Council refutes controversial report

Waimarino Bulletin, Volume 5, Issue 16, 15 September 1987, Page 1

Council refutes controversial

report

Last week we published a report from the secretary of the Rangataua Residents and Ratepayers Association, Tim Warmington, about the proposed sewerage scheme for Rangataua. Today we publish the response from Gavin Jones, deputy chairman of the Waimarino County Council and chairman of the Rangataua Sewerage Committee, writing on behalf of the Waimarino County Council.

Freedom of speech and freedom of press are two of the planks of democracy. Integrity also plays a vital role in the way we uphold our democratic rights. In the article on the Rangataua residents meeting in the Bulletin on 8 September supplied by Mr Tim Warmington of Wellington under the name of the Secretary, Rangataua Residents and Ratepayers Association, several statements are made that are false, mischievous and designed to mislead. The following resume of the sewerage proposal for Rangataua is a statement of facts prepared by Council to present a balanced account to the public at large. In 1977 the district scheme was reviewed. A proposal that Rangataua be zoned for Rural use only with no further building to be allowed, was, after the due process of objections, submissions and hearings changed to zone Rangataua as Rural D. The zoning allows one building per Certificate of Title with the proviso that sewerage effluent must be disposed of within the boundaries of the property and that an adequate supply of potable water or a storage tank of 23,000 litres be provided, and that no further subdivision of land in the zone be allowed. Ten years on Council must heed the changes and plan for the future. With the advent of the local Turoa skifield, the land at Rangataua, being already subdivided into town sections has been keenly sought and development has occurred in line with the scheme plan. High numbers in residence during the winter months have highlighted a problem of poor soakage from septic tank systems. Water table levels being over almost the entire area of Rangataua, from 200mm to 600mm higher than the septic tank outlets. While water from sink and bath wastes adds to the pollution. Engineers and Health Department officers have monitored the area and council has spent a

considerable amount on drainage ditches. The engineers have recorded very high water table levels alongside deep drains illustrating the water holding ability of the Rangataua soil structure. Water samples taken by our Health Inspector from Block 3 and to a lesser degree Block 7 in September '86 were found to have high coliform levels. (Coliform organisms indicate human pollution). As a direct result of these severe drainage deficiencies it is all but impossible to obtain a building permit. However even without further dwellings a health nuisance has been identified as being similar to & situation in a neighbouring County where an outbreak of Hepatitis A occurred. In this day and age science has largely controlled cholera and diphtheria and modern sewerage systems have made outbreaks of dysentery and hepatitis negligible. Rangataua without a sewerage system, according to the Health Department, is a prime suspect. With the assistance of the Health Department and Council's Consulting Engineers, several options were considered and costed and an area was defined. The Government an-

nounced the withdrawal of sewerage subsidies by a set date and to comply with these conditions Council submitted for subsidy a scheme costing $409,000. Government subsidy of $146,000 was granted leaving a sum of $262,000 to be found by the ratepayers in the designated area. A ratepayer owning a section with a Land Value of $10,000 would pay $1500 for a connection inside his boundary. The ratepayer would have an additional cost of approximately $23 per metre to connect to the house. A ratepayer with the required 23,000 litre water tank would have adequate water to service the system. There has been a strong enquiry for a reticulated water supply. Council has costed a system and in the event of the sewerage proposal being accepted further costings would be investigated on demand. Changes to the scheme plan have been promoted allowing, among other things, limited subdivision. It is now Council's intentiori to apply to the Loans Authority Board for sanction to raise a loan to pay for the scheme. With permission granted Council will advertise for sanction. At this point objections can be made and if 15 percent a poll is taken. If over 50 percent object as a result of the poll the sewerage proposal would be defeated. Who can vote. The Government in April of 1986 brought about changes so cont'd on p. 2

cont'd from p. 1 that to vote for or against the scheme the voter must reside in the designated area and be on the electoral roll for the district. The voter does not have to own the property or building in which he or she resides. No Council has the authority to act contrary to this law. A questionnaire has been sent to the ratepayers of the designated area seeking their preferred method of payment e.g. lump sum or levy and to date 65 percent have replied, 58 percent of the total have indicated lump sum payment, 7 percent levy and 3 have not

wished to support the scheme. Council is a well aware that some may experience difficulty in raising the necessary finance and is investigating several avenues of assistance for pensioners. The Government operates some assistance at interest rates of 3 percent. Council will be happy to answer any question that may arise. In summary the residents of Rangataua are being offered a proven treatment of household effluent that will assure them from risk to health at a cost that can never be cheaper. The chance is theirs.