The Whangārei District Council has voted in favour of applying for $9.48 million of funding in the Government’s Three Waters reform “Better Off Support Package”.

While the funding application is yet to be submitted, the
decision has attracted a lot of heat from locals who have accused the council of selling out.

But Whangārei Mayor Sheryl Mai says the council remained “hostile” to the reforms despite the decision to apply for the money being voted through by a majority at a June 23 meeting.

Its opposition has Whangārei, Timaru and Waimakariri District Councils awaiting a judgement from the High Court about a declaration on property rights and ownership of council assets.

Criticism about the funding has come from their own with councillor Vince Cocurullo – one of the five to vote against the motion – saying accepting the “bribe” fell out of step with their stance.

“You don’t take someone to court with one hand and the other hand turn around and say accept this money from them.”

Ardern said of the reforms yesterday during a media stand-up that the status quo was “untenable” because ratepayers could face bills of up to $9000 per household.

She said instead of choosing to ignore the problem “we’re choosing to act, and I know many members of local government support that.”

However, Mai confirmed the Whangārei District Council did not fall within that category and the decision to apply for the $9.48m was “pragmatic”.

“When it comes to government funding let’s get real, this is public money. This isn’t government money. This is yours and my tax money,” she said.

She said, “if it goes to a project that we’d have to otherwise raise money through rates then we’re saving our ratepayers having to go through that increase in rates costs”.

Mai said the funding would be used towards projects in the district as long as they either built resilience to climate change and natural hazards, enabled housing development and growth, supported local place-making, or improved community wellbeing.

“You can see that the requirements for the fund are not linked to water assets,” Mai said.

Cocurullo said if a government was going to offer money for Better Off funding that would mean they want to provide some investment into the infrastructure “but we’re not allowed to use it for that”.

“We should be better than accepting a $9.48 million payout in return for our principles … we should be sending the Government a message that our principles cannot be bought.”

However, Mai said projects could have an infrastructure component – the council just hadn’t reached that level of detail yet needed to submit the funding application.

Cocurullo said he was concerned accepting the money would affect the council’s ability to speak out against the Government due to a clause in the funding agreement.

The clause stated those accepting the money must not do anything that would have an “adverse effect on the reputation, good standing or goodwill” of the Department of Internal Affairs [DIA] or the New Zealand Government.

Mai said the DIA had stated that “publicly criticising or expressing opinions on reform” could not “reasonably be expected to have an adverse effect”.

Based on the information at hand, the council had decided as a collective it would be able to apply for the funding without impacting its critical stance, she said.

A total of $37.93 million has been allocated to the Whangārei District Council as part of the Better Off funding.

Should the Three Waters reforms proceed then the second tranche, up to $28.45m, will be available from July 1, 2024.

Additional funding has been made available as the Government announced a $44m package on top of an earlier $2.5 billion funding package intended to compensate councils for the reforms, of which $500 million was to ensure they were no worse off through the transition period.

Mai said the council was yet to decide whether they would pursue the Government’s recently announced transition funding.

“You could argue that by taking that funding, which council hasn’t decided yet but if we do, that’s another indication that we’re supporting reforms – we don’t.”

If the council did opt to it would be for practical reasons, she said, which included staff being diverted from normal day-to-day work to respond to requests from the Government.

“So, for our ratepayers, that means they’re not able to do the work that we would have been doing so it’s fair to claim compensation so that we can employ consultants either to do the regular work or consultants to do the work that’s required for the transition,” Mai said.