Invercargill Mayor Nobby Clark has railed against Affordable Water Reforms, which could result in the city’s rates ballooning by four times.
Mr Clark and chief executive Michael Day presented the Invercargill City Council’s submission on the reforms, formerly Three Waters, to a parliamentary select committee yesterday.
Mr Day said from an operational matter, their key issue was with the council’s potential obligation to bill ratepayers on behalf of the water entities.
"We’re really concerned about the confusion that will create.
"Particularly given that’s going to over the next couple of years have a significant cost increase for the ratepayers."
He said Invercargill was in a unique position in the Southland region, being the only city that had a significant cost implication on the community.
"Best-case scenario is indicating four times what we currently have."
Speaking to chairman Ian McKelvie, Mr Clark said the council had been opposed to Three Waters for some time.
"[That is] based on the three original pillars, which are economy of scale, adequate number of water engineers being available and the ability of contractors to upscale over the next 10 years [which] are not shown in more recent times," he said.
He said there were many issues with Entity J, which includes Otago and Southland, that the council was not comfortable with, particularly the transfer of debt, as ratepayers would subsequently cross-subsidise and service that debt.
Moving from four entities to 10 reduced the benefits of the reform, he said.
The council’s submission forecast a water cost of $1850 per household for Invercargill residents without reform, but through the 10-entity modelling the estimate was $4439.
"It seems to me and my council that to satisfy the co-governance model ... we have lost our council abilities to manage our future assets, even if that was collectively.
"Having a one-for-one representation with iwi will put us in a position where we’ll get outvoted on significant things."
Speaking to the Otago Daily Times following the submission, Mr Clark felt it would not make any difference.
"They’ve got to be seen to be listening to the community, but I don’t think they really want to hear what the message is."
Mr Clark said the council’s submission was rushed through at an extraordinary meeting of the council on Tuesday, as it was given five days by the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) to submit.
It was recommended by the DIA the report be discussed in a public-excluded session, but Mr Clark was in strong opposition.
"We’ve been required by DIA and the minister for more than three years now to not consult with our community.
"This document’s a very important one as we transition to the new entity that’s being proposed, and for the community to be kept in the dark about this — especially given the opposition there is from the staff around the financial implications — can’t be warranted," he told councillors.
Councillors were divided on the public exclusion, but a 6-5 vote made the meeting public.
