Ross M

I am retired and find cost increases which directly affect my standard of living, concerning.  

One such increase is council rates. I am not fully versant with council matters, but the following comes to mind after reading a recent Beacon, January 14, 2026:

“Big Changes on the Way” – five buildings in the Whakatāne town centre to be demolished to facilitate a riverfront revitalisation project aimed at improving community access and connection with the Whakatāne River.

Whakatāne District Council own the buildings to be demolished.

The council states: “We know how important it is for our communities to maintain access to the river and enjoy the space for recreation. If the buildings were to remain, repair costs would fall largely to ratepayers.”

The enhancement works are supported by $3.79 million from central government.

Alongside this, the council has allocated $7.5 million through the long-term plan for this and further enhancements.

My thoughts or questions on this being:

n This area is part of the Central Business District of the town. Do the business folk want a further recreation area in the CBD or are the two large parks sufficient?

n The CBD is the area allocated in a town for retail activities and office activities – to conduct business for the benefit of the residents. Why would the residents think it so important for the CBD area to maintain access to the river. Wouldn’t it be sufficient for river access to be maintained from the town’s two large parks.

n How can you improve access to the river when the new stop bank is a permanent feature? Demolishing the buildings will not give improved river access.

n It looks like the council budget for this project is approximately $11.3 million +/- ($3.79m + $7.5m). Where in the long-term plan is the $7.5m for this project?

n How much has the council spent on this project to date including the capital or purchase costs for the land leases and buildings involved.

n Is such spend a priority – part of the core activities for the council or is this a nice to have?

n The council in the last few years purchased the Wally Sutherland buildings and ground leases, demolishing some of the buildings for car parking. Are the other buildings on this land leased out or empty?

When the council purchased this area what was the planned use for the property. Was this use part of the core activities of the council or would it be covered as a nice to have or possibly a “don’t know”?

n Building owners usually like to maintain the assets they own, carrying out repairs as needed to keep the building in a usable condition.

After attending functions in the War Memorial Hall some months ago and seeing the state of the building, including the water leaks in the ceiling, it would appear that the council does not consider the maintenance of its assets as a core activity.

Perhaps from the Beacon article it could be inferred that the council has carried out no routine maintenance on the buildings they want to demolish.

A building owner generally would keep his options open until a decision to demolish was taken by continue routine maintenance.

n For a council that is having trouble keeping its spend within its present rating revenue plus an inflation factor, a council that appears to have increased debt by $90 million in the past three years is this project part of the core activities of the organisation or is it a nice to have?

Will this project be funded from rates revenue or by increased debt?

Should the town restrict activities of future councils by lumbering them with interest and debt repayment?

n Going back to when the river stop banks were built, the residents were told that the stop bank on the town side of the river would be higher than the stop bank on the other side – the side which was mainly farmland.

This was to prioritise the protection of the town and let the farmland be flooded if the stop banks could not contain the river in flood mode.

If this was the case, why was it necessary for the Bay of Plenty Regional Council to increase the height of the town side stop bank when no work has been carried out on the stop bank on the other side?

What benefit have we got from this major expense?

PS:  The front on The Strand of the building next to the restaurant has been covered over with roofing iron. This building many moons ago was a butcher shop with some old tiles under the main window depicting scenes appropriate for such a shop.

Perhaps these tiles could be removed and given to the museum for future display.