Few ECan members upset by rates rise
A majority of Environment Canterbury councillors support increasing its rates by up to
24.5 per cent.
Four of 14 councillors criticised the proposal at a meeting yesterday, while most others said the budget was transformational and showed the council was responding to the demands of the community. The proposal has drawn the ire of farmers and city councillors, while delighting environment campaigners.
If rates were to rise by 24.5 per cent, an average homeowner would have to fork out an extra
$136. There is a second option to raise rates by 18 per cent, which would have the average homeowner paying $110 extra.
The changes are included in the regional council’s 10-year budget, known as a long-term plan. Yesterday, regional councillors voted to send the plan out for public consultation, which will begin next month.
All 14 councillors, along with two Nga¯ i Tahu representatives, gave speeches outlining their views on the proposals.
Councillor Peter Scott, also the deputy chair, said residents were surprised by the headline numbers, and a majority were angry and annoyed.
But, he said, the changes were just proposals and ‘‘a lot of water [has] got to go under the bridge’’ before final decisions were made.
He urged residents with concerns to get in touch with him.
Councillor Lan Pham said that while the long-term plan ‘‘was a big ask to the community’’, she hoped people would acknowledge it was an appeal for them to be part of the solution to the climate and ecological emergency.
‘‘That is our unfortunate reality and this [plan] is just one small part of our attempt to address that,’’ Pham said.
In May 2019, ECan became the first council in New Zealand to declare a climate emergency.
Iaean Cranwell, a former ECan councillor who is now one of two non-voting Nga¯i Tahu advisers on the council, said the regional council was brave and the long-term plan was aspirational. He urged residents not to focus on the rate rise percentage but to instead read the plan’s consultation document and look at what ECan would be doing.
‘‘We need to make change and we need an enduring environment for the generations to come,’’ Cranwell said.
But Councillor Claire McKay said she was extremely concerned and alarmed by the proposed rate rises. ‘‘Where is the leadership from this council?
‘‘What we go out with should have been sensible, and 24.5 per cent is not,’’ McKay said.
Councillor Ian Mackenzie said there was no responsible governance. ‘‘I guess I not only have reservations about the scale of the expenditure but I have real reservations about the process we have gone through in terms of scrutinising that and other expenditure,’’ he said.
Councillor John Sunckell said he was uncomfortable with the proposed rate rises but supported putting the plan out for consultation. Councillor Megan Hands described the council as ‘‘extremely divided’’ and said the proposed changes were insulting to ratepayers.
Her division comment was rejected by councillor Phil Clearwater. ‘‘There are always going to be different opinions. But overall, we are quite clear on doing this [plan], that is what we agreed on and that is what we are going to be doing,’’ he said.