The proposed plan was notified for submissions on March 1, which were set to close on May 9.
But the "unsuppressed version" of an Environment Court decision, made in August 2024 for the Waitaki District Council, was "only published" on March 31, say lawyers Todd & Walker who are acting on behalf of a group of Waitaki ratepayers.
The legal opinion is being tabled among papers for the Waitaki District Council meeting tomorrow.
Todd & Walker argue the Environment Court decision sought by the council in early 2024 and made in its favour last August, might have an impact on potential submissions to the proposed plan.
A 15 working day-extension of the current submissions period is being sought.
The council papers reveal the existence of the Environment Court decision issued in August 2024 but not its full content.
However, Environment Court decision shows council planning officers applied in February 2024 for some aspects of the proposed plan to legally "take effect immediately" upon the court’s decision.
Todd & Walker note the full decision not being published until March 31 — a month after public submissions were called — means many "likely submitters" are now only coming up to speed with the implications of the decision.
Todd & Walker said council planning staff had "openly acknowledged" in their original application to the Environment Court the proposed plan represents "a significant policy shift" from the current operable plan.
Because of that, submitters needed time to understand the implications of the full decision to fully engage in the process and to take expert advice.
A staff report to tomorrow’s meeting is recommending a 5-working day extension.
It also recommends the appointment of an interim commissioner to handle further "procedural matters".
A legal letter on behalf of the council suggests this is because once the proposed plan was notified on March 1, those matters were "regulatory decisions" under the RMA.
"This includes decisions on changing the nominated timeframes for making submissions, further submissions and provision of reports and evidence under the Act."
Waitaki Property Guardians chairwoman Kate Murcott said the group backed the idea the whole plan should be paused at this stage. They were primarily interested to see that happened, to give time for the government’s overarching Resource Management Act reform direction to become clearer.
"We obviously fully support that and our communication to council has been our first preference would be to pause the whole plan," Mrs Murcott said.
Their second preference was to see contentious "overlay" chapters in the proposal, at least paused. Those were overlays impacting private land-use — including Significant Natural Areas, Sites and Areas of Significance to Māori, and Outstanding Natural Landscapes.
Mrs Murcott said those overlay areas — directed under National Policy Statements — have been particularly singled out by the government for change in its overarching legislative programme.
Waitaki district plan review subcommittee chairman Jim Thomson’s call to seek formal advice on the process was the right one, she said.
As it was, the hefty proposed plan was not easy to handle.
Waitaki Guardians knew of people struggling to absorb its complex details, let alone access it online.
There was a lot of information to try to understand for individuals, let alone working up a cogent submission.
Mrs Murcott said the Guardians were now working with individual Waitaki residents, as well as formulating a group submission to the plan.
