What's Driving Tasman's Draft 8.8% Rates Hike?
Tasman District Council's long-term plan for the current decade was adopted in June 2024.
That plan indicated a 7% rates increase but an overspend of $6.5 million is forecast for this financial year and so the council has been forced back to the drawing board.
A raft of changes is proposed to the original outline for the upcoming 2025/26 financial year, resulting in an updated plan for the same year, now with an average 8.8% rates increase.
The council blames rising costs for its overspend and the need for a greater average rates increase.
It says interest rates, depreciation and maintenance costs, and the price of electricity are all higher than expected and is subsequently allocating more money to certain areas.
Among many other smaller increases, next financial year the council wanted an extra $534k to reinstate water and wastewater maintenance to earlier levels to reflect actual spending, $392k for parks and reserves maintenance to account for managing new reserves and inflation, $357k for its IT fees and licences, $222k to bring its environmental compliance services in-house after its contractor exited the contract, and $242k for sewerage works, including upgrading capacity at the overflow-prone Beach Road pump station.
Errors in its earlier plan have also resulted in proposals for allocating $104k for local government sector group subscriptions, $103k for the Māpua Ferry, and $80k for the eBus service due to a misunderstanding with NZTA funding.
The decade's plan for new builds, upgrades, and renewal projects has also been shuffled around to result in an extra $7.3m spending in 2025/26, largely for the Motueka and Tākaka wastewater treatment plants, the Lower Queen Street bridge project, drinking water in Eighty-Eight Valley, and the Motueka Aquatic Centre.
New Government rules also require the council pay $310k for its water and wastewater to be monitored by both the national water regulator Taumata Arowai and the Commerce Commission.
Councillor Kit Maling thought the fees were 'bloody rubbish' when Audit NZ already audited the council's water services, and said the prospect of future fee increases were 'a real concern'.
But budget increases aren't the only changes proposed for next year's plan and several areas could see reductions to keep rates from jumping even higher.
Chief executive Leonie Rae said the council had scrutinised 'every line' of its budget to find ways to reduce spending without drastically impacting the current levels of service.
'We're really thinking about what was essential, and what we could actually let go of or potentially do better.'
The council proposes selling $3 million of its unneeded Emissions Trading Scheme credits to partially offset its deficit, effectively shaving 0.5% off the rates increase.
Other cuts include slashing the staff salary budget by $1.4m, using funding from a Government levy rather than rates for a $1m upgrade of the Richmond Resource Recovery Centre, selling an extra $1m of surplus council property, and reducing insurance coverage to save $700k.
Efficiencies and optimisations are also being pursued in traffic management.
Group manager community infrastructure Richard Kirby said while the number of cones might not drop, there would be likely fewer manned points during roadworks.
The council has indicated it was likely to rescind an earlier original cost-cutting measure of removing bins and closing public toilets, but Kirby said a more targeted approach to managing those facilities would be taken.
Bins that are underutilised or near others will be 'slowly removed' over time, while public toilets which don't get much use in winter, like those on Rabbit Island, would be closed during those months.
Some other proposed measures to lessen the general rates increase would still be felt by some residents like introducing paid parking in off-road, all-day Richmond car parks, and shaving library opening hours.
The council is also seeking to increase most of its fees and charges by 10% to ensure some council services remain user-pays rather than being subsidised by rates.
Elected members grudgingly approved the proposals last week, with Mayor Tim King saying that none of them were 'hugely comfortable' with the 8.8% increase, as they tried to balance affordability with ensuring the council's levels of service continued to meet residents' expectations.
But councillor Mark Greening, the only member to vote against the plan last week, railed against measures.
He thought the council should drastically cut staff numbers to reduce staffing costs by up to $6m, significantly more than the $1.4m reduction already proposed.
'The public should be concerned,' he said.
'This annual plan is still tinkering around the edges and fails to address the fundamental problems.'
The proposal is expected to go out for consultation on May 12 for two weeks.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
a day ago
- RNZ News
Beef and Lamb NZ on proposed Emissions Trading Scheme changes
environment 43 minutes ago Proposed changes to the Emissions Trading Scheme were reported back to the House last night. Beef and Lamb New Zealand chairperson Kate Acland spoke to Corin Dann.
Otago Daily Times
2 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
Former minister hits out at carbon farming of pines
A tree industry expert and former minister of forestry has condemned "lock and leave" carbon farming, but says you still can not tell farmers what to do with their land. Former Labour minister Stuart Nash said in his time with the portfolio he had a dream for how the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) would benefit the country. "With the ETS, for the first time ever there's been an economic incentive to plant up land that should have never been cleared in the first place," he said. But forestry conversions, since the incentive was introduced, where dense pines were planted with no plan to harvest the mature trees, were not good, he said. "You will end up with an ecological disaster in between 80 and 100 years," he said. He understood that some legislation was developing to help restrict the planting of pines, but said you still can not tell farmers what to do with their land and their money. "I don't know if that's the right route," he said. "Farmers get pretty p..... off ... because what it does mean is, their farm which may be worth, $10 million to a forester is now only worth $7m." The Climate Change Response (Emissions Trading Scheme-Forestry Conversions) Amendment Bill passed its first reading in June. It proposed restrictions to the quality and proportion of arable land that could be planted in trees. Mr Nash had a masters degree in forestry science and previously worked for construction, paper and forestry giants Carter Holt Harvey and Fletcher Challenge. His ideal for carbon farming was that pines would be planted low density, for no longer than 50 years, while at the same time seeding natives. Then after 50 years, the ministry would allow the grower to collect carbon credits of the native forest as the pines died off. In this ideal situation, carbon farmers would not be allowed to collect credits or money on pines past that 50-year cut-off. He said research by the sustainability charitable trust Pure Advantage showed that Mānuka could be a just as fast growing and carbon-absorbing alternative to pines. While he was the minister, he said the research needed more time to cook and the good thing about pines were that they were the most hardy. "It's the over-boiled Brussels sprouts of the trees," he said. "Not many people like it, not many [bugs and diseases] like it [either]." Coming from Napier, he had seen the devastation Cylone Gabrielle and Cyclone Hale had on the east coast of the North Island in 2023. This was where trees on farms would have come in handy, he said as roots made the ground more hardy, and would have prevented slips and other soft ground corrosion after the floods. A lot of New Zealand land should never had been cleared for farming and he said it was expensive to plant hilly, non-productive land, without incentive. He said despite seeing the benefit of forests and the ETS for the land, he by no means wanted to see highly productive farms and soil turned into carbon farms. "I'm really loathe to tell farmers what they should and shouldn't do," he said. "But I'm very happy to tell carbon farmers what they should do."
Otago Daily Times
07-08-2025
- Otago Daily Times
End of the road for fuel tax
The road is running out for using petrol taxes as the primary way to fund New Zealand's roads. Fuel tax may be simple to administer and penalise gas guzzlers more than granny cars, but change is inevitable. Last year, the government introduced road user charges (RUCs) for the growing fleet of electric vehicles. According to Transport and Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop, fuel-efficient petrol hybrid vehicles have accelerated from 12,000 in 2015 to more than 350,000 today. Modern petrol cars are also more fuel-efficient than older vehicles. As Mr Bishop said: "It isn't fair to have Kiwis who drive less and who can't afford a fuel-efficient car paying more than people who can afford one and drive more often." In his announcement on Wednesday, Mr Bishop wisely avoided setting firm dates for this "once-in-a-generation change". While legislation could be passed next year, implementing nationwide technology changes will be much more challenging. Nevertheless, the government has signalled 2027 as the target for the system to be "open for business", with third-party providers offering payment services through a consistent approval process. Given the repeated delays in launching a national bus ticketing system and other costly tech failures and setbacks, the 2027 timeline is ambitious. Naturally, concerns have been raised about the administration costs, already a problem with the "clunky" current paper-based RUC system. The government will have to ensure private providers do not embed excessive profits for years to come. Present road user charges for light vehicles are $76 per 1000km, plus a $12 or $13 administration fee. Petrol taxes a litre are about 70c for the National Land Transport Fund (the roads), 6c for ACC, 14c for the Emissions Trading Scheme levy and GST on top. The envisioned system would allow motorists to pay online, like any other bill. Time-of-day or toll-based charges could also be included. Many new vehicles already have the necessary onboard technology. Older cars would likely require added sensors to measure distance and possibly weight. About half of heavy trucks already use electronic devices to calculate location, mileage and RUCs. If the present RUC rates were applied uniformly, they would unfairly penalise small car owners. The "light vehicle" category includes anything under 3500kg, from the top-selling Ford Ranger to the popular compact Suzuki Swift. A Toyota Corolla weighs about 1820kg. Yet, the Ranger takes up more space and causes significantly more road wear. At present, it pays more per kilometre because of higher fuel consumption. Introducing weight-based tiers within the "light vehicle" category would create complexity and anomalies at the margins. Still, the current definition is far too broad. Overhauling any system creates winners and losers, fuelling opposition. Expect robust debate as the details are worked through. Urban drivers stuck in congestion and with low-speed, stop-start driving would benefit, as they travel shorter distances for similar fuel use. Those in hilly areas could also come out ahead. Owners of older, less efficient vehicles may see their overall bills drop. Potential digital surveillance and tracking raise legitimate privacy concerns. It is easy to say that those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear. However, the brick-by-brick erosion of civil liberties and democracy in the United States is a cautionary tale about what could happen anywhere. Enforcement will be another challenge. At present, odometer readings at warrants of fitness help ensure a reasonable level of compliance, but some will likely find ways to cheat the new system. Avoiding petrol tax is harder by comparison. The announcement is no surprise. RUCs were floated before the election and included in the National-Act New Zealand coalition agreement. The AA supports the change in principle, acknowledging both its logic and its challenges. These issues must be tackled fairly and effectively along New Zealand's bumpy road to a new way of funding its roads.
