Council defends itself over Annual Plan criticism

The Rangitı¯kei District Council is defending itself against allegations it has deliberately dodged scrutiny on big ticket projects.

A letter sent to councillors this month alleges the council is curbing ratepayers’ ability to comment on the council’s direction by producing its Annual Plan behind closed doors without public consultation.

The letter was sent by Marton resident Simon Loudon, who claims to represent a small group of ratepayers.

Local authorities are required to prepare an Annual Plan for each financial year.

One of the purposes is to identify unexpected variations not included in a council’s LongTerm Plan.

Loudon, a physiotherapist in Bulls, said there were several key projects running over budget that required ratepayer scrutiny.

These budget blowouts were unanticipated and not accounted for in the council’s long-term vision, he told Stuff.

They include multi-milliondollar blowouts at the Putorino Landfill and the Bulls Community Centre.

‘‘[The] council have flagged that they intend to fund much of this expense by long-term intergenerational debt, which will be a burden ratepayers are forced to bear for years to come,’’ Louden wrote to councillors. ‘‘As a ratepayer, I would like to know what the council has planned and what is in its budget for this year.’’

Mayor Andy Watson defended the stance and said it was the approach many neighbouring councils were taking.

Council chief executive Peter Beggs said the council had already held public meetings on the Bulls Community Centre.

The council was also holding public submissions this week for changes to the District Plan that would allow the rezoning of 207 hectares to industrial land.

Councillors are scheduled to adopt the Annual Plan at the council’s next meeting on Thursday next week.

A report to councillors in February by executive manager Carol Gordon stated the goal of the Annual Plan was to identify variations.

She said the council’s significance and engagement policy was not triggered because the proposed Annual Plan did not include significant differences to the Long-term Plan.

Therefore, there was no statutory requirement to consult with the public.

Loudon said the question then became whether budget blowouts constituted a ‘‘significant difference’’.

If they did, the council must consult.

Gordon’s report recommended the document be produced ‘‘in house’’.

It will include a separate document with an update on what has occurred in the past year and an outline of what is expected in the next financial year.