Waimea dam refloat possible – mayor

The Waimea dam project may be refloated with a revamped funding model that lowers the estimated cost for ratepayers.

Tasman district councillors look likely to be asked at an extraordinary full council meeting on Thursday to change the ‘‘no’’ vote they made on Tuesday and instead agree to proceed with the dam project.

However, the issue is scheduled to be discussed behind closed doors, although the high public interest is recognised, with time allowed in the public forum section of the meeting for people to speak for or against the project.

Tasman Mayor Richard Kempthorne said Tasman District Council’s potential partners in the project – Waimea Irrigators Ltd (WIL) and Crown Irrigation Investments Ltd – approached the council on Wednesday with the possibility of additional funding, which would reduce the cost of the project for ratepayers.

The approach came the day after councillors voted 8-6 to effectively end the $102 million project.

‘‘We’ve got new information,’’ Kempthorne said. ‘‘It’s simply our responsibility to look at it and make the decision for the best interests of our district, region and the country.’’ He said he had been working with the council’s executive team on the matter.

WIL chairman Murray King confirmed that WIL was ‘‘trying to arrange additional funding’’.

‘‘We think we’ve got a way we can do it,’’ he said. ‘‘This thing is so important, we can’t walk away from it now.’’

King said he could not reveal much about the additional funding because some of it was bound by confidentiality ‘‘and some is still being worked through’’.

However, he did confirm the involvement of a ‘‘reputable New Zealand-based investor’’.

In a newsletter the day before the vote, WIL said it had been busy working on how to fund its share of a funding gap after updated pricing caused a budget blowout for the project of $23m to $26m. Its ‘‘way forward’’ included a single investor with equity provided through convertible preference shares.

King said there were ‘‘a couple of other concessions we’re working on as well’’.

The aim was to de-risk the council’s investment so it could avoid rates increases ‘‘to those not in the area of benefit’’.

Cr Dana Wensley said the setting of rates was a responsibility of council, ‘‘not Murray King’’.

Wensley said she was concerned that ‘‘backroom deals’’ were being made to try and change the votes of some councillors.

The votes of Golden Bay Ward councillor Paul Sangster and Motueka Ward councillor Paul Hawkes were key to the ‘‘no’’ decision on Tuesday. Sangster previously supported the dam project, while Hawkes’ votes had been mixed. Both cited concerns about rate rises

‘‘This thing is so important, we can’t walk away from it now.’’

Murray King, Waimea Irrigators Ltd chairman

proposed to fill the funding gap. The district-wide rate was tipped to climb from $29 to $46 a year, with additional hikes for some areas in the Golden Bay Ward that are members of the ‘‘urban water club’’.

Hawkes said he was called to a meeting with Kempthorne on Wednesday and asked whether he would reconsider his ‘‘no’’ vote if a more favourable funding model was available. ‘‘If the funding model ticked boxes I had crossed, I would be amicable to reconsider,’’ he said.

The decision to vote ‘‘no’’ had been difficult, he said, because it went ‘‘totally against my personal belief’’.

Hawkes said he believed the dam was the best long-term option for the district and he knew, from his background, about the economic effects of no water. ‘‘But the bottom line is that the ratepayers can’t afford the cost.’’

Kempthorne said it was not unusual for him to speak to individual councillors. ‘‘I’ll approach all councillors who I think would be open.’’

Wensley said she believed the full council should be involved in the negotiations. ‘‘We would have told the mayor what we wanted as a council.’’

Wensley said her concern was that WIL still would not know the position of the full council.

‘‘I’m not sure what terms he’s [Kempthorne] negotiating,’’ she said. ‘‘Once again, councillors have been excluded. I am still only finding this out from the media first.’’

WIL had been negotiating the best deal it could for irrigators, and it appeared that Kempthorne was then ‘‘socialising’’ WIL’s position with some selected councillors ‘‘to see if that can go through rather than bringing it to full council’’, she said.

Kempthorne said the post-vote events all happened ‘‘very quickly’’, but an email had been sent to councillors. It was the council executive team that would be putting the recommendation to the council, he said.

Cr Anne Turley said she was appalled that the mayor had not involved the full council ‘‘on the way forward’’.

‘‘It shows poor leadership. The mayor is trying to divide and rule councillors. He needs to wake up.’’

There were other good options that were less expensive for the urban water supply, she said, such as fixing the leaks in the system, working with Nelson City Council to use its surplus, and building the Wakefield water treatment plant ‘‘sooner than planned’’.

‘‘There are solutions for irrigators and businesses as well, which are user-pays,’’ Turley said. ‘‘The mayor needs to unite his council and show democratic leadership. He needs to listen to his ratepayers and not just the vested commercial interests who stand to gain at the ratepayers’ expense.’’

Turley also questioned why the matter was due to be heard in the confidential session. ‘‘In the interests of transparency and open government, we should vote this down in order that the public can be informed,’’ she said.