Sign In / Register
Kaipara District Council (KDC) has voted not to fund a dedicated climate resilience programme over the next three years, despite strong opposition from some elected members.
According to advocacy group Kaipara Climate Action Inc (KCAI), the decision “blatantly disregards community input”.
KDC received a record number of submissions on its Long-term Plan (LTP) for the 2024-2027 period, and almost half related to the climate issue – more than any other issue or theme.
Council offered three options – provide zero funding and no dedicated climate adaptation, action or resilience work (option 1); spend $500,000 across three years for climate adaptation – but not mitigation (option 2); and direct $700,000 over three years for climate adaptation and mitigation services (option 3).
A total of 91 submissions from Kaipara ratepayers and residents supported zero funding, 59 preferred option 2, and 192 favoured option 3.
Nonetheless, a council staff document recommended adopting option 1, which it said would “assist with keeping the rates rise as low as possible”.
It argued that council already carried out work in the climate field such as land drainage schemes in Ruawai and Raupō and was “committed to a considerable programme of work relating to climate adaptation and resilience”. Implicitly justifying the recommendation to adopt an option not favoured by a majority of submissions, the document noted that 149 of the 192 responses supporting option 3 had come from KCAI.
That left just 43 other resident and ratepayer respondents who preferred option 3, which it pointed out was a smaller number than the 91 individual responses favouring option 1.
During a discussion on June 6 that became heated at times, Mayor Craig Jepson offered a motion supporting adopting option 1. He stressed that the three-year LTP was a recovery budget, focusing on helping the district to recover after last year’s floods.
“Everything I’m doing is to drive down rates,” Jepson said.
Councillor Eryn Wilson-Collins said she could not recall ever reading a staff recommendation that was so against what the community was asking for, without laying out good arguments for doing so.
Cr Ihapera Paniora said “the community has spoken”, yet it seemed that council’s decision had been predetermined.
“It’s not about money at all,” she said, adding that option 3 would cost each Kaipara household around $11 a year.
Wilson-Collins rejected the effective sidelining of the KCAI submissions, saying that duplicate submissions did not appear to be an issue when it came to feedback on other issues before council.
Jepson rejected accusations that the decision had been predetermined.
“I certainly take all submissions seriously, and make my own mind up as to their weight in this matter,” he said.
KCAI spokesperson Aprilanne Bonar said after the vote that her group was appalled by KDC’s decision, describing it as short-sighted and irresponsible. Bonar said council’s suggestion that the views of the 149 people who made submissions through KCAI should be treated as a single viewpoint was fundamentally flawed and dismissive of the community’s voice.
KCAI described as “woefully inadequate” council’s claim that it does fund climate work, such as drainage maintenance.
“With a strong community mandate for a dedicated climate programme, and the programme’s minimal cost to ratepayers, council’s choice to ignore this support and proceed with a substandard proposal is unacceptable,” Bonar said.
“Kaipara deserves leadership that listens to its community and takes decisive action to safeguard our future. This decision is a stark reminder of the council’s failure to fulfil its responsibilities to the people it serves.”
