Council favours in-house water management
How water is managed is now up for public debate.
The Taupō District Council favours keeping the management of its water services in house but will consult on three options.
By Chris Marshall
Consultation is not binding but is required under Local Water Done Well (LWDW) – the Government’s rejig of Labour’s Three Waters reforms (drinking, waste and stormwater).
On Tuesday, the council decided almost unanimously, but for an abstention by Duncan Campbell, to follow officers’ recommendations, concluding 12 months of exploring options.
The Local Government (Water Services Preliminary Arrangements) Act requires councils to review water services delivery and consider alternatives.
Public consultation must include the preferred proposal and at least one other option.
LWDW programme manager Jo Walton noted in her written report to the meeting said that throughout previous Three Waters Reform, the Taupō District Council has been consistent in its stance.
“We accepted that while the status quo was not sustainable, we were concerned about loss of local voice and challenged the idea that larger entities would necessarily be more efficient.”
Material presented to the meeting compared the existing inhouse model to the two most feasible alternative options that met government requirements.
These were joining a regional multi-council-controlled water services entity (Waikato Water) or forming a single council-controlled organisation (Taupō Water).
Consideration has been given to financial sustainability, service quality, governance, potential efficiencies, risks and complexity, and the impact on other council services.
Walton’s report said the council had determined the best option currently was to retain water services inhouse.
A council statement following the meeting noted this option would still include significant changes to how the council manages and reports on water services.
The inhouse option could comfortably meet the financial sustainability requirements, the report said and was prudent given the risk and complexity inherent in moving to an alternative model and the additional debt liability that could incur, balanced against relatively small financial efficiency gains.
Her report recommended reviewing this position in two years.
“Over time as economic regulation takes effect, and regional entities begin to mature, our position may change. We will keep an open mind through this process and reassess the cost-benefit in two years.”
Walton said participating in the initial design phase of Waikato Water and remaining close to the discussions throughout the region, ensured that moving to a different water entity in future remains a viable option.
Council chief executive Julie Gardyne explained during the meeting that staying close to the Waikato Water option might allow the council in future to access shared services or cheaper procurement opportunities – though negotiations were ongoing with this group.
The council’s discussion of the options to go public with got off to a familiar start on Tuesday as Cr Duncan Campbell used the declaration of any conflicts of interest to declare an apparent internal one.
“Yeah, I just question persistent censorship of elected members and withholding of crucial information. I question if that meets our obligation of transparent governance. That is my perceived conflict of interest today.”
While stating he didn’t disagree with its direction but also that he would not be assenting to the proposal, Campbell returned to his theme of lack of transparency several times during the 25-minute discussion.
On these occasions deputy mayor Kevin Taylor, Gardyne, John Williamson and council officers either disagreed with his assertions or attempted to demonstrate the wealth of information that had been made available, while acknowledging the tight timelines.
Taylor led the charge in countering Campbell’s assertions.
“I can give an absolute assurance that the volume and quality of the information is more than sufficient for us as elected members to make the decision that we need to make today around what we consult on,” Taylor said at one point.
“Further to that, in terms of the position we are in at the moment, you could argue we’re a victim of our own efficiency and success, and we are an outlier to the other Waikato councils because we have invested wisely and prudently for a long period of time and our water services infrastructure is in some respects light years ahead of our peers.”
He also leapt to the defence of staff.
“The fact that our water services infrastructure is in the state that it is in, is testament enough to the skills and experience and knowledge of the team delivering that on behalf of our communities.”
Ultimately when the proposal was decided on, Campbell recorded an abstention, rather than a dissenting vote.
The council’s public consultation which now swings into action will run until 4.30pm, May 29 with information and submission forms available at taupo.govt.nz/haveyoursay.
Feedback, including hearings, will be followed by any final revisions to the Water Services Delivery Plan before this is approved in late June or early July in time to present to the Minister for Local Government on September 3.
These deadlines have been compressed by the convention of avoiding major decisions in the three-months prior to local government elections.
Public consultation will run until 4.30pm on May 29 with information and submission forms available at taupo.govt.nz/haveyoursay.
Feedback, including hearings, will be followed by final revisions to the Water Services Delivery Plan before it is approved in late June or early July in time to present to the Minister for Local Government on September 3.
These deadlines have been compressed by the convention of avoiding major decisions in the three-months prior to local government elections.