Moutere-Waimea ward candidates have their say

Stuff asked candidates for the Moutere-Waimea ward to respond to key issues facing the region.

With voting papers already fanned out on dining room tables across Tasman, Stuff asked candidates for the Moutere-Waimea Ward to respond to key issues facing the district.

The Moutere-Waimea Ward has three vacancies and six candidates vying for the role of Tasman District councillors.

The ward covers the settlements of Brightwater, Coastal Tasman, Māpua and Ruby Bay, Tasman Village, Upper Moutere and Wakefield. Moutere has a population of 5800, Māpua has 2700 residents, and Wakefield is home to 2500. Around 2300 people live in Brightwater.

Stuff asked candidates:

❚ What do you believe is the key issue facing the district, and how would you try to address it?

❚ How would you bring the views of your community/ward to the council table?

❚ Do you support the Government’s Three Waters reform programme? If so, why? If not, how do you propose that future infrastructure upgrades should be funded?

Mike Kininmonth (Independent)

1. Climate change is the key issue facing the district. I believe by strong governance and together with the likes of the Nelson Tasman Climate Change Forum, the council can implement the Tasman Climate Action Plan, to build resilience into our town planning to ensure a better future.

2. By actively seeking out ratepayers’ concerns and issues, I believe I will be a strong advocate. I bring enthusiasm, and a caring for the community and its values, coupled with a strong knowledge of local government as well as business acquirement.

3. I oppose the Three Waters Entity bill. Local government has failed to adequately forecast the expenditure required to effectively identify/manage/replace these three pieces of infrastructure. [But] these are local assets that should be governed by locals for locals! I would investigate extending the role/powers of the Local Government Funding Agency to facilitate funding for this infrastructure in line with best engineering and life cycle practices.

Christeen Mackenzie (Incumbent)

1. We need to work with other partners to deliver the services needed and to progress initiatives that will provide long-term benefits for the region. A good example of this is partnering with DOC in the Jobs For Nature initiatives. We also need to maximise the return from the council’s commercial investments . . . to leverage every ratepayer dollar to achieve more for the district.

2. In the Moutere-Waimea Ward, we are fortunate to have a number of very active local community associations . . . I attend the majority of the meetings. I amconnected to the community through committees I sit on, and through my everyday connection with people.

3. I amconcerned . . . how Tasman District ratepayers would be able to fund upgrades . . . therefore, I don’t believe the status quo is tenable. The current model proposed by the Government has shortcomings: the governance arrangements, the entity boundaries, the importance of the local voice, the financial models and cost harmonisation.

Dan Robinson (Common Sense)

1. Infrastructure and debt. I think determining what kind of situation we are in fiscally once the dam is complete will be important to getting the balance right going forward.

2. By being open and available to the ward residents. I plan to regularly interact with the public to get a feel for the diverse and specific needs of the various communities.

3. No. But I could be convinced with a few changes. Doing away with the super regions and making it opt-in would satisfy the lion’s share of my concerns. Should Tasman still choose to go its own way, then I would support this, too. I think the people can be trusted with the decision. In such a situation, the funding would need to come from traditional sources.

Jono Trolove (Local Democracy and Public Service)

1. Loss of local council control and regional self-determination. Three Waters legislation, changes to the Resource Management Act and the Future For Local Government review will undermine local government, local private property rights and the ability of local business to flourish.

2. Outside of council, I would engage with entities such as the chamber of commerce, iwi and the Nelson Climate Action Forum to understand what the community wants and bring their concerns to the council. 3. I do not support the Three Waters reforms for the following reasons: loss of local control and decision-making, a large bureaucracy . . . will be inefficient, costly and likely to fail, and unelected governance means the people will lose the ability to democratically oppose [it]. I propose funding through the following: central government direct funding and low-interest loans, public-private infrastructure investment bringing in super and KiwiSaver funds along with longterm private equity.

Dan Shallcrass

1. I amconcerned about our people, in particular our young people. We need to engage them. But first, we need to bring inclusion to all aspects of our communities and further planning. Let’s create places of belonging to build strong connections for the future of our society.

2. Face to face communication is something I strongly value, and I genuinely want the voters to talk to me about their concerns. I amthe man on the ground . . . available to listen. I aim to bring an honest information-sharing policy.

3. No to Three Waters. I cannot visualise its success, especially in Tasman, where needs and water usage are hugely varied. Centralisation would bring many frustrations, slow decision-making, and give less opportunity for a local voice. I’d be keen to see strong policy where users that are making a commercial profit directly from water use have a larger part to play in future funding.

Kelvin Woodley

Kelvin Woodley declined to respond.