Submission on

204

Water Fluoridation

April 2015

Pat McNair 15 Ascot Rd Hamilton 3210 07 855 8162

579 An Introduction

My name is Pat McNair. I live in Hamilton. I am a member of Fluoride Free NZ, Health Freedom NZ, Safe Water Alternative NZ, Patients’ Rights Action Waikato Inc and Fluoride Free Hamilton.

I wish to speak to my submission at the upcoming hearing.

Most of the world has rejected fluoridation for a variety of reasons - the infringement on civil liberties, the harm that overexposure can cause and the impact on the environment - are just some of the reasons. It remains only America, and countries strongly influenced by America, that persist in what most of Europe calls “an unethical practice”.

In 2004 a group of medical professionals started to speak out about the dangers of Fluoridation. Many of them had at some point reversed their view from a pro- fluoride position - including a Nobel Laureate - plus the current President (and six past Presidents) of the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology. They are now calling for an urgent end to water fluoridation.

Lack of safety data

A number of international government-appointed bodies have raised concerns about a lack of any safety data relating to fluoridation of public water supplies: -

 The U.S. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Register (ATSDR) in 1993 and 2003.

 The “York Report” - a British National Health Service investigation (McDonagh et al. 2000).

 The National Research Council (NRC-USA) 2006.

 The Scientific Committee on Health and Environmental Research (SCHER-EU) in 2011

Following is a quotation from the ATSDR: “very limited human and animal data were located to evaluate the immunological effects of fluoride.”

And a further quote from the NRC report: “The existing data base does not permit a complete assessment of the immunotoxic potential for fluoride.”

All of the organisations referred to above requested that definitive research had to be done into the potential for adverse health effects.

580 Not surprisingly, governments that have established policies to fluoridate public water supplies (e.g. America, Australia, New Zealand and the Republic of Ireland) have been reluctant to undertake such research. Nevertheless, health officials in these countries have repeatedly provided to their respective Governments and public, unfounded assurances about the safety of their policies – and persistently refused to consider relevant evidence about the likely harm that their policy may be causing.

But as biological sciences have been advancing, so has the evidence of the probability of such harm.

Diseases correlated with water fluoridation

In February 2013, a report was presented to the Government in Ireland that was titled: “Public Health Investigation of Epidemiological data on disease and mortality in Ireland related to water fluoridation and fluoride exposure”.

This presentation compared the incidences of 28 diseases in the Republic of Ireland with both unfluoridated Northern Ireland and the EU. (Waugh D. available at: www.enviro.ie).

Notably, the Republic of Ireland has had mandatory water fluoridation for 50 years. Although it has to be acknowledged that epidemiological studies cannot prove cause and effect, they do reveal statistical correlation.

Comparing the Republic of Ireland with Northern Ireland, the incidence of Type 2 diabetes was 60 per cent higher in the fluoridated Republic.

New Zealand is also experiencing a current epidemic of diabetes, according to NZ Government statistics. In 1996 there were 81,000 diagnosed cases; by 2009 there were greater than 270,000 diagnosed cases.

A similar pattern of increase in diabetes occurs in both the USA and Australia. It is reported that Pacific Islander and Maori populations have three times higher rates of diabetes than Caucasians.

The U.S. increase in diabetes appears to be associated with the increase in water fluoridation as shown below.

581

Endocrine/metabolic disorders, including hypothyroidism and immunological disorders, were all markedly elevated in the Republic of Ireland compared with Northern Ireland. That evidence would be consistent with fluoride being a known endocrine disrupter (State of the Science of Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals, UNEP / WHO report 2012) and "an endocrine disruptor in the broad sense of altering normal endocrine function." (NRC 2006).

Admission rates for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) were highest for the Republic of Ireland at 364 per 100,000. The rate for NZ is similar at 319 per 100,000. Australia is also similar at 312. By comparison the EU is <200 per 100,000 for the (OECD 2012).

Asthma rates in the Republic of Ireland were double those seen in Northern Ireland. The Republic's figure was the highest in the EU – ref. the ISAAC study. (1998)

Asthma incidence worldwide shows that all of the fluoridating countries share equally elevated rates (Masoli 2004). [See map below.]

582

In 2007 in the Republic of Ireland, following a nationwide 30 per cent reduction in water fluoride concentration (to 0.7 from 1.0ppm), there was a 27 per cent decline in hospital admissions for asthma among children under 15 years of age; the largest decline was observed among children aged 0-4years.

There is international epidemiological evidence associating asthma with fluoride, the following local NZ example is pertinent.

New Plymouth ceased fluoridation in 2011: subsequently, the hospital asthma admission rate has fallen by approximately 50 percent in following years to 2014 (Taranaki DHB Figures obtained under OIA July 2014). [See Table below]

583

Deaths in males from ischaemic heart disease were highest in the USA, with NZ next, followed by Canada and then the Republic of Ireland (WHO 2011).

NZ leads the world for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) per 100,000; next in sequence are the USA, Argentina, Australia and the Republic of Ireland.

Infants that are still breast fed at six months of age are less than 10 per cent in the Republic, whereas in the EU the figure is more than 40 per cent. Republic of Ireland infants would therefore have significantly greater fluoride exposure and increased risks of neurotoxicity and lowered I.Q. - a well-documented adverse effect of fluoridated water (Choi et al 2012). The US EPA website includes fluoride in the 100 chemicals having “substantial” evidence of developmental neurotoxicity.

The Republic of Ireland has the highest rates in the EU for prostate, ovarian, colon, rectal and pancreatic cancers as well as Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (all of which are notably of concern in NZ).

A statistically significant increase in uterine cancer was also detected following water fluoridation during the American occupation of Okinawa, Japan, between 1945 and 1972 (Tohyama 1996).

The following chart demonstrates the overall increased cancer incidence in the fluoridating countries (orange bars are fluoridating countries) [Note: Israel is ceasing fluoridation in 2015].

584

Industrial waste disposal

Water fluoridation uses hexafluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) and its sodium salt (Na SiF) almost exclusively. They are hazardous substances - HazChem class 7.

These fluoride forms are recovered ('scrubbings') from gaseous emissions following treatment of phosphate ores with sulphuric acid.

Such scrubbings are contaminated with variable amounts of lead, arsenic, beryllium, vanadium, cadmium, and mercury. Therefore, because of the different chemicals used, old studies based on the use of natural calcium fluoride are irrelevant.

Disposal of such highly toxic and corrosive chemicals from the super-phosphate fertiliser production, was a major problem, until approval was orchestrated in the USA to permit dilution into municipal water supplies in the 1940s and 50s (Kauffman 2005).

If the fertiliser production companies had to store or destroy such unwanted and dangerous chemicals, it is likely that the cost of fertiliser would rise significantly. It has been fortunate for them that governments have turned a blind-eye to health and safety considerations and allowed these mainly bio-accumulative toxins to accrue in peoples' bodies and in the environments around municipal wastewater disposal sites.

585 Lack of safety testing

Such silico-fluoride and toxic metal fertiliser-production waste products, added to public water supplies, have never been tested for their likely adverse effects on peoples' health and safety or upon the environment (associated with wastewater disposal).

The Republic of Ireland and NZ both have generally 'soft' water supplies that have low calcium levels. Low calcium levels increase potential toxicity of fluoride added to water supplies.

Fluoride is a halogen that has a particularly high negative electron charge that gives it a bias to be highly reactive with other substances – for example, aluminium cooking utensils and lead in brass plumbing fittings.

Increasing peoples' bio-accumulation of aluminium and lead would be a most serious matter; sufficient to invoke the precautionary principle or, more likely, to meet the legal test of a greater than 50 per cent probability of causing harm.

Such factors would more than offset any MoH claimed benefit of any minuscule reduction in the incidence of dental carries caused by sugar-laden diets in a proportion of the population.

Adverse environmental effects

There is mounting evidence that fluoride in drinking water together with other common contaminants causes both direct and indirect brain damage in utero as well as accumulative material damage to a person's brain during their lifetime. That evidence points to effects that range from materially-lowered IQ and brain- functioning disorders ranging from ASD through to early Alzheimer's disease (AD) (Grandjean P. 2014).

The typical form of fluoride - fluorosilicic acid or hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFS) - used for fluoridation of public water supplies contains the following additional substances – some of which are particularly toxic as well as bio-accumulative and synergistic with one another (increasing their toxicity) in both people and the environment. (Source of the table below is Prayon Rupel S.A., Belgium – a supplier to NZ.)

Substance Max. allowable level (MAL) micrograms/l Arsenic 5 Barium 200 Beryllium 0.4 Cadmium 0.5

586 Chromium 10 Copper 130 Nickel 10 Lead 1.5 Antimony 0.5 Selenium 5 Thallium 0.2 Mercury 0.2

Where is the MoH documentation that shows that it has considered all of these categories of likely toxicity, in a reasonable way, and given them due weight in the formulation of its policy to add fluoride to public drinking water?

Municipal waste water from fluoridated water supplies tends to be disposed of in a concentrated area where the range of toxic materials referred to above will tend to bio-accumulate in soils, underground aquifers and flow into streams, lakes and river systems.

Such wastewater concentration issues arguably trigger issues of compliance with the purpose and intent of the Resource Management Act 1991. MoH does not seem to have advanced any documentation that shows that it has considered the potential for such adverse effects on the environment when it formulated its fluoridation policy.

Ethical considerations

The issue of free choice is central to the ethical argument. Adding fluoride cannot be regarded as an optional medical intervention – anyone who wishes to opt out would be at a serious financial and logistical disadvantage to the rest of the population. The obvious ethical requirement is that people must be required to opt in to, not out of, medical interventions and exercise their free choice.

It is only for potentially life-threatening contagious diseases that the states’ interests can over-ride individual’s wishes. Clearly tooth decay does not qualify as such a life- threatening disease. So those who elect not to have their dental caries treated by water fluoridation present no public health risk whatsoever. Therefore the imposition of water fluoridation is clearly a violation of human rights.

Water fluoridation is indisputably a one-size-fits-all medical intervention that is being imposed on the whole population, regardless of individual medical conditions. Consider for example the elderly who are toothless; the bottle-fed babies under 6 months; those with cardiovascular disease; renal disorders; Vit C deficiencies; magnesium deficiencies; calcium deficiencies etc.

587

There is no control over how much anyone drinks and no way that an individual can accurately measure their daily dose. Water fluoridation does not take into account any additional sources of fluoride such as fluoridated mouthwash, fluoridated toothpaste, various food and drink products, prescription medications etc.

Unbelievably this medical intervention has been set up without any monitoring system at all for adverse reactions to these unregulated dosages of fluoride medication.

Conclusion

Arguably, there is sufficient scientific evidence, for MoH policy formulation purposes, to require the engagement of the precautionary principle. Water fluoridation is fast becoming a thing of the past as more and more people and communities in NZ and around the world stop blindly following old outdated advice and start questioning the medical ethics and the outdated science that is still being used to justify this dangerous practice.

So - IF IN DOUBT – LEAVE IT OUT!

588 File No: 01 12 15A Document No: 3315083 Enquiries to: Anthea Sayer

7 April 2015

Chief Executive Taupō District Council Private Bag 2005 TAUPŌ 3352

Attention Rob Williams

Tena koe Rob

Submission on Taupō District Council's 2015-2025 Draft Long Term Plan

Thank you for the opportunity to submit on the Taupō District Council 2015-2025 Draft Long Term Plan (LTP). We would like to be heard in support of our submission.

Firstly, Waikato Regional Council (WRC) would like to acknowledge the overall positive working relationship that exists between our organisations. This relationship is demonstrated by the progress being made over the last few years on key projects such as the Lake Taupō foreshore erosion protection works, the Lake Taupō Protection Project, and the Waikato Mayoral Forum Projects (e.g. Waikato Plan and Waikato Means Business).

WRC requests the following proposals within the LTP be considered as follows:  ensure sufficient funding to enable the reticulation of the Waitahanui community to the main Taupō urban sewer network to proceed within the proposed timeframes  WRC supports the inclusion of funds to resource water efficiency measures (page 9 of the consultation document)  WRC supports the planned review of the Taupō District Plan (page 13 of the Consultation Document). For the RPS to be fully implemented it is essential that its policy directions are incorporated into plans at the local level. Given the differing areas of control of both councils it is important that this happens through both regional and district plans. WRC requests to continue discussions with Taupō District Council in relation to the district plan review and how we can best be involved to ensure implementation of the Waikato RPS  we note that on page 28 of the Groups of Activities section you have allocated $150,000 of capital for Project Watershed erosion protection but it is not clear how this funding will be applied. Subsequent years also have capital allocated (varying amounts between $100,000 and $132,000) but, again, no specific projects are identified in the plan.

WRC requests the following matters be considered for inclusion within the LTP: Waikato Regional Policy Statement – resourcing priority projects The Proposed Waikato Regional Policy Statement (RPS) will become operative later this year. The successful implementation of the RPS will be achieved through our organisations partnering together to achieve mutual outcomes. The following comments are made to help ensure that together we can deliver on some key priorities for your district.

Local Indigenous Biodiversity Strategies A key implementation method of the RPS is the development of local indigenous biodiversity strategies. These will enable a more strategic and collaborative approach to managing

589 biodiversity. Our draft LTP budgets $175,000 per year in years 2016/17 to 2018/19 to assist territorial authorities throughout the region to develop local indigenous biodiversity strategies.

We encourage the Taupō District Council to make provision in its LTP to support these strategies. We are seeking funding of $50,000 in 2017/18 to enable the development of a local indigenous biodiversity strategy for the Taupō district. We believe this strategy will assist the future vision that the community has for its district.

Regional Heritage Forum The Waikato Regional Heritage Forum is another RPS method that has direct applicability to the Taupō district. WRC supports the allocation of resources in the LTP that will support regional heritage capacity building.

Healthy Rivers / Wai Ora As you will likely be aware, the timeframes for WRC’s ‘Healthy Rivers: Plan for Change/Wai Ora: He Rautaki Whakapaipai’ have recently been extended into early 2016. WRC is grateful for Taupō District Council staff support during this process and requests that council continue to maintain the ability to engage through to the project’s completion.

Rolling Review of the Taupō District Plan WRC supports the planned review of the Taupō District Plan (page 13 of the Consultation Document). For the RPS to be fully implemented it is essential that its policy directions are incorporated into plans at the local level. Given the differing areas of control of both councils it is important that this happens through both regional and district plans. WRC requests to continue discussions with Taupō District Council in relation to the district plan review and how we can best be involved to ensure implementation of the Waikato RPS.

Caldera Advisory Group WRC acknowledges Taupō District Council’s support of the Caldera Advisory Group. We request you consider the development and implementation of appropriate planning provisions through the forthcoming district plan review that recognise the ongoing impacts of a caldera unrest episode, should one occur. WRC (via the Caldera Advisory Group) would be willing to assist Taupō District Council in this process.

Lake Taupō Foreshore Erosion Strategy As signalled in WRC’s 2014/15 Annual Plan submission to you, in order for us to make funding available for Taupō District Council’s foreshore activities we need a specified programme of the works you intend to undertake - at least for the first three years of the new LTP. This will enable us to set aside the appropriate level of match funding for this work. As you know from the Lake Taupō Foreshore Erosion Strategy, Taupō District Council has the lead on developing this programme as the work undertaken is largely on district land or certainly protecting an amenity that is in local public ownership. Without a clear programme of work we find it hard to balance the competing demands for funding across the region and have difficulty justifying rating for works that have not been sufficiently scoped. This may lead to the need to reduce the amount of funding we set aside on an annual basis for foreshore works.

Once again, thank you for the opportunity to submit on the 2015 – 2025 Draft LTP.

Yours faithfully

Vaughan Payne Chief Executive Doc # 3315083 2 590 From: Steve Jolly [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, 7 April 2015 4:03 p.m. To: Ella Howie Cc: Matt Ryder Subject: TDC RENTALS - NUKUHAU BOAT PENS 206

Hi Ella.

Subject : Market rents for the Nukuhau Boat Pens.

Dear Councillors,

As a Taupo rate payer and Taupo recreational sailor I request that you reconsider your proposal to charge "market rents" for the Nukuhau Boat Pens.

In support of this I make the following points.

In my view there are no other sites in Taupo that are comparable to Nukuhau Boat Pens.. i.e. Storage for fully rigged boats along with easy access to a boat ramp with no power requirements.

The Nukuhau Pens are on a recreational reserve, and store boats which are used solely for recreational purposes. The Councils costs are mainly depreciation and maintenance

My conclusion is that the Council wants a commercial return on the capital cost of recreational reserve land which is being used as a recreational facility for mainly local residents and water sports club members.

There are numerous sites across Taupo used by recreational/sports organisations who pay only nominal fees for their use.

The proposed rental is much higher than that charged by other councils for comparable facilities.

Examples are:

Okawa Bay Rotorua $475.00 pa

New Plymouth $606.00 pa

Napier $620.00 pa

Evans Bay Wellington $720.00 pa

Taupo 1560.00 pa

The high fees will have a very detrimental effect on the Taupo Yacht Club membership and its long term future and growth.

Weekly sailing races and regattas provide a spectacle on the lake and help bring considerable visitor money to the town.

I question the validity of Councils determination of 'Market Rental' for the Nukuhau boat pens. It would appear from the statistics above from regional as well as city based marinas, that $1560pa. is no where near 'Market Rental'. Please supply to me your evaluation of market rental for the Nukuhau pens.

591 I strongly object to any increase in the pen rentals in Taupo. If anything the rentals should be reduced to come into line with rentals in other areas where sporting pursuits are being supported by the local authority. Sports should be encouraged as involvement in sport assists with the well being of the local population.

Yours faithfully

Steve Jolly Phone 07 378 8635 (w); 377 0628 (h) Fax 07 378 8531

592 SUBMISSION TELEPHONE 0800 327 646 I WEBSITE WWW.FEDFARM.ORG.NZ

To: Taupo District Council 72 Lake Terrace TAUPO 3330

Submission on: Draft Taupo District Council Draft Long Term Plan 2015/25

Submission by: Federated Famers of New Zealand Rotorua/Taupo, Waikato and Ruapehu Provinces of Federated Farmers

Date: 07 April 2015

Contacts: SALLY MILLAR, REGIONAL POLICY MANAGER, Federated Farmers of New Zealand PO Box 447, Hamilton, New Zealand P 07 858 0827 E [email protected]

CHRIS LEWIS WAIKATO PRESIDENT Federated Farmers of New Zealand P 07 872 4533 E [email protected]

ALAN WILLS ROTORUA/TAUPO PROVINCIAL PRESIDENT Federated Farmers of New Zealand P 07 357 2142 E [email protected]

LYN NEESON RUAPEHU PROVINCIAL PRESIDENT Federated Farmers of New Zealand P /F 07 893 8547 E [email protected]

Federated Farmers wishes to be heard in support of this submission.

593 2

INTRODUCTION

Rotorua/Taupo, Waikato and Ruapehu provinces of Federated Farmers appreciate this opportunity to submit on the Taupo District Council Draft Annual Plan 2014/15. We acknowledge any other submissions from individual members of Federated Farmers.

Federated Farmers has a strong interest in the effective performance of local government and has a good understanding of the challenges faced by councils in meeting the growing legislative requirements of recent years. We are concerned with Taupo District Councils proposals in regards the rating mechanisms used in this draft long term plan.

Federated Farmers is focused nationally on the transparency of rate setting, and the overall cost of local government to agriculture. We are concerned at the unrelenting growth in the cost of rates, which this draft annual plan is an example. For most farms rates are among the highest uncontrollable working expenses.

In this submission Federated Farmers will focus on;  Debt and Debt reduction  TEL Fund  Uniform Annual General Rate and Targeted Rates  General Rate and the use of differentials

DEBT and DEBT REDUCTION

Council’s debt level has been the topic of considerable concern over the last few years and we support that Council has started confront and propose to control debt. Federated Farmers further supports the use of debt to fund new capital projects to ensure intergenerational equity with the interest costs being largely funded from rates.

Therefore while we support the proposal to control the current debt burden we have concerns with the long term plan proposing to shift for a debt position of $77million to net cash position of $40million on the basis that the build up of cash reserves will be needed to fund the renewal of assets as the become due for replacement. In doing so undermines the desire for intergenerational equity by forcing today’s generation to pay for assets that will be used by future generations.

It is also not clear in the long term plan documents whether the debt recovery is being collected from the general rate or included in the targeted rate and Federated Farmers considers that Council should be more transparent in how the debt recovery is being collected. It is Federated Farmers position that debt recovery for infrastructure assets should be collected as a targeted rate from the users of those assets. As the users of the infrastructure are future users it is therefore appropriate to fund such assets from debt.

Recommendation:  That Council undertakes the debt repayment as proposed in the long term plan but does not pursue the building of cash reserves as proposed in 2023 and 2024 but rather funds the renewal of the assets from debt to ensure intergenerational equity is achieved.  That Council undertakes a more transparent approach to how debt is collected from rates

594 3

 That Council collects debt that is raised for infrastructural assets by a targeted rate to the beneficiaries of those assets.

TEL FUND

The TEL fund has been applied to operational expenditure to reduce the amount of rates that have been collected. The Consultation document provides three options with Council preferred option to dedicate income from the fund to community projects and cease its application to rates subsidies. The document states that “there is an opportunity to reduce the amount of income applied to rates by the fund due to the proposed rates revenue increases over the next 10 years”.

Federated Farmers is strongly opposed to this proposal. The TEL fund is owned by the ratepayers not Council and therefore Federated Farmers considers it must be used in a manner that benefits every ratepayer not just those who may benefit from a specific community project.

Federated Farmers does however support measures to inflation proof the fund.

Federated Farmers considers that any application of the fund must be equitable and of benefit to all ratepayers such as for debt repayments and/or rate reductions. The reduction of debt and reduced rates are mechanisms that will assist in stimulating economic growth in the District.

Recommendation:

 That Council inflation proofs the fund and;  That Council either continues to use the income from the TEL fund to subsidies rates or uses it to reduce the debt burden that Council currently has.

UNIFORM ANNUAL GENERAL RATE (UAGC) and TARGETED Rates

Federated Farmers strongly supports the use of UAGC’s and targeted rates and encourages Councils to where appropriate increase the UAGC’s up to the maximum allowable of 30% under the Local Government Legislation.

Federated Farmers considers targeted rates and UAGC’s important revenue tools that ensures a more equitable funding stream where the benefit is to individuals rather than per rateable property. We do not consider it equitable that households with high value properties, such as farmers, should be contributing significantly more than a residential household for the provision of such activities as libraries and swimming pools.

There are many examples in the consultation document and supporting documentation of activities that are currently funded from the general rate but should be funded from an increased UAGC. These include parks and reserves, sportsgounds, pools, events centres, public toilets, libraries, galleries and museums, long term planning, community engagement, parking, etc , etc.

Three years ago Federated Farmers accepted a reduction of the UAGC as a means to smooth the impact on residential properties in the shift from land based rating to capital based rating. As noted in the consultation document this transition period is now completed.

595 4

The UAGC 3 years ago was 19% (at $460 per property) and on our calculations for the 2014/15 year at the proposed $250 per property equates to 15% far short of the maximum of 30% that is allowed.

It is difficult to extrapolate from the Consultation documents the exact figure of contribution from the general rate for the services that we consider should be charged as a UAGC but as an example if the contribution towards libraries for an urban property valued at $500,000 from the general rate is $100 say then a farm valued at $5,000,000 also with one household the general rate contribution will be $1000 for exactly the same service on the presumption that the farmer who will be some distance from the library will use the library at the same level as the urban property who is much closer to the service.

Further from our interpretation there is no indication in the documentation that the UAGC is to be increased from the current proposed charge of $250 over the life of the LTP. If this is the case the percentage value of the UAGC in 2024/25 year will have fallen to 11.7%.

Recommendation

 That Council increase the Uninform Annual General Charge per property to back to where it was three years ago for the 15/16 year and then up to the maximum 30% within the term of this Long Term Plan to provide a more equitable funding stream from ratepayers.

 That Council better match the use or benefit of services with the charging mechanism used and therefore the amount paid by recipient households. These include the Economic development, community facilities and storm water rates.

GENERAL RATE

Federated Farmers also submits that Council should only use the general rate where there is a correlation between a ratepayer’s property value and the benefit they receive from the expenditure, or the amount the ratepayer contributes towards the need for the expenditure. Many of the activities funded by the general rate will be providing an equal benefit to all ratepayers, regardless of their capital value.

Councils reliance on income from the use of the general rate rather than using the many other tools it has, means that farmers will face the double insult of not just paying substantially more for a range of services but also often using or benefiting from those services substantially less than other rate payers.

Federated Farmers therefore supports the use of general rate differentials, and agrees in part with the Council differential system, but it submits that the rural differential should be lower than the urban one to recognize the lower demand for many services by rural ratepayers. We consider the rural differential should appropriately be set at lower than 0.8 of the urban general rate.

Recommendation:

 That council maintain a differential system for the General Rate.

 That the Rural differential on the District wide General Rate be set at lower than 0.8 of the urban differential. 596 5

INFRASTRUCTURE: WATER AND STORMWATER

Federated Famers agrees that infrastructure such as water and stormwater should be funded by targeted rates to those ratepayers who benefit from the infrastructure. We therefore support the approach of using targeted rates to fund these assets that Taupo District Council has adopted. In regards to the need for upgrades or supply Federated Farmers strongly supports consulting and working with the affected communities to determine the best option for that community.

Federated Farmers also agree that minimising wastage and encouraging efficient use of water will reduce costs and future demand.

SOLID WASTE

Federated Farmers overall supports the existing use of a mix of fees and charges and targeted rates for the funding of refuse and recycling collection and disposal. We however consider that litter control should be a UAGC rate rather than being funded from the general rate as the primary beneficiary is individuals rather than property.

It has also been noted that in communities such as Kinloch where there are high tourist numbers over holiday periods such as Easter that the Kinloch with the Kinloch Transfer Station closed over these periods holiday makers cannot dispose of their rubbish as they leave. We consider that opening these facilities at an appropriate time for example Monday afternoon for Easter, would simply resolve what is becoming a significant problem for residents.

Recommendation:

 That council uses UAGC’s for the funding of litter control

 That council continue the mix of fees and charges and targeted rates for the funding of refuse and recycling collection and disposal.

 That transfer facilities in holiday communities are opened at the end of holiday periods for holiday maker to dispose of rubbish

ROADING

It is proposed to set aside $400,000 for 4 years to continue the current programme of seal extension which equates to approximately 2.5km of extension per year. Federated Farmers supports this funding and encourages Council to expand this programme if the funding is available.

Recommendation:

 That council continues that programme of seal extension of rural roads

597 6

ROLLING REVIEW OF DISTRICT PLAN - GOVERNANCE

Taupo District Council is proposing to commence a rolling review of the Taupo District Plan as opposed to the alternative to undertaking a comprehensive review every 10 years. Federated Farmers considers there is little cost advantage to undertaking a rolling review approach, other than evening the costs out year by year rather than compacting these costs into 2 or three years.

Further we do not consider that a rolling review fosters the integrated management approach of our natural resources that is required by the Waikato Regional Policy Statement and further does not allow an appropriate assessment of the District Plans overall direction. Federated Farmers experience with a rolling review approach is that most RMA issues cannot be considered in isolation and have broader impacts than that which is under consideration for the rolling review. However such matters cannot be considered as they are outside the scope of the review.

Another issue that arises with a rolling review approach is that the community becomes quickly disengaged with the process of continually having to make submissions, attend hearings and if not satisfied with the decision make an appeal to the Environment Court with its initial cost of $511 for each appeal made.

Recommendation:

 That council does not does not pursue the rolling review method of reviewing its District Plan but rather undertakes a comprehensive 10 year review

Federated Farmers is a not-for-profit primary sector policy and advocacy organisation that represents the majority of farming businesses in New Zealand. Federated Farmers has a long and proud history of representing the interests of New Zealand’s farmers.

The Federation aims to add value to its members’ farming businesses. Our key strategic outcomes include the need for New Zealand to provide an economic and social environment within which:

 Our members may operate their business in a fair and flexible commercial environment;  Our members’ families and their staff have access to services essential to the needs of the rural community; and  Our members adopt responsible management and environmental practices.

Federated Farmers believes that every dollar that a farmer spends on rates is a dollar that will not be spent in the community on goods and services. We therefore believe that the Council should limit its spending to core services.

Rotorua/Taupo, Waikato and Ruapehu provinces of Federated Farmers thank the Taupo District Council for considering our submission to the Consultation Document for the Long Term Plan 2015- 2015.

598 Waikato River Trails Office 6 Main Street 7th April 2015 Putaruru 3411 PO Box 223 Putaruru 3443

His Worship the Mayor David Trewavas Taupo District Council Private Bag 2005 TAUPO 3352

Dear David

Re: Draft Long Term Plan 2015-2025 Submission

We acknowledge the 2015-2015 Draft Long Term Plan. The published Draft Long Term Plan is well presented and asks the community the important questions with strong supporting information. Council is congratulated for initiating such open dialogue with your community.

In particular, the focus on building a thriving, vibrant community.

The Waikato River Trails has operated for three and a half years since its opening in November 2011.

Growth and success has been measured in terms of visitation, environmental protection and enhancement and economic benefits to our communities.

Council’s support of the Waikato River Trails project is starting to deliver measurable value across our communities and is changing in a very positive way the perception of our district. The Waikato River Trails have provided access to one of our key assets, the Waikato River and created interest and visitation at a level never before seen in the communities of Whakamaru and Mangakino.

The table below details the key objective data captured relating to Waikato River Trails activity over the last 12 months.

Result year Key Performance Indicator Measurement ending March 2015

Trail usage Trail counts 38,000

Net Users 75% one day use 28,500

Average spend per person On Trail surveys $60

Total economic contribution Count X survey data $1,710,000

Taniwha participation Taniwha registrations 980

Taniwha Economic benefits Total Sport post event survey $186,000

Total estimated economic return 12 Months to March 31st $1,896,600 2015

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 599 1

WAIKATO RIVER TRAILS - LOOKING BACK

The concept of a 100km long Waikato River Trail was initiated out of an economic development brain storm in 2002. The resulting vision for the Trail was motivated at the time by diminishing employment opportunities in the area.

Council support for the Waikato River Trails project has delivered a number of key benefits:

1. The project has delivered a 103km cycling and walking trail free to use by locals and visitors to our district.

2. Over 140 jobs were created during the construction phase of the project. Many were Community Max or Task Force Green positions providing unemployed opportunities. More than 50% of those employed subsequently went onto employment.

3. The Waikato River Trails Charitable Trust was formed in 2006 to act as an autonomous entity outside of Council which has enabled leveraging of funding. The total project cost to date is about $8.4M

4. In 2009 the Trust was the first organisation to sign an agreement with the Ministry of Economic Development to fast track the development of one of New Zealand’s “Great Rides”

5. In November 2011 the Trail was officially opened. Since then over 100,000 people have enjoyed the Waikato River Trails.

COUNCILS ENDURING SUPPORT

Council’s ongoing support for the Waikato River Trails project has assisted the creation of one our Countries “Great Rides”. The Prime Minister is often credited for the vision of a network of world class cycle trails. The Taupo District Council as supporter of the Waikato River Trails development needs to be congratulated for backing the creation of an asset of national significance.

WAIKATO RIVER TRAILS – A GREAT RIDE

The family of “Great Rides” is a status to be proud of. The national network of great walks has a distinct brand that has been developed over time. The “Great Ride” network has just started in that journey to national and international recognition. We are in esteemed company. The iconic Central Otago Rail Trail, Alps to Ocean, Great Lake Trail, The Timber Trail and Hawkes Bay Trails are just some of the wonderful trails in our network.

Leveraging

Being a member of the New Zealand cycle Trails network affords Waikato River Trails significant exposure nationally and internationally. Tourism New Zealand, New Zealand Cycle Trails and our local Regional Tourism Organisations are all committed to promoting the network of cycling products. The marketing undertaken by these is of enormous value. With ongoing support the NZ cycle Trails brand will gain momentum and individual Trails will benefit.

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 600 2

Auditing

New Zealand Cycle Trails audits members of the Great Ride network annually to ensure trails meet standards and that trails are actively being improved to meet world class standards. A recent audit indicated the Trail is being well maintained by our team.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

A wide range of businesses are benefiting from Waikato River Trails visitation. The Trust currently has 23 licensed partners.

Partner locations below:

Number of Location Licensed Partners

Tokoroa 2

Putaruru/Arapuni 7

Mangakino/Whakamaru 5

Tirau 4

Out of Region 5

Established and start-up businesses including cafes, bike shops, bike hire, accommodation and transport are enjoying increased business. The cluster of cafes in the Whakamaru and Mangakino area including the Dam Café, The Hui Hut and Bus Stop Café are sought out by River Trails users.

Mangakino is perfectly located on the Trails to take advantage of cycle traffic. For most the Waikato River Trails is a three day experience. A day one ride from Atiamuri takes cyclists directly into Mangakino. It is pleasing to see the recent investment into the Mangakino Hotel. The Hotel and Lake Maraetai Lodge continue to provide excellent customer service to River Trails users.

Attached as appendix 1, letter of support from the Mangakino Hotel.

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 601 3

MARKETING

The Trust has implemented a marketing plan with focus on a central North Island target audience. The last year we have undertaken marketing into the Australian market with support from Tourism New Zealand.

Marketing channels include digital including social media and web site.

Key statistics below:

Web stats:

Unique Visitors are up 27% in the last year versus the previous year.

Year to Feb 2014 28,876

Year to Feb 2015 36,796

Facebook likes: 544; was 284 a year ago.

Electronic newsletter data base is 1,978; was 1,238 a year ago.

Hard copy marketing has included:

 30,000 hard copy brochures distributed, 22,500 were distributed last year.

 Advertising in:

o Chill Magazine

o Hamilton Maps

o NZ Walking Magazine

o Hamilton/Waikato Visitors Guide

o AA Regional Guide

o Waikato Times

Face to face marketing to encourage out of region visitation at the following events:

 Auckland Covi Motor Home Show

 Hawkes Bay Home and Garden Show

 Taranaki Home and Lifestyle Show

 National Agricultural Fieldays

Over 4,000 conversations have taken place with event attendees with 6,200 Waikato River Trails brochures handed out.

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 602 4

An example of pull up banner content used at events.

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 603 5

The Trust also has a full wrapped vehicle acting as mobile advertising.

TRAILS OPERATIONS

There are a number of key elements that are required to manage successful operation of the Waikato River Trail. After three and a half years of operation the Trust has an accurate picture of what is required to manage a professional operation.

The current full time FTE across all operations is 5.2 made up of:

 Office and management: 2.2

 Maintenance & riparian enhancement: 2.8

 Shuttle driver: 0.2

The in kind contribution from volunteers and trustees to the Waikato River Trails project in the last year is valued at $98,584.00

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 604 6

DRAFT LONG TERM PLAN 2015-2025

Waikato River Trails Trust applauds Councils vision to ensure the Taupo District remains a great place to live.

The Trust takes this opportunity to comment on specific aspects of the Draft Long Term Plan:

Ensuring the Taupo District Remains A Great Place to Live

This vision is supported by the Waikato River Trails.

With Councils support we provide trails that are:

 Free to use

 Safe as they are off road

 Highly scenic

 Multi use for walking, cycling and events.

Trails such as the Waikato River Trails are now a permanent asset in the Taupo District. The trails are a playground for the local community.

Promoting Economic Development

The Waikato River Trails, a member of the family of New Zealand’s “Great Rides” is pleased to report that just over 38,000 users enjoyed the Trails in the last 12 months. This is an increase of 6,000 from the previous year.

The following local businesses benefit directly as a result of the Waikato River Trails:

 The Dam Café  That Dam Lodge

 The Bus Stop Café  Lake Maraetai Lodge

 The Mangakino Hotel  The Hui Hut Café

In its third year, The Taniwha event attracted almost 1,000 participants. With all local accommodation booked for Taniwha weekend both event participants and their supporters are estimated to spend $186,000 in the local community.

Protect Our Water Resources and Use Them Wisely

The Trust is committed to continuing our Riparian enhancement and protection work, doing our part to improve the quality of the Waikato River. Our custodial role along ¼ of the Waikato River is well supported by our environmental funding partners and a strong volunteer base.

TEL Fund

The Trust prefers option one as the best means of managing the income from the TEL fund. The income from the fund dedicated to community services and projects provide opportunities for community organisations to drive important projects.

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 605 7

CCTV in Mangakino

The Trust supports the suggested installation of CCTV in the Mangakino town centre. With the Trails bringing more visitors into Mangakino any initiatives to provide a safer environment for both locals and visitors are welcomed. We recognize that visitors positive experiences are a key part of developing a reputation.

The Environment

Relationship with the Waikato River Authority

Our relationship with our Principal Environmental funder the Waikato River Authority (WRA) is in place and growing from strength to strength. The Trust now has a three year contract to undertake riparian improvement in sensitive areas along 103km of the Waikato River with support from Waikato Catchment Ecological Enhancement Trust and South Waikato Environmental Initiatives Fund.

The Waikato River Trails project has excellent alignment with Waikato River Authority funding criteria.

Alignment with Trust Criteria Protect √

Restore √

Health √

Wellbeing √

Biodiversity Improvement √

Larger Riparian Setbacks along the River and feeder streams, riparian √ fencing and planting.

Wetland restoration, protection and recreation. √

Protecting diversity of natural landscapes. √

Improving access to the River and development of River Trails. √

WHAT WAIKATO RIVER TRAILS TRUST HAS BEEN ACHIEVING

The Waikato River Trails at 103 km in length have opened up public access to the Waikato River. This free public access creates connection and visibility. Water quality is clearly visible, the significant environmental initiatives undertaken by our Trust are there for all visitors to see and enjoy. The Waikato River Trails Trust is a member of the Waikato River co-governance family. We work alongside our major sponsor Mighty River Power, Raukawa our local River Iwi, Waikato River Authority, Waikato Catchment Ecological Enhancement Trust and South Waikato Environmental Initiatives Fund.

Waikato River Trails Trust riparian enhancement and protection work over the last 12 months includes:

 Poisoning or removal of over 150 wilding pines.

 Poisoning or removal of 2000m2 of willows in the Huihuitaha Wetland at Lake Karapiro.

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 606 8

 Planting of 14,500 native trees in riparian areas at Lakes Karapiro, Maraetai and Whakamaru.

 Education and engagement with 120 volunteers from schools and the business community including the planting of native trees by Waikato Regional Council Staff

WAIKATO RIVER TRAILS TRUST RELATIONSHIPS

Waikato River Trails Major Sponsor Charitable Trust “Mighty River Power”

Key Supporter Key Supporter Key Supporter Key Supporter Key Supporter “South “Taupo “Raukawa “Hancock “Waikato Waikato District Charitable Forest Regional District Council” Trust” Management” Council” Council”

Primary Funder Co Funder Environmental Co Funder Environmental Environmental Enhancement Enhancement “Waikato Catchment Ecological “South Waikato Environmental Enhancement Enhancement Trust” Initiatives Fund” “Waikato River Authority”

Project specific funders Project specific funders Project specific funders “Walking Access” Project“Lion specific Foundation” funders “Pub Charity”

Project specific funders Project specific funders Project specific funders “FirstKEY SovereignISSUES Trust” “Trust Waikato” “Graham Brown & Co; Chartered Accountants”

The Council is providing support for the 103km long Waikato River Trails.

Council should be very proud of backing the project as in the little over three years since the trails were opened we have seen:

 over 100,000 people use the Trails

 three very successful Taniwha events

 39,000 native trees planted by volunteers

 extensive marketing of the Trails

 23 licensed tourism operators engaged in collaborative marketing

 National and international exposure for the trails and district.

The Councils ongoing investment in the Waikato River Trails is crucial to the Trust continuing to deliver on our goals. The trails have opened up access to the Waikato River in a way that is very special. This

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 607 9

access provides not only opportunity for active recreation and economic development but for riparian protection through fencing, planting and education.

The current Council investment of $14,000 per year is appreciated, but is inadequate.

Our operating budget for the 2014/15 year is $622,000. We ask Council include in the Long Term Plan to increase the level of future funding to $30,000 per year.

As a Charitable Trust we are focused on generating income to invest in the Trails. Booking services including bike hire, accommodation and shuttle services and on-Trail events do create an income stream for the Trust.

We do however require support from Council to continue to maintain, develop and market the Waikato River Trails. Increased Council funding will also go some way to also closing the gap between current South Waikato District Council funding of $225,000 per year and the current Taupo District Council funding.

The Trust is committed to expanding our business activities to meet the needs of our customers and to create further employment opportunities.

Waikato River Trails Charitable Trust places very high value on the ongoing support from Council and your staff.

Waikato River Trails Trust looks forward to the opportunity to speak to this submission.

Yours sincerely

Stuart Edmeades Chairperson Waikato River Trails Trust

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 60810

APPENDIX 1: Letter of Support

WRTT – TDC Draft Long Term Plan Submission 2015-2025 60911

Taupo District Council’s LTP 2015-25: Lakes & Waterways Action Group Trust (LWAG) submission

Lakes and Waterways Phone: Jane Penton (Secretary) 378 2043 e.mail: [email protected] P.O. Box 407 209 Taupo

Lakes and Waterways (LWAG) have the following comments on the draft plan that we request are considered by Taupo District Council (TDC).

Taupo District Council’s 10-year plan There much in TDC’s 10-year plan that is supported by LWAG.

Community Facilities  LWAG support the proposed funding for landscaping the lower Otumaheke Stream

We note there are on-going operational budgets allocated for Project Watershed as part of the agreed Flood and Erosion Strategy protection works.

 We ask that part of the foreshore maintenance fund be allocated to revegetation of high- priority areas, for this to be integral to operational planning and linked specifically to relevant Reserve Management Plans such as the South Western Bay Settlements Reserve MP.

Many of Taupo’s highly valued reserves have foreshores vulnerable to erosion such as those at Taupo Bay and Kuratau. Moreover, erosion delivers phosphorus directly to the lake. We have seen that improved management of overland stormwater systems and planning tools for development have reduced silt pathways to Lake Taupo in recent years. Many of these mitigation works are at the interface of stormwater gullies and the lakeshore.

 We request that these wholly supported TDC initiatives be extended to include an on-going plan of works for foreshore revegetation as per above. Over time the benefits of this will have amenity and environmental benefits. Community groups such as the Kuratau Omori Preservation Society, Greening Taupo and Greening kids could ideally work in partnership to help design and action the planting works and maintenance.

Wastewater

 LWAG wholeheartedly supports TDC’s plans to continue to work with Lake Taupo Protection Project nitrogen discharge limits and compliments the council on its continued support for on-going waste-water treatment plant (WWTP) upgrades to keep discharge within these and future Upper Waikato limits.

 As per our last Annual Plan submission, we are pleased to see that Waitahanui Wastewater will be reticulated. We certainly support this significant reduction in nitrogen from the Taupo catchment.

In regards to the Acacia Bay WWTP, LWAG would like to remind TDC that investigation of the option to pump this wastewater to the Taupo transition was recently in its plans.

610  We request that investigation of this option remains “on the books”, i.e., included in the 10- year plan.

Lake Taupo Protection

 LWAG also supports increasing environmental standards. In particular we support TDCS’s on- going involvement with the Lake Taupo Protection project.

At the time of writing, it appears that this project will meet its aims to reduce nitrogen discharge in the catchment. However, this is not the only aim of the project and TDC support for the project will be required in the longer term. This support will include upgrades and maintenance to WWTPs. In addition, LWAG believes that the Lake Taupo Protection project is a major marketing opportunity for the Taupo District.

 Therefore, we request that the text “Lake Taupo Protection Project” is included in two the sections of the 10-year plan: “increasing environmental standards” as this will give the project a status it deserves; and economic development. In the section on economic development, LWAG would like to see an aim of developing economic opportunities that are based on our wonderful, protected, lake and its catchment.

For instance, Bike Taupo is a great example of an organisation leveraging off the Lake Taupo Project.

Stormwater

 LWAG agrees with the 10-year plan projects proposed by TDC, including the enviropod programme and stormwater quality monitoring. We also agree that education programme should be continued.

Community Services

Re: Funding for LWAG

TDC has supported LWAG in the last few years with funding of $5k/yr. (Our current contract expires at the end of 2015/16 and we understand that funds have been set aside up to 2018/19). We thank TDC for this invaluable support.

The funding aims at covering the costs of our administration, monthly meetings, speakers, policy process involvement, events and communication of LWAG activities. However, our costs have increased as we now pay for venue hire at $80 per month, and have extended our community engagement role, particularly in relation to the long-term goals of the Lake Taupo Protection Project.

We are happy to provide further details, but generally we refer to the support of visiting speakers, attending forums on environmental issues, reporting to Lake Taupo Catchment Committee and reporting on their activities, and taking part in research such as the recent project involving “Taupo Beef”.

 We therefore ask TDC to consider increasing our annual grant, after the expiry of our current contract to 7.5k/yr through to 2019/2020.

611  LWAG is in support of proposed Community Grants for Bike Taupo, Tongariro Trout Hatchery, Waikato River Trail and Enviroschools.

All these initiatives have long-term environmental goals and benefits that provide interactive experiences, education and economic opportunities. We would like to particularly acknowledge Bike Taupo for their on-going biosecurity work.

 In this regard we also support funding being allocated for the Greening Taupo project.

LWAG would like to thank TDC for their ongoing support of our advocacy work. We look forward to reporting our group’s activities for 2014/2015 to the council in the near future.

We wish to be heard.

Paul White (Chairman) Lakes & waterways Action Group Trust

612 Submission to Taupo District Council LTP 2015 – 2025

Jane Penton 27 Hatepe Ave Taupo 3330 07) 378 2043 210 To: the Cheif Executive Officer Taupo District Council Private Bag 2005 Taupo 3352

Submission: Ref: Consultation document  Ref; pg 7 I support proposal 1 of the Tel Fund options  Ref; pg 8 I support community consultation regarding drinking water upgrades  Ref; pg 9 I support conservation of treated water and alternative collection and storage of rainwater and grey water. I support consultation with Waitahanui community re: drinking water upgrade.  Re; pg 10 I support the Wastewater proposals including improved treating of wastewater now discharged to the Upper Waikato as part of the Healthy Rivers Plan. I also support the option (not included in this LTP) to consider the reticulation of Acacia Bay wastewater within the LTP scope (2015-2025)  Ref; pg 11 I support Stormwater processes as outlined  Ref; pg 13 I am not sure if there are other alternatives for the use of biosolids to land treatment, nor what ‘treating’ them entails, but would like to comment on this in general. There may be an alternative fuel/charcoal use which could be utilised in future. Bio-char is an increasingly used soil conditioner for agriculture and forestry. A quick Google search has come up with this study: “The use of Biosolid-derived Biochar to Control the Leaching of Nutrients and Bacteria from Agricultural Soil” https://www.wisconsin.edu/waste- research/download/2014_student_reports/14%20MIL%20Feriancikova%20biochar%282%29 .pdf  Ref; pg 17 I support the lakes and Waterways submission including their request for specific Operational Funds towards foreshore reserve revegetation and their request for an increase to their funding to $7.5 K per year.  Otherwise I support the community grants and service agreements in general and in particular the funding of Enviroschools and Bike Taupo.  I also support Greening Taupo’s submission and their request for funding. They are an example of a group providing environmental projects that work in partnership with other groups and agencies to improve our environment while increasing participation in biodiversity and biosecurity actions and related educational opportunities. Greening Taupo have a proven record of successful community plantings to date, and aim to improve over time the aesthetic values of the town environs and increase our local birdlife particularly for natives. Moreover, our district can only benefit from supporting Greening

613 Taupo and Bike Taupo as they create opportunities for low nitrogen related tourism and local low impact activities are a big part of Taupo’s economy.  I support The Taupo Community Garden’s request for funds of $4.5 K per year. A group of volunteers (of which I am a member), has been successful in initiating and maintaining a local project which aims to: 1. Stimulate interest in organic gardening, self sufficiency, community resilience and sustainable living.

2. Promote healthy eating habits to improve nutrition and general health

3. Be a place for local food production (eg: for food bank, Woman’s refuge, schools etc)

4. Enable community cohesion and exchange through working together

5. Become a teaching facility with the possibility of local employment

6. Showcase ways for waste minimization through composting organic waste for businesses or events (like Oxfam trailwalker), making use of recycled materials.

7. Be a show case for local council.

8. Be a location for seasonal celebrations and fundraising events (eg. play groups, schools).

We strive to be a recognised asset to Taupo, a space for all to come & enjoy and feel proud of. With the opportunity of formalising a 10 year licence with TDC and procuring a double garage from the now disbanded Waipahihi Bowling Club, the Taupo Community Garden Trust intends to consolidate their operations and increase their community outreach as outlined in their submission.  Ref; pg 18 “Services to the Community” – I do not support the closing of the rock climbing wall as it is a highly valued facility for people of all ages and abilities.  “Enterprise & Destination Great Lake Taupo” – I would like to see these organisations profile the Lake Taupo Protection Project (LTPP), as it is a unique long- term environmental project aiming at preserving our high quality lake water for generations to come. As a community we have worked hard to achieve this hard-won outcome, and I believe we should be celebrating and leveraging off the project at every opportunity. This is especially important regarding the different perceptions, needs and future options of urban and rural landowners around the catchment.

Thank you for the opportunity for submitting.

I wish to be heard.

Jane Penton

614 Submission to the Ten Year Plan

Name: Aroha Henry Address: 23 Pitiroi Street, Nukuhau, Taupo 211 Email: [email protected]

Contact Number: 0273865633

I am completing this submission on behalf of Rauhoto Land Rights Committee

I am unable to be present

These are issues raised by our Maori communities for whom Rauhoto Land Rights represent.

Please feel free to contact me if you require further information or clarification.

 Allocate Māori seats on Local Council  Environment – Kaitiakitanga Plan  Support Māori Land development enablement  Support Papakainga Development Support  Review Marae Rates  Visibility of Te Reo Māori and Cultural Understanding  Build more Co-Management Relationships with Tangatawhenua  Tinorangatiratanga Flag to be flown outside TDC

615 From: Jennifer Haraki [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, 7 April 2015 5:01 p.m. To: 10year plan Subject: Re: Taupo District Council: Consult Registration 212

Submission Please provide your feedback on the Consultation Document for the Long-term Plan 2015 - 25. 1. Revenue and Financing policy 2015 - do not sell any more assets without consulting us 2.Water - Auckland have a scheme where water tanks are to be used particularly over the North shore - why can this not be something to look at. 3. Cover the Mangakino pools for all year round swimming - will benefit the whole community and user will pay

TEL Fund Option 1 - We want to keep rates affordable but we can see great benefit in creating a community fund that can be used How should Council use the income from the TEL Fund? for community services and projects. An opportunity to steadily reduce the amount of income currently applied to rates has been created due to the level of the proposed rates revenue increases over the next 10 years. This means that in 2021 the TEL fund would be ‘inflation proofed’ and the income from the fund could be dedicated to community services and projects. This approach is consistent with the principle of intergenerational equity as the fund will be able to be used over a long period of time and will benefit generations of our community. This is Council’s preferred option and is reflected in the financial information presented in the consultation document.

TEL fund Powered by Objective

1 Please provide any comments regarding the TEL Fund proposal making sure funds are not used on selected projects Water Please provide your feedback on water including compliance with the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards and raw water availablity

- again why not have water tanks for toilets, washing machine and gardens

Waitahanui Water Treatment Plant upgrade Please provide your feedback on the proposal to upgrade the Waitahanui water treatment plant.

Please advise if you are directly affected by the proposal needed as population growing Waste water - yes

Please provide your feedback on waste water. it seems to be the highest charge

Stormwater Please provide your feedback on stormwater re-use roof run-off for washing machine, toilets and gardens

Condition of underground infrastructure ok Fees and charges already set

Draft Revenue and Financing Policy no selling of assets

Draft Development Contributions Policy again already set

Thank you Jennifer Haraki 6 Tawa St Mangakino

Draft Rates Remissions and Postponement Policies ok 616 617 618 619 Taupo District Council 10 Year Plan Submission 214

1. (a) We could not* gain an advantage in trade competition through this submission.

(b) I /We am/are not* directly affected by an effect of the subject matter of the submission that adversely affects the environment; and does not relate to trade competition or the effects of trade competition

2. The specific provisions of the proposed plan change that my submission relates to: Are of a general nature...... 3. My/Our submission is that I/We support the provision and additions to the District plan for Papakainga Development Support.

It has become timely and relevant to enable the transition, progress and future proofing of the development of Papakainga, for both descendants wanting to return to their land and for the region to embrace these developments and the culturally enriching and economic benefit they have the potential to provide. We also support a co-joint process with tangata whenua to develop clear pathways and guidelines that supports land owners to navigate through to creating healthy, safe, sustainable homes for people.

There are some amendments and additions for consideration.

4. I/We seek the following decision from the Council

The Papakainga provisions will provide for the development of ancestral Māori Land. These provisions will seek to provide opportunities for Māori land owners to develop and live on their ancestral land. It is recognised that Māori land is subject to a number of development barriers and complications that require it to be treated differently to land held in European title.

That the District Plan identifies and expresses the need and support for Papakainga development, and objectives that meet those needs. Also a holistic approach, it is about the land, its care, improved utilization and its progressive development, it is about the people and community on and around the land, and how the community as a whole can benefit.

Briefly highlighting some initially identified mutual benefits.

* Benefits for tangata whenua: it is about reconnecting, reviving our special relationship and values through a long lived (since 1800's) line of passed tupuna (ancestors), and whakapapa (geneology) who all have a bond and connection to the land, and this in turn provides a sense of belonging, peace, acceptance and safety to those descendants, and particularly those wanting to return to grass roots home base and create a Papakainga.

* Benefits for land: it is also a living and often spiritual entity Wairuatanga (embedded emotion/spirit), requiring nurturing and ideally positive utilisation (not economic exploitation), by tangata whenua or those that share the same aroha for the land. Much of this land not only has rich history, but often archaeology sites left by the once occupying tupuna and natural assets once used for survival and now valued for conservation.

620

* Benefits and knowledge to share: cultural, environmental and conservation resources/assets: Māori have a special relationship with natural resources, once resourcefully and environmentally managed and used to survive by their tupuna and their land it is sacred taonga rich in much history, there is opportunity and benefits for realisation and embracing by owners, descendants, community and regions to preserve, conserve and share their land asset in a respectful and enriching way.

* Benefits for the community: as Marae, Papakainga are also based on principles of kotahitanga (cohesion and collaboration) establishing effective partnerships and collaboration with community. Also Manaakitanga (hospitality and security) acceptance and hospitality to visitors.

* Benefits for the economy: progressive development, this requires planning, financial resources and technical/skilled/contracted resources, equates to hiring, purchasing and financial expenditure directly into the local community and economy.

Issue/Need To improve the under utilisation and non occupation of Māori land (multi owned), unfortunately is often in need of Kaitiakitanga (Guardianship, protection and stewardship) care and development for both returning owners, and the wider community for many unrealised benefits .

Objective: Realising the potential from enabling the development of the districts Māori land (and Treaty settlement land) to ensure the land asset can be occupied and developed to contribute significantly to lift Māori social, health, cultural, and economic wellbeing, that in turn benefits the wider community.

Policy inclusions Appropriate density Papakainga are settlements and require the ability to build in close proximity, this may not be adequately provisioned for in rural zoning. Zoning will need to allow for more residential type allocation for housing and facilities so that there are no restrictions to building Papakainga as a close knit settlement.

Due to some Papakainga being on rural land with no services there needs to be provision for alternative infrastructure for power generation and waste /water disposal i.e. Solar, windmills, eco sewerage systems.

Urupa will need to be an inclusion if the Papakainga has a requirement to have one, if one does not already exist, or full or not able to be used for other reasons.

Community facilities to be able to provide for a range of activities, that would be used for hui, host visitors and social events. Also buildings that may have flexible and functional uses, as classrooms, offices, workshops, art and craft studios or additional accommodation and/or home occupations space or commercial activity, that can employ as many people as needed for economic sustainable well-being of the community and regional economic input for development.

621

I/We am/are happy to be contacted regarding this or further information at details below

5. If others make a similar submission I/We would be prepared to consider presenting a joint case with them at any hearing.

6. Preferred place Turangi.

622 215

623 624 Submission to Council’s Long Term Plan on behalf of Mangakino Community Led Development Group. We would like to speak to our submission 217 1. Note that the skate park at Mangakino has been a huge success and support the collaborative approach and involvement of young people in the decision making.

2. Support the further funding of stage two of the town centre and would like to be involved as part of a community working group to develop the concept.

3. Would like to see the continuation of community grant of $25,000 for distribution by the Mangakino Pouakani Representative group.

4. Would like to be involved in the review of the Grants Policy as this might be an opportunity to strengthen the community-led philosophy (collaboration, build capacity and leadership)

5. Support the continued funding to the Mangakino area through Enterprise Great Lake Taupō and/or Destination Great Lake Taupō – especially in relation to the current ‘person’ resource.

6. Support option one of the TEL fund, to provide funding for community facilities and projects in the future.

7. Support a collaborative approach to the weed issue around the lakefront area on Lake Maraetai and other hydro lakes in the District.

8. Support funding for a new toilet at the Mangakino lakefront

9. Continued and increased support by way of a grant to the Waikato River Trail Trust (should part of the grant come from economic development budget as the river trail has provided great economic benefit to the local economy in both Mangakino and Whakamaru)

10. Request that Council work with Waikato River Trail regarding the safety for road cyclists on Waipapa Road (the section from the Mangakino Township to Maraetai Dam turnoff).

11. Support the funding for CCTV for Mangakino, however would suggest that the $25,000 is made available for the community, even if funding cannot be fully matched by the community. The Group would like to be part of a community working party for this project and which should also look at other initiatives to address “anti-social behaviour’.

12. We would like to see Council support, develop and implement in collaboration with other entities a more connected community/public transport infrastructure that supports the economical, educational, health and social wellbeing of the people permanently residing within the Mangakino/Pouakani district.

625 7th April 2015

Dear Councillors, As a Taupo rate payer and Taupo recreational sailor I request that you reconsider your proposal to charge “market rents” for the Nukuhau Boat Pens. In support of this I make the following points. - In my view there are no other sites in Taupo that are comparable to Nukuhau Boat Pens. i.e. Storage for fully rigged boats along with easy access to a boat ramp.

- The Nukuhau Pens are on a recreational reserve, and store boats which are used solely for recreational purposes. The owners of Yachts in these pens do not use these facilities for commercial gain. They are purely for recreational. The Councils costs are mainly depreciation and maintenance. Differentiation has to be made between this type of storage and that of a commercial business who aim to gain from the rent of the land from the Council. My conclusion is that the Council wants a commercial return on the capital cost of recreational reserve land which is being used as a recreational facility for mainly local residents and water sports club members. If Council is so hell bent on recovery of cost, why not also charge a parking fee for those users of the Nukuhau Ramps who choose to park their vehicle and trailer there after launching their boat - they are users of this area as well? There are numerous sites across Taupo used by recreational/sports organisations who pay only nominal fees for their use when the actual true cost to the Council is much higher for maintenance. The proposed rental is much higher than that charged by other councils for comparable facilities. Examples are: Okawa Bay Rotorua $475.00 pa New Plymouth $606.00 pa Napier $620.00 pa Evans Bay Wellington $720.00 pa Taupo $1560.00 pa

The high fees will have a very detrimental effect on the Lake Taupo Yacht Club membership and its long term future and growth. The current fees are already causing some members to sell their Yachts as the costs are becoming too great for them to sustain. Many of these people are retired and on fixed incomes. Weekly sailing races during summer and regattas provide a spectacle on the Lake and help bring considerable visitor money to the town. Lake Taupo Yacht Club has held multiple regattas over the current sailing season some brining in excess of 500 people to town. I request that the Council rethink if market rents are appropriate in these circumstances and strongly suggest that Council look to reduce the current rent on these pens.

Matt Ryder 72 Taharepa Road Taupo 626 2015 LONG TERM PLAN:

SUBMISSION FROM PROJECT TONGARIRO

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on Council’s Long Term Plan.

Project Tongariro is a Trust that has been working in Tongariro National Park and its environs for 30 years undertaking biodiversity work and information and education services to the area. Two significant projects we are managing at present are integrated pest management at Mt Pihanga-Lake Rotopounamu in Tongariro National Park and restoration of Te Matapuna wetlands just north of Turangi. These projects have been in existence for 12 and 11 years respectively and positive outcomes have been achieved.

At Taupo we initiated and continue to administer the Greening Taupo project in collaboration and support from a range of business partners, iwi, Councils, conservation groups, schools and the public.

Our key points for the 2015-2025 LTP are as follows-

1. We note and support the emphasis of the LTP in recognising the outstanding natural environment of the District and the goal of Council for Taupo to remain a great place to live.

2. We note that the LTP does not appear to have any priorities towards protecting and improving the natural environment? We do note as a contrast the strong support given to economic development and in particular tourism development. The natural environment is part of the economy of the District. It is a core value that requires to be maintained.

3. We support the Waikato Regional Council’s proposal to develop local indigenous biodiversity strategies and their request to Taupo District Council to provide $50,000 in 2017-18 to enable development of a local biodiversity strategy for the Taupo District.

4. We note that Taupo District Council has removed exotic plantations with the stated intention to replant them with native plants over the coming 5-10 years. This restoration work is important to help protect water quality, control erosion and encourage improvement of the natural environment [also making Taupo a better place to live.] The plantings are also required to ensure the areas do not become weed havens, fire risk or rubbish dump areas.

There does not appear to be any commitment to this important work in the LTP?

5. We are concerned that Taupo District Council withdrew support to the Waikato Environment Forum several years ago. The Regional Coordinator of the Forum in Hamilton continues to provide a useful support role to community groups in the

627 Taupo district. Groups like the Pukawa-Omori restoration group and Project Tongariro depend on this advice for the work they do in enhancing the natural values of the area.

The district is unique in its natural values, particularly because of its geothermal biodiversity and would benefit from this role being supported but located in the Taupo District at a part time level.

6. We support the submission by Greening Taupo and in particular their request for a service agreement. We note that if Taupo District Council undertakes the restoration work that it is committed to under point 4 above - and has an agreement with Greening Taupo to provide the plants, plant them and maintain them through the community, that there is likely to be no increase in costs to the District Council!

Supporting Greening Taupo is an investment by Council. It is a way of achieving restoration of community land that Council administers at the best price! Not only would the work be done with significant benefit to the natural environment and Taupo as a place to live but the broader community will have been involved and have an enduring commitment to the project. Through Greening Taupo partnering the Council will have been able to purchase plants at a significant reduction and have them planted and cared for by the community.

We note that the support of DOC, Waikato Regional Council, Tuwharetoa Maori Trust Board Mighty River Power, has been given at a strategic level to the Greening Taupo Project. Our District Council is a significant land owner and beneficiary of Greening Taupo but support has been very limited to allowing an area to be planted and staff attendance at meetings. There is significant support from the Waikato Catchment Ecological Enhancement Trust to commence restoration on the Waikato River and support from Bike Taupo, Forest and Bird and a variety of business partners. Taupo District Council should commit as a partner!

7. We support the submissions of Bike Taupo and the Lakes and Water group. They both benefit the District greatly.

We would like to be heard in support of our submission.

Yours sincerely

Paul Green Project Tongariro President [email protected]

628