The Water Done Well consultation, which closed on Wednesday, asked the Selwyn community to choose between two options - establishing a council-controlled organisation (CCO) or retaining an in-house model with enhancements to meet new legislative requirements.
Some residents fear the council’s consultation was merely a tick box exercise and community feedback would not be listened to.
Rolleston Residents Association chair Mark Alexander said the consultation could have been four or six weeks.
“In my view the council are very naughty.”
Alexander said while there is a one-week minimum consultation period, there is no maximum.
“It’s convenient for staff to have short consultation periods, it’s not convenient for communities.”
Alexander’s concerns were echoed by Prebbleton Community Association chair Jane Elms and West Melton Residents Association chair Sam Wilshire.
Broughton defended the timeframe, stating it was necessary to meet Government deadlines, which require the council to submit its Water Services Delivery Plan (WSDP) by September 3.
“While we understand concerns about the length of the consultation, we are also mindful that this is not a new conversation,” Broughton said.
“We have had Government enforced changes in local water as a conversation for the past four years and the council is aiming to be proactive in addressing the changes and providing certainty to both the community and our staff.”
Wilshire said he thought the council was leading the community “down the garden path” to choose a CCO.
Darfield Residents Association chair Harvey Polglase also expressed skepticism, saying he worried the council had already made up its mind and was consulting residents merely to confirm its decision.
However, Broughton said while the council has chosen its preferred option, its final decision will be informed by the community.
“The consultation process is not a mere formality; it is intended to gather community feedback to make a well-informed decision.
“Our final decision needs to informed by the community as there may be new ideas or ways of looking at our two options.”
Council critical of flaws in Government’s water bill
Overly complex and costly. That is the district council’s view of new water legislation.
Wednesday was the final day of public consultation on how to manage the district’s water, with the council considering two options: keeping water services in-house or establishing a council-controlled organisation (CCO).
At the same time, the council has submitted feedback on the Local Government (Water Services) Bill, which outlines the regulations for the new water services model.
Mayor Sam Broughton and council lawyer Julie Hands presented the council’s submission to Government last week.
“The council considers the bill often lacks clarity and flexibility in relation to key requirements and obligations that it will place on the council,” the submission states.
“The bill contains various overlapping and inefficient requirements which will result in unnecessary cost for the council.”
The council is projected to spend its $2 million budget for CCO preparation by April 2, with costs expected to rise if that option is pursued.
Additionally, the council is concerned about the timing of the legislation, which is still being finalised while councils must make critical decisions about the future of water services.
To address this, the council has called for a close working relationship with the Government to ensure a smooth process of implementing new processes.
Another key concern is the bill imposes national water standards, limiting local decision-making.
“This effectively removes the ability for the council to impose any community-informed rules or standards, even where those rules are more restrictive due to local environmental needs,” the submission states.
