1 Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 13:11 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are: Name: Eugenia Puntillo Organisation (if applicable): Postal address: PO Box 145 Franz Josef Email: [email protected]Phone Number: Submission: Other Type submission here: At the consultation meetings back in August, I was presented with the following situation: “Due to the effects of the March flood, it’s been decided that you need a waste water treatment plant. This is what it looks like, this is where it is going to go and it is going to cost $6.2 million + GST + running costs + any other unexpected costs that may come up. Now, how would you like to pay for it?” So the actual consultation was about how to finance a course of action on which a decision had already been made. This, of course, had a predictable result: it confronted South Westland communities regarding who was going to absorb most of the cost. Classic “divide and conquer”. I know very little about the technicalities and feasibility of building a WWTP as opposed to upgrading or expanding the current oxidation ponds and strengthening the banks of the river. On that I trust the people who, for decades now, have been actively working with the ponds and the Waiho and whose opinion wasn’t really heard. What I do know is that it is unrealistic to expect approximately 300 ratepayers to sign what looks like a blank cheque, especially when there hasn’t been a fair consultation. So on this basis, I demand all alternatives to be considered through a proper consultation, all proposal information and costing details to be shared with the community, independent consultants to be appointed by the community for proposal evaluation and costing and, above all, that no further action is taken and no decision is being made by the current Council on this matter before the forthcoming council elections. All decisions on this should be made by the new Council. Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with another party?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer to present via an audio or audio-visual link?: No 044E
Transcript
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:18 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 13:11 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Eugenia PuntilloOrganisation (if applicable):Postal address:PO Box 145Franz JosefEmail: [email protected] Number:Submission: OtherType submission here:At the consultation meetings back in August, I was presented with the following situation:“Due to the effects of the March flood, it’s been decided that you need a waste water treatment plant. This is whatit looks like, this is where it is going to go and it is going to cost $6.2 million + GST + running costs + any otherunexpected costs that may come up. Now, how would you like to pay for it?”
So the actual consultation was about how to finance a course of action on which a decision had already been made.This, of course, had a predictableresult: it confronted South Westland communities regarding who was going to absorb most of the cost. Classic“divide and conquer”.
I know very little about the technicalities and feasibility of building a WWTP as opposed to upgrading or expandingthe current oxidation ponds and strengthening the banks of the river. On that I trust the people who, for decadesnow, have been actively working with the ponds and the Waiho and whose opinion wasn’t really heard.
What I do know is that it is unrealistic to expect approximately 300 ratepayers to sign what looks like a blankcheque, especially when there hasn’t been a fair consultation.
So on this basis, I demand all alternatives to be considered through a proper consultation, all proposal informationand costing details to be shared with the community, independent consultants to be appointed by the communityfor proposal evaluation and costing and, above all, that no further action is taken and no decision is being made bythe current Council on this matter before the forthcoming council elections. All decisions on this should be made bythe new Council.Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
044E
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:19 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 13:12 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Jennifer Anne WilliamsOrganisation (if applicable):Postal address: PO Box 154, Franz Josef, 7856Email: [email protected] Number: 0272055365Submission: OtherType submission here:SUBMISSION:
I, Jennifer Anne Williams1. do not support any of the 3 funding options presented2. do not support the proposed site for the planned WWP3. do not support the proposed WWP system put forward by council
The presentation council gave in August to the community of Franz Josef should be regarded as the 'start' of theconsultation process and nothing more.
Further information now needs to be supplied through questions being answered regarding the potential re-instatement of the current WW system and 'other'options available for an enclosed system. These questions have arisen from the August presentation.Following this process is part of a full consultation process.
The funding proposals:1. The proposed options are not sustainable on a long term basis for the average rate payer or business.2. The proposed system of 50/50 for Franz Josef ratepayers is not sustainable for the business sector of Franz Josef.The businesses in this township function under a seasonal business practise and that needs to be considered.3. With not knowing the methodology used by council to arrive at the 3funding options, or what other options were considered, it makes it difficult to add further options. There will beother funding models out there that should be investigated.4. Council needs to look at the major infrastructural requirements that WDCwill be required to fund throughout the Westland region over the next 10 year period and then look into the bestfunding mechanism for this as a region.
The new council must take over the management of this to allow the consultation process to continue but moreimportantly, provide the essential time needed in seeking financial resolution to the plant requirements
We appreciate council may have engaged in tenders which are currently on hold. Council shouldn't have progressedto the stage it has without having completed full and complete consultation with the community. In that respect,consultation began in August when council presented the essential information that supports the Waste WaterPlant.
045E
2
We ask that this entire process be put on hold - it is inappropriate for the council to rush any decisions through priorto the elections and would be a dangerous precedent to undertake. We ask that council note this at their monthlymeeting, 29th September.
Jennifer Anne WilliamsRatepayerFranz JosefDo you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:20 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 13:14 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Jeremy David WilliamsOrganisation (if applicable):Postal address: PO Box 154, Franz Josef, 7856Email: [email protected] Number: 0276857397Submission: OtherType submission here:SUBMISSION:
I, Jeremy David Williams1. do not support any of the 3 funding options presented2. do not support the proposed site for the planned WWP3. do not support the proposed WWP system put forward by council
The presentation council gave in August to the community of Franz Josef should be regarded as the 'start' of theconsultation process and nothing more.
Further information now needs to be supplied through questions being answered regarding the potential re-instatement of the current WW system and 'other'options available for an enclosed system. These questions have arisen from the August presentation.Following this process is part of a full consultation process.
The funding proposals:1. The proposed options are not sustainable on a long term basis for the average rate payer or business.2. The proposed system of 50/50 for Franz Josef ratepayers is not sustainable for the business sector of Franz Josef.The businesses in this township function under a seasonal business practise and that needs to be considered.3. With not knowing the methodology used by council to arrive at the 3funding options, or what other options were considered, it makes it difficult to add further options. There will beother funding models out there that should be investigated.4. Council needs to look at the major infrastructural requirements that WDCwill be required to fund throughout the Westland region over the next 10 year period and then look into the bestfunding mechanism for this as a region.
The new council must take over the management of this to allow the consultation process to continue but moreimportantly, provide the essential time needed in seeking financial resolution to the plant requirements
We appreciate council may have engaged in tenders which are currently on hold. Council shouldn't have progressedto the stage it has without having completed full and complete consultation with the community. In that respect,consultation began in August when council presented the essential information that supports the Waste WaterPlant.
046E
2
We ask that this entire process be put on hold - it is inappropriate for the council to rush any decisions through priorto the elections and would be a dangerous precedent to undertake. We ask that council note this at their monthlymeeting, 29th September.
Jeremy David WilliamsRatepayerFranz JosefDo you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:21 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 13:15 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Mark NicholsonOrganisation (if applicable):Postal address:PO Box 145Franz JosefEmail: [email protected] Number:Submission: OtherType submission here:1.1 I, Mark Nicholson, resident of Franz Josef have no confidence in theWestland District Council in relation to the proposed new Franz Josef wastewater treatment plant.
1.2 I consider that:(a) the views and concerns of the Franz Josef residents have been ignored bythe Westland District Council;
(b) the Westland District Council has paid lip service to consultation andhas not consulted properly with the community. In particular the Council has –• failed and refused to provide full information and details of all optionsCouncil has considered and the costings and consultants reports in relation to each option;• failed to properly explain why the current oxidation ponds cannot berepaired and/or expanded to meet the requirements of the township for the foreseeable future;• failed to explain why the community should be expected to accept and payfor an expensive new treatment plant that has not been tested in NZ conditions similar to those at Franz Josef as theonly Council alternative.
1.3 I consider that Council has already predetermined the outcome of theprocess and is already committed to its proposed experimental replacement scheme.
1.4 I demand that Council properly consults with the community in a full andopen manner including –• properly considering all alternatives, including repairing and upgradingthe current oxidation ponds• providing full information and details of all options and all costings tothe community• arranging for independent consultants to be appointed by the community toevaluate and cost each proposal.
1.5 I demand that the present Council takes no further steps and makes no
047E
2
decisions in relation to these matters prior to the forthcoming council elections and leaves all decisions for the newcouncil.
Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:24 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 13:16 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Cushla Jones & Chris RoyOrganisation (if applicable): Franz Josef FourSquare SUPERMARKET Postal address:PO Box 65Franz Josef 7856Email: [email protected] Number: 03-7520177Submission: OtherType submission here: We acknowledge that it is imperative that Franz Josef has a more suitable WWT system butstrongly believe the proposed plant is not the only option and this needs to be taken seriously . The proposed plantthat council is recommending is unaffordable by this community. We are against the proposed location for this plant. We would like further consultation on the option to extend the current ponds including stop bank protection . Thisoption is achievable and at a lesser cost to the rating community. We agree entirely that the planning for this systemneeds to be futuristic and looking into the long term . We have grave concerns regarding the proposed plant notactually ever been tested in any other small community in NZ , why should Franz Josef be the test for this at suchgreat cost when in reality there is other options . We think the council has come to the table with a predetermineddecision on what they want and are not fairly considering what the community wants and can afford . Consideration, further consultation and present all of the evidence / information in planning this please Do you wish to be heardin support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with another party?: No Do you requirea language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer to present via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
048E
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:25 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
TRACEY WATERS
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 13:19 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: TraceyOrganisation (if applicable):Postal address:P O Box 36Franz JosefEmail: [email protected] Number:Submission: OtherType submission here:I would like a oxidation pond system to be looked in to more.I am concerned about the other costs on top of the estimated cost of the WWTF.I would like this process to be put on hold until after the up coming elections Do you wish to be heard in support ofyour submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with another party?: No Do you require a languageinterpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer to present via an audio or audio-visual link?:No
049E
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:25 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 13:22 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Christopher John TaylorOrganisation (if applicable):Postal address: PO Box 140, Franz Josef, 7856Email: [email protected] Number:Submission: OtherType submission here:SUBMISSION:
I, Christopher John Taylor1. do not support any of the 3 funding options presented2. do not support the proposed site for the planned WWP3. do not support the proposed WWP system put forward by council
The presentation council gave in August to the community of Franz Josef should be regarded as the 'start' of theconsultation process and nothing more.
Further information now needs to be supplied through questions being answered regarding the potential re-instatement of the current WW system and 'other'options available for an enclosed system. These questions have arisen from the August presentation.Following this process is part of a full consultation process.
The funding proposals:1. The proposed options are not sustainable on a long term basis for the average rate payer or business.2. The proposed system of 50/50 for Franz Josef ratepayers is not sustainable for the business sector of Franz Josef.The businesses in this township function under a seasonal business practise and that needs to be considered.3. With not knowing the methodology used by council to arrive at the 3funding options, or what other options were considered, it makes it difficult to add further options. There will beother funding models out there that should be investigated.4. Council needs to look at the major infrastructural requirements that WDCwill be required to fund throughout the Westland region over the next 10 year period and then look into the bestfunding mechanism for this as a region.
The new council must take over the management of this to allow the consultation process to continue but moreimportantly, provide the essential time needed in seeking financial resolution to the plant requirements
We appreciate council may have engaged in tenders which are currently on hold. Council shouldn't have progressedto the stage it has without having completed full and complete consultation with the community. In that respect,consultation began in August when council presented the essential information that supports the Waste WaterPlant.
050E
2
We ask that this entire process be put on hold - it is inappropriate for the council to rush any decisions through priorto the elections and would be a dangerous precedent to undertake. We ask that council note this at their monthlymeeting, 29th September.
Christopher John TaylorRatepayerFranz JosefDo you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:26 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 13:24 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
I, …Anne Kennedy………………………………………1. do not support any of the 3 funding options presented2. do not support the proposed site for the planned WWP3. do not support the proposed WWP system put forward by council
The presentation council gave in August to the community of Franz Josef should be regarded as the 'start' of theconsultation process and nothing more.
Further information now needs to be supplied through questions being answered regarding the potential re-instatement of the current WW system and 'other'options available for an enclosed system. These questions have arisen from the August presentation.Following this process is part of a full consultation process.
The funding proposals:1. The proposed options are not sustainable on a long term basis for the average rate payer or business.2. The proposed system of 50/50 for Franz Josef ratepayers is not sustainable for the business sector of Franz Josef.The businesses in this township function under a seasonal business practise and that needs to be considered.3. With not knowing the methodology used by council to arrive at the 3funding options, or what other options were considered, it makes it difficult to add further options. There will beother funding models out there that should be investigated.4. Council needs to look at the major infrastructural requirements that WDCwill be required to fund throughout the Westland region over the next 10 year period and then look into the bestfunding mechanism for this as a region.
The new council must take over the management of this to allow the consultation process to continue but moreimportantly, provide the essential time needed in seeking financial resolution to the plant requirements
051E
2
We appreciate council may have engaged in tenders which are currently on hold. Council shouldn't have progressedto the stage it has without having completed full and complete consultation with the community. In that respect,consultation began in August when council presented the essential information that supports the Waste WaterPlant.
We ask that this entire process be put on hold - it is inappropriate for the council to rush any decisions through priorto the elections and would be a dangerous precedent to undertake. We ask that council note this at their monthlymeeting, 29th September.
…………………………………………
Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:26 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 14:02 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
I, …Paddy Kennedy………………………………………1. do not support any of the 3 funding options presented2. do not support the proposed site for the planned WWP3. do not support the proposed WWP system put forward by council
The presentation council gave in August to the community of Franz Josef should be regarded as the 'start' of theconsultation process and nothing more.
Further information now needs to be supplied through questions being answered regarding the potential re-instatement of the current WW system and 'other'options available for an enclosed system. These questions have arisen from the August presentation.Following this process is part of a full consultation process.
The funding proposals:1. The proposed options are not sustainable on a long term basis for the average rate payer or business.2. The proposed system of 50/50 for Franz Josef ratepayers is not sustainable for the business sector of Franz Josef.The businesses in this township function under a seasonal business practise and that needs to be considered.3. With not knowing the methodology used by council to arrive at the 3funding options, or what other options were considered, it makes it difficult to add further options. There will beother funding models out there that should be investigated.4. Council needs to look at the major infrastructural requirements that WDCwill be required to fund throughout the Westland region over the next 10 year period and then look into the bestfunding mechanism for this as a region.
The new council must take over the management of this to allow the consultation process to continue but moreimportantly, provide the essential time needed in seeking financial resolution to the plant requirements
052E
2
We appreciate council may have engaged in tenders which are currently on hold. Council shouldn't have progressedto the stage it has without having completed full and complete consultation with the community. In that respect,consultation began in August when council presented the essential information that supports the Waste WaterPlant.
We ask that this entire process be put on hold - it is inappropriate for the council to rush any decisions through priorto the elections and would be a dangerous precedent to undertake. We ask that council note this at their monthlymeeting, 29th September.
…………………………………………
Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:27 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 14:13 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Dale BurrowsOrganisation (if applicable):Postal address: PO Box 32 Franz Josef GlacierEmail: [email protected] Number: 0273226207Submission: OtherType submission here:I, Dale Burrows
1. do not support any of the 3 funding options presented2. do not support the proposed site for the planned WWP3. do not support the proposed WWP system put forward by council
The presentation council gave in August to the community of Franz Josef should be regarded as the 'start' of theconsultation process and nothing more.
Further information now needs to be supplied through questions being answered regarding the potential re-instatement of the current WW system and 'other'options available for an enclosed system. These questions have arisen from the August presentation.Following this process is part of a full consultation process.
The funding proposals:1. The proposed options are not sustainable on a long term basis for the average rate payer or business.2. The proposed system of 50/50 for Franz Josef ratepayers is not sustainable for the business sector of Franz Josef.The businesses in this township function under a seasonal business practise and that needs to be considered.3. With not knowing the methodology used by council to arrive at the 3funding options, or what other options were considered, it makes it difficult to add further options. There will beother funding models out there that should be investigated.4. Council needs to look at the major infrastructural requirements that WDCwill be required to fund throughout the Westland region over the next 10 year period and then look into the bestfunding mechanism for this as a region.
The new council must take over the management of this to allow the consultation process to continue but moreimportantly, provide the essential time needed in seeking financial resolution to the plant requirements
We appreciate council may have engaged in tenders which are currently on hold. Council shouldn't have progressedto the stage it has without having completed full and complete consultation with the community. In that respect,consultation began in August when council presented the essential information that supports the Waste WaterPlant.
053E
2
We ask that this entire process be put on hold - it is inappropriate for the council to rush any decisions through priorto the elections and would be a dangerous precedent to undertake. We ask that council note this at their monthlymeeting, 29th September.
Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:28 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 14:15 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Bronwyn BurrowsOrganisation (if applicable): Glacier Country Kayaks Postal address: PO Box 32 Franz Josef GlacierEmail: [email protected] Number: 037520180Submission: OtherType submission here:I, Bronwyn Burrows
1. do not support any of the 3 funding options presented2. do not support the proposed site for the planned WWP3. do not support the proposed WWP system put forward by council
The presentation council gave in August to the community of Franz Josef should be regarded as the 'start' of theconsultation process and nothing more.
Further information now needs to be supplied through questions being answered regarding the potential re-instatement of the current WW system and 'other'options available for an enclosed system. These questions have arisen from the August presentation.Following this process is part of a full consultation process.
The funding proposals:1. The proposed options are not sustainable on a long term basis for the average rate payer or business.2. The proposed system of 50/50 for Franz Josef ratepayers is not sustainable for the business sector of Franz Josef.The businesses in this township function under a seasonal business practise and that needs to be considered.3. With not knowing the methodology used by council to arrive at the 3funding options, or what other options were considered, it makes it difficult to add further options. There will beother funding models out there that should be investigated.4. Council needs to look at the major infrastructural requirements that WDCwill be required to fund throughout the Westland region over the next 10 year period and then look into the bestfunding mechanism for this as a region.
The new council must take over the management of this to allow the consultation process to continue but moreimportantly, provide the essential time needed in seeking financial resolution to the plant requirements
We appreciate council may have engaged in tenders which are currently on hold. Council shouldn't have progressedto the stage it has without having completed full and complete consultation with the community. In that respect,consultation began in August when council presented the essential information that supports the Waste WaterPlant.
054E
2
We ask that this entire process be put on hold - it is inappropriate for the council to rush any decisions through priorto the elections and would be a dangerous precedent to undertake. We ask that council note this at their monthlymeeting, 29th September.
Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:48 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 14:30 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Anne & Richard TunnahOrganisation (if applicable):Postal address:PO Box 90Franz JosefEmail: [email protected] Number:Submission: OtherType submission here:SUBMISSION:
We ,Anne & Richard Tunnah …………………………………………1. do not support any of the 3 funding options presented2. do not support the proposed site for the planned WWP3. do not support the proposed WWP system put forward by council
The presentation council gave in August to the community of Franz Josef should be regarded as the 'start' of theconsultation process and nothing more.
Further information now needs to be supplied through questions being answered regarding the potential re-instatement of the current WW system and 'other'options available for an enclosed system. These questions have arisen from the August presentation.Following this process is part of a full consultation process.
The funding proposals:1. The proposed options are not sustainable on a long term basis for the average rate payer or business.2. The proposed system of 50/50 for Franz Josef ratepayers is not sustainable for the business sector of Franz Josef.The businesses in this township function under a seasonal business practise and that needs to be considered.3. With not knowing the methodology used by council to arrive at the 3funding options, or what other options were considered, it makes it difficult to add further options. There will beother funding models out there that should be investigated.4. Council needs to look at the major infrastructural requirements that WDCwill be required to fund throughout the Westland region over the next 10 year period and then look into the bestfunding mechanism for this as a region.
The new council must take over the management of this to allow the consultation process to continue but moreimportantly, provide the essential time needed in seeking financial resolution to the plant requirements
We appreciate council may have engaged in tenders which are currently on hold. Council shouldn't have progressedto the stage it has without having completed full and complete consultation with the community. In that respect,
055E
2
consultation began in August when council presented the essential information that supports the Waste WaterPlant.
We ask that this entire process be put on hold - it is inappropriate for the council to rush any decisions through priorto the elections and would be a dangerous precedent to undertake. We ask that council note this at their monthlymeeting, 29th September.
Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
2
Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:49 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 14:46 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: william alan whitemanOrganisation (if applicable): crack on ltd trading as snakebite brewery Postal address:p o box 69franz josefEmail: [email protected] Number: 03 7520234Submission: OtherType submission here:As a Franz Josef resident I have no confidence in the Westland District Council in relation to the proposed new FranzJosef wastewater treatment plant.
1.2 I consider that:(a) the views and concerns of the Franz Josef residents have been ignored bythe Westland District Council;
(b) the Westland District Council has paid lip service to consultation andhas not consulted properly with the community. In particular the Council has –• failed and refused to provide full information and details of all optionsCouncil has considered and the costings and consultants reports in relation to each option;• failed to properly explain why the current oxidation ponds cannot berepaired and/or expanded to meet the requirements of the township for the foreseeable future;• failed to explain why the community should be expected to accept and payfor an expensive new treatment plant that has not been tested in NZ conditions similar to those at Franz Josef as theonly Council alternative.
1.3 I consider that Council has already predetermined the outcome of theprocess and is already committed to its proposed experimental replacement scheme.
1.4 I demand that Council properly consults with the community in a full andopen manner including –• properly considering all alternatives, including repairing and upgradingthe current oxidation ponds• providing full information and details of all options and all costings tothe community• arranging for independent consultants to be appointed by the community toevaluate and cost each proposal.
1.5 I demand that the present Council takes no further steps and makes nodecisions in relation to these matters prior to the forthcoming council elections and leaves all decisions for the newcouncil.
056E
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:50 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 14:47 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Kathy HartshorneOrganisation (if applicable):Postal address:P O Box 142Franz JosefEmail: [email protected] Number: 037520244Submission: OtherType submission here:I oppose this whole WWTP plant until more consultation is needed with the Franz Josef community and the whole ofSouth Westland.There has been no proper explanation as to why the current oxidation ponds can not be repaired.As a rate payer, we can not afford to have an increase in rates to cover costs as we are paying already.The council should take no further steps and makes no decisions in relation to these matters prior to theforthcoming council elections and leaves all decisions to the new council Do you wish to be heard in support of yoursubmission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with another party?: No Do you require a languageinterpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer to present via an audio or audio-visual link?:No
057E
2
decisions in relation to these matters prior to the forthcoming council elections and leaves all decisions for the newcouncil.
Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?: No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with anotherparty?: No Do you require a language interpreter in order to present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer topresent via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:53 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 14:51 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: mark gibsonOrganisation (if applicable): crack on ltd trading as snakebite brewery Postal address:p o box 69franz josefEmail: [email protected] Number: 7520234/7520228Submission: OtherType submission here:1.1 I, mark gibson resident and ratepayer of Franz Josef have no confidencein the Westland District Council in relation to the proposed new Franz Josef wastewater treatment plant.
1.2 I consider that:(a) the views and concerns of the Franz Josef residents have been ignored bythe Westland District Council;
(b) the Westland District Council has paid lip service to consultation andhas not consulted properly with the community. In particular the Council has –• failed and refused to provide full information and details of all optionsCouncil has considered and the costings and consultants reports in relation to each option;• failed to properly explain why the current oxidation ponds cannot berepaired and/or expanded to meet the requirements of the township for the foreseeable future;• failed to explain why the community should be expected to accept and payfor an expensive new treatment plant that has not been tested in NZ conditions similar to those at Franz Josef as theonly Council alternative.
1.3 I consider that Council has already predetermined the outcome of theprocess and is already committed to its proposed experimental replacement scheme.
1.4 I demand that Council properly consults with the community in a full andopen manner including –• properly considering all alternatives, including repairing and upgradingthe current oxidation ponds• providing full information and details of all options and all costings tothe community• arranging for independent consultants to be appointed by the community toevaluate and cost each proposal.
1.5 I demand that the present Council takes no further steps and makes no
058E
1
Colleen McGeady
From: Karen Jury
Sent: Thursday, 8 September 2016 2:54 p.m.
To: Colleen McGeady
Subject: FW: Form submission from: Submission on the funding mechanism for Franz Josef
WWTP
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
Submitted on Thursday, September 8, 2016 - 14:51 Submitted by user: Anonymous Submitted values are:
Name: Ian HartshorneOrganisation (if applicable):Postal address:P O Box 142Franz JosefEmail: [email protected] Number: 037520244Submission: OtherType submission here:I do not support any of the 3 optionsI do not support the proposed site for the planned WWTP I do not support the proposed WWTP system put forwardby council More information is needed around the existing ponds This all needs to be put on hold until the newcouncil is elected and more consultation has taken place Do you wish to be heard in support of your submission?:No If yes, do you want to make a joint case with another party?: No Do you require a language interpreter in orderto present at the hearing?: No Would you prefer to present via an audio or audio-visual link?: No
