Water scheme ownership challenged

Disagreement over ownership of a rural water scheme near Gore has led to the hiring of a top Auckland public affairs lawyer to help resolve matters.

Otama Rural Water Supply Scheme committee chairman Tom Affleck said Chen Palmer Partners principal Mai Chen had been engaged by the committee to help local consumers regain control of the estimated $2.5 million scheme from Gore District Council.

The situation with district council had come to a head during the past six months as the committee moved to invest significant capital in water quality improvement projects across the scheme’s 239 kilometres of pipelines.

‘‘Up until six months ago, Gore District Council also agreed the consumers owned the scheme, which was originally owned by Southland County Council until about 1988-89, then handed over. But six months ago, a council lawyer found we [the committee] had no legal identity at all, despite 46 years of money and labour invested directly by the scheme’s consumers,’’ Affleck said.

‘‘We asked them, ‘what do those 46 years count for?’, and they basically said, ‘nothing’.’’

Believing the scheme could most effectively and efficiently be run by the local committee on behalf of its 250 households, farms and public buildings, it had taken on Chen to fight their corner, Affleck said.

‘‘[Chen] has produced a good report, laying out how best to proceed for the consumers to regain control of their water scheme, and that’s what we’ve been discussing with council recently.’’

Clutha-Southland MP Todd Barclay chaired a meeting between the conflicting parties on February 2, with some lively, but constructive, exchanges of opinion, Gore District mayor Tracy Hicks said.

‘‘We simply want to ensure the best long-term solution for users on the scheme,,’’ Hicks said.

‘‘To that end, we’ve been engaging with the scheme committee on issues of ownership and future water quality and statutory compliance, and believe we now have a way forward.

‘‘We’ll be contacting consumers during autumn detailing the situation as it stands, and what some of those compliance and other issues are under both alternatives. They’ll then have the opportunity to vote on the issue.’’

Key among the issues was the need for a Local Government Bill to be passed through Parliament if the scheme were to be adopted by its consumers.

‘‘A change of legislation in 2002 means local water schemes over 200 consumers can’t be taken out of local government control without a special bill being passed. Otama has about 250 households and farms using the scheme, meaning this would be required to move forward if the consumers decided to do so,’’ Hicks said.

This meant any potential handover was some way down the track, something confirmed by Barclay.

‘‘Both parties were in agreement that the users needed to be provided with a full suite of information so that they could determine the best option ... Timeframes for resolution will be dependent on the outcome chosen and it will take some time to develop all of the detail around each of the options before they can be presented to users,’’ he said.

In the meantime, that was leaving local consumers feeling powerless and frustrated with council, Affleck said.

‘‘It feels like we’re getting little assistance, just hindrance. We’re in a good financial position, and we believe we can run our own scheme more efficiently than council. We’ve got no intentions of just handing it over wholesale.’’