Mackenzie District Council supports multiple partners plan for Local Water Done Well

Wednesday, 7 May 2025

The Mackenzie District Council prefers multiple partners for its Local Water Done Well (LWDW) scheme entry, but the public still has a large part to play in the plans.

The council's preference for “a multi-council water services organisation” option to deliver the scheme, which the coalition Government says will address New Zealand's long-standing water infrastructure challenges, was decided at a meeting in Fairlie on Tuesday.

Two options were tabled in a report by Neil Jorgensen, the council's general manager of operations and regulatory services, with the sidelined second option being a service run “through an internal business unit of council”.

The two options had been analysed by consultants MartinJenkins while the council assessed the options against a series of key strategic objections.

Jorgensen said the assessment showed “considerable risk in council continuing to deliver the waters, and in being able to meet the public health and environmental standards as legislated”.

“This is partly due to the limited resources of the Mackenzie District Council (capacity and capability) and the ongoing ability to remain operationally resilient.

“Affordability and financial impact to water users is another consideration.”

Data in Jorgensen’s report showed that keeping water services in-house, and overseen by the council, could cost $2050 per year per connection, compared to $1670 per year for a three-council setup or $1470 for a four-council setup.

However, there was no certainty as to whether three and four-council setups would proceed, as Waimate's preferred option was to go it alone while Waitaki was consulting on several options such as an in-house business unit, a stand-alone Council Controlled Organisation (CCO), and a joint council-owned CCO, either with the Southern Water Done Well group of Central Otago, Clutha and Gore councils, or potentially with South Canterbury's three district councils.

Joining with the Timaru council was still an option, after the Timaru council confirmed it preferred a joint council-controlled water services organisation at its meeting on Tuesday afternoon.

Jorgensen emphasised that Tuesday’s “preferred” decision wasn't the final one in the process.

“This is just council stating its preference which it thinks is the best delivery model.”

The next step was getting community feedback, taking that into account at hearings, then a decision “about how council would like to move forward”, and submitting the plan to the Department of Internal Affairs.

Jorgensen said the process started with a number of options on the table, but all but two options had been discounted due to being either unaffordable or impractical for the council to deliver.

He described the plan process as a “once-in-a-generation” decision that would impact all members of the community.

“This decision will not only have financial implications, but will also have governance and structural impacts as regards the service delivery of three waters.

“Council is required by legislation to consult with the community and must state the preferred option for the delivery of water into the future.”

Jorgensen said “the status quo is not an option”.

“Mackenzie will be facing both population and tourism growth, and the ability to deliver affordable, fit-for-purpose infrastructure upgrades to meet that and service that growth is vital for the long-term success of the district.

“It is imperative that future standards are complied with and with that the ability to sustain a resilient service is vital.”

Cr Rit Fisher expressed concerns that the public could get confused.

“We have councils around us that have said that they would like to go in-house, and we're not sure where Waitaki sits.

“It worries me that when we go to public consultation we have it written definitively as three councils or in-house … but in actual fact, the consultation might lead us to a two-council setup.”

Fisher said it was important that the public knew a multi-council option could involve two, three or four councils.

Jorgensen said the issue was at a concept stage, and they couldn’t say “exactly who the partners will be”.

“However, what we can say is that council will be making a decision in due course.

“If the feedback comes back, and council decides the service organisation is the right method to flow water services, and is best for the community, then whoever the partners are in due course will be a council decision, and if the council doesn't like the partners, or doesn't think it's suitable, then I imagine the council won't make the decision to join with that partnership.

'So this is really just saying this is what council thinks is the best option for community with the information that we have, and get feedback from the community on it.“