TDC releases deliberations on LTCCP
Tasman District councillors have read and considered the 5700 submissions on the draft Long Term Council and Community Plan (LTCCP) and their deliberations on those submissions have been released.
The GB Weekly asked Golden Bay’s ward councillors how they felt submitters’ views fared in the process.
“I think council has adopted a ‘steady as she goes’ approach,” said Cr Stuart Borlase. “We read all the submissions and heard everything the submitters had to say.
“From my point of view, I guess submitters had a better chance of changing the way councillors think if their submissions were carefully thought through and used moderate language. Mass-produced submissions and those where the council was just being harangued didn’t seem to have the same effect.”
Cr Borlase said that the big issues were the tourism rate, the multi-bin rubbish and recycling proposal, and the targeted rate on communities with community boards.
“Businesses who benefit from tourism will now be paying the $122 targeted rate to allow Nelson Tasman Tourism (NTT) to do its thing. It’s less than was originally proposed and it means that council won’t be directly subsidising one industry. There are plenty of industries that have to get by without direct assistance from council. I’ve been impressed with what NTT does. It certainly punches above its weight and this region does better in terms of visitor numbers than many others nationwide.
“Over 3000 submissions were received on the multi-bin rubbish and recycling proposal, and it will not be going ahead in the meantime.”
The targeted rate on communities with community boards will remain, but Cr Borlase said that he had high hopes about recent initiatives in that regard.
“We’re going to be doing some good things on this issue. I’m optimistic that some things that should have happened all along will be happening before too long. I’m also hoping that good things may come of the proposal that was in the community board’s submission - and one other person’s - about going back to the community about reticulated water for fire-fighting and drinking in Takaka township. If we can get the Government grant, we could do the whole job for very little more than what the current proposal will cost.”
Councillor Noel Riley said that councillors had to make hard decisions about where council should and should not spend money.
“Our problem is to find some kind of balance,’ he said. “A balance between what we know has to happen, what would be nice and what we just can’t afford.
“In the end we decided that tourism has had enough ‘public good’ money, so that’s where the targeted rate makes sense. When it comes to the money for the Nelson Tasman Heritage Trust’s storage facility, the Local Government Act makes it quite clear that councils have to take some responsibility. The NCC and TDC created an organisation to look after heritage matters. It makes sense to put money into a proper storage facility for our heritage. If we don’t take care of our heritage, we lose a lot.”
Cr Riley said that he felt the argument over the targeted rate on communities with community boards was “over in the meantime,” but he suggested that developments in Auckland might have implications for the situation in Tasman.
“What Mr Hide is proposing for the super-city council [the creation of a number of community boards to work in co-operation with the larger council] might make everyone take more notice of the Local Government Commission’s ruling on community boards,” he said.
Neil Wilson
