A controversial reclamation near Kerikeri looks set to go ahead after all after council members voted narrowly to reverse an earlier decision to pull support from the mostly government-funded project.

The plan to upgrade an
existing boat ramp and jetty and reclaim an area of Kerikeri Inlet for parking has sharply divided hapū and the Rangitane community.

That was evident in the size of the crowd at yesterday’s Far North District Council meeting — the last of the current council — and the presence of security guards in case tensions boiled over.

Some councillors said they had received threats and “hate mail” from people on both sides of the debate.

More than 40 members of the public, some of whom had to stand, squeezed into the council chambers in Kaikohe to hear arguments for and against revisiting the council’s August 11 decision.

The “shovel-ready” project was granted $2.4 million from the government’s Covid-19 Response and Recovery Fund in 2020 with the council committing another $1.2m.

Since then the project has hit a number of snags.

A second cultural impact assessment had to be prepared after Ngāpuhi complained it had been left out of initial consultation, and a surprise High Court ruling about wetlands in an unrelated case meant the Rangitane project wasn’t eligible for the fast-tracked consenting process.

Then, last month, councillors voted narrowly against endorsing the project, which could have driven the final nail into the coffin.

Yesterday’s decision, passed only with Mayor John Carter’s casting vote, has breathed life back into the project — but it still has to go through a full resource consent process giving all affected parties a say.

Members of the public who addressed councillors about the project included Nora Rameka, whose hapū, Ngati Rēhia, prepared the initial cultural impact assessment.

Ngāti Rēhia continued to back the project which she said aligned with hapū goals of improving safe access to the inlet.

Hugh Rihari, on the other hand, said Ngāti Torehina and the other hapū he represented were left out until the project was two years down the track.

His hapū supported upgrading the existing ramp and jetty but were concerned about the reclamation’s environmental impact.

Blair Stanley, vice-president of the Rangitane Residents Association, said the plan was ill-conceived and divisive.

“The issue is not whether a new boat launching facility is needed. The question is where.”

The 4700sq m reclamation would have to be shoe-horned into a small channel with no provision for future growth.

Reversing last month’s decision in the council’s final moments was at best disingenuous, Stanley said.

Mark Turner, of Kerikeri Cruising Club, said the club was under increasing pressure and faced costs of about $100,000 a year because it was required to make its private boating facilities at nearby Dove’s Bay available for public use.

The club, which had about 1000 members, supported any move to improve access to water, reduce overcrowding at its ramp, and reverse long-running council under-investment.

“If this funding isn’t used, the Far North won’t benefit from the money at all. It will go back to central government,” Turner said.

Deputy Mayor Ann Court, who moved yesterday’s motion to support the project, said councillors received a number of emails prior to last month’s vote.

Based on those emails it was “not unreasonable” for councillors to decide the project shouldn’t proceed.

However, she said councillors had made an “unsafe” decision based on “a significant information void”.

Court said they may have made a different decision if they had been exposed to a wider range of information so she included a bundle of 13 previous reports.

Councillors were not experts in the Resource Management Act so the best way forward was to allow the project to go through the resource consent process.

That way, independent, qualified experts could consider all aspects of the project, hear from affected parties, and decide whether any negative effects could be offset by consent conditions.

Carter allowed three councillors to speak for the motion and three against, cautioning them to debate the process and not the merits or otherwise of the Rangitane project.

Kelly Stratford, who said she had received threatening emails over the issue, said the project hadn’t gone through a proper consultation process so it wasn’t fit for the resource consent process.

She also complained of bias in the reports included with yesterday’s agenda.

Rachel Smith, who was also subjected to “really hateful” emails from both sides, said councillors weren’t fully informed ahead of the August vote.

She believed the resource consent process was the right way to strike a balance between environmental, cultural and social factors.

David Clendon took exception to the “patronising” claim that last month’s vote took place in an information void.

“I find it a little offensive to suggest I was not well informed when I made my decision. Of the 305 pages tabled today, not one wasn’t available to any of us last month.”

The resource consent process would not deal with the “inevitable” cost overrun given the budget was set in 2020.

“By signing up to this we are handing over a blank cheque,” he said.

Felicity Foy said the district stood to lose a significant amount of government funding if the project didn’t go ahead, while John Vujcich said the vote was “ill-timed” and should be left to the new council.

“I see a divided community, I see hate speech… on that basis I believe we should go out for full public consultation.”

Dave Collard said he hadn’t done the matter justice last month and now believed it was best considered by independent commissioners.

With the vote deadlocked at 5-5 Carter used his casting vote to pass the motion supporting the project.

Supporters of the project have cited Northlanders’ vanishing access to the water due to the coastal property boom and the congestion at Bay of Islands boat ramps in summer.

Opponents have raised concerns about environmental effects, increased traffic on Rangitane Loop Rd, and the high cost given the number of parking spaces created.

Rangitane is about 13km from Kerikeri on the northern side of Kerikeri Inlet.

Northlanders losing access to the water, kaumātua says

A Kerikeri kaumātua says the controversial Rangitane reclamation should go ahead because Northlanders are increasingly locked out of the coast by private landowners.

Richard Civil (Hineira, Te Uri Taniwha, Ngāti Korohue), said he sought agreement from other hapū and community members before signing off on the Far North Holdings proposal more than two years ago.

The fifth-generation fisherman said the site of the proposed reclamation used to be covered in oysters.

Now the area was lifeless and blanketed in silt.

He believed building the reclamation, if combined with dredging the entrance to Pickmere Channel further downstream, could help the return of tio (oysters) by improving flow and reducing siltation.

Civil, who said he had been mandated as a kaitiaki by the Ngāpuhi rūnanga and Taiamai hapū, said Northlanders were increasingly shut out of the coast by private landowners.

The only other boat ramps on the northern side of the inlet were at Opito Bay, which had “bugger-all parking”, and the privately-owned Dove’s Bay marina.

However, whatever happened to the reclamation, Civil said the council’s top priority should be rebuilding Rangitane jetty.

People used to travel long distances from Moerewa and Taiamai to catch fish from the jetty and feed their whānau.

Another recent boat ramp project — at Rangitoto or Windsor Landing, on the other side of Kerikeri Inlet — had also been controversial.

“But now my whānau down there all use Rangitoto and say it’s bloody brilliant,” he said.