Agenda of Report to Tasman District Council Meeting

Tasman District Council Agenda – 07 May 2026

7 Reports

7.1 Use of 79-81 Commercial Street Takaka as the site for storage of the Anaweka Waka

Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	7 May 2026
Report Author:	Leith Townshend, General Counsel; Grant Reburn, Reserves and Facilities Manager
Report Authorisers:	John Ridd, Group Manager - Customer & Community; Leonie Rae, Chief Executive Officer
Report Number:	RCN26-05-4

1. Purpose of the Report / Te Take mō te Pūrongo

1.1 The purpose of this report is to provide information to the Council on the Anaweka Waka project and seek their agreement to engage with the community on the location and ownership of the facility being proposed to house the Anaweka Waka.

2. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

2.1 On 13 February 2025 the Council received a presentation from the Anaweka Waka Working Group on the history of the Anaweka Waka and the proposal for a new facility to accommodate the long-term storage and display of this Waka. The feedback from the presentation from the Council was positive.

2.2 The Working Group have previously identified the site next to the current Golden Bay Museum (79-81 Commercial Street, Tākaka) as the preferred location for a building to house the Waka.

2.3 Since 1990 this site location has been gazetted as Local Purpose Reserve (site for museum). It is the opinion of the Working Group and Council staff that the storage and display of the Anaweka Waka and other taonga is in keeping with this purpose.

2.4 On 19 June 2025 (RCN25-06-10) the Council resolved the following:

That the Tasman District Council:

1. receives the Use of 79-81 Commercial Street Tākaka as the site for storage of the Anaweka Wakareport, 0.0; and

2. notes that legal ownership of the Waka has not been determined by the Māori Land Court but both claimants have jointly offered support for the approach below; and

3. agrees in principle, subject to future consultation, that 79-81 Commercial Street, Tākaka is an appropriate location for the housing of the Anaweka Waka; and

4. notes that consultation will be required under the Reserves Act and Local Government Act to allow for any future use on this site; and

5. notes that there are a number of options regarding ownership, operation and governance of any facility built on the site and that these are being explored by the Working Group before coming back to the Council for approval.

2.5 The working group have presented to the Golden Bay Community Board on this proposal, and Councillors have had the opportunity to view the Waka as part of the induction process They will be attending to provide a presentation..

2.6 This report now seeks Council approval to gather community feedback on the proposed site of the Anaweka Waka facility.

3. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. Receives the Use of 79-81 Commercial Street Takaka as the site for storage of the Anaweka Waka RCN26-05-4; and

2. Agrees to engage with the community on the following questions before the final decision is made by Council:

2.1 That 79-81 Commercial Street, Tākaka is a suitable location for a facility to store and display the Anaweka Waka,

2.2 Whether Council should agree to lease the land during the construction of the facility,

2.3 Whether Council should enter into a long-term lease for a facility and/or the ground under the facility depending on final ownership decisions.

3. Notes that the engagement described above will meet the requirements to consult under the Local Government Act 2002; and

4. Notes that a Council decision on the use of the 79-81 Commercial Street Takaka site is required to give Iwi enough certainty to investigate and lodge the required consent applications;

5. Notes that a decision on ultimate ownership of the Anaweka Waka storage facility has not been made and that this decision will be made as part of the Long-Term Plan considerations, and subject to further due diligence for all parties; and

6. Notes that the feedback received during engagement on the use of 79-81 Commercial Street Takaka will be made available to Council and the working group once the enagagment period is closed so that a decision can be made.

4. Background / Horopaki

4.1 The Anaweka Waka was discovered on the West Coast approximately 14 years ago and has since been undergoing a conservation process in Golden Bay.

4.2 The Anaweka Waka is a hugely significant find. The attached article sets out the scientific significance of this find – An early sophisticated East Polynesian voyaging canoe discovered on New Zealand's coast.

A wooden object on a shelf

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

Left: The waka held within the purpose-built drying facility. Right: Turtle emblem carving.

Legal ownership of the waka

4.3 As set out in the Protected Objects Act, the waka (being taonga tūturu) is currently in the ownership of the Crown and under the care of the Manatū Taonga (Ministry of Culture and Heritage) until ownership is determined by the Māori Land Court.

4.4 There are two claimants for the waka; Manawhenua ki Mohua on behalf of Ngāti Rārua, Ngāti Tama and Te Ātiawa, and Ngāti Kuia.

4.5 To settle the claim, the claimants will need to prove they can care for and protect the integrity of the waka, including certainty on where and how it will be stored. The claimants are all represented within the working group and steering group and are collectively working towards a solution.

4.6 The working group also includes representation from the Golden Bay Museum and Tasman District Council.

4.7 Until legal ownership is determined, Manatū Taonga will maintain interim ownership and ultimate decision-making. However, as far as possible Manatū Taonga want to support the aspirations of Iwi and support the current proposal. Attachment one is a letter of support from Manatū Taonga.

4.8 Both potential claimants are involved in the Anaweka Waka working group and are supportive of the approach to build a new facility in Golden Bay.

Conservation

4.9 Staff from the Auckland War Memorial Museum continue to support conservation efforts. This support has been facilitated and funded by the Manatū Taonga. The conservator team advise that the waka is dry, stable and being cleaned of any final residue.

Activities of the Working Group

4.10 The focus of the Working Group is shifting towards the design and construction of the building alongside the other decisions that need to be made by Iwi and the Council – such as ownership of the building and operating models.

4.11 They have also completed an RFP selecting a project architect, Fineline Architecture, and are underway with design of the wharewaka adjoined to the Golden Bay Museum. A pre concept design has been completed which was previously shared with the Council.

4.12 The concept design is well developed and one of the designs is below:

4.13 While there is still more work to do on the final budget and design, including quantity survey, the working group has set a cap of $5 million capital cost for the construction of the wharewaka inclusive of the ātea space. Internal alterations required within the Golden Bay Museum are out of scope of the wharewaka project and are being considered by the Golden Bay Museum in conjunction with this project.

4.14 The intention is to fundraise externally to fund this project. To date, the Department of Internal Affairs have funded the design work through the Lotteries Environment and Heritage Fund and the working group is preparing a funding application for stage 2 for 1 July 2026 to 30 June 2027 which will include the developed and detailed design; and building consent application.

5. Analysis and Advice / Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

5.1 Ultimately the Council will need to make several decisions in relation to this project and public consultation is required before those decisions can be made. These decisions and the questions for consultation are outlined below.

The location of the facility to store the Waka

5.2 Iwi and the working group have previously explored several different options for storing the waka. Their preferred site is 79-81 Commercial Street, Tākaka.

5.3 The reason that this site is preferred is its central location in Tākaka and proximity to the Golden Bay Museum which creates efficiencies for the operation of the facility and adds operational resilience to both the Golden Bay Museum and the wharewaka.

5.4 Since 19 April 1990, this land has been designated as a reserve meaning that it is subject to the Reserves Act 1977.

5.5 There are a number of different ‘types’ of reserve under the Reserves Act and this land has been designated ‘Local Purpose (Site for a museum) Reserve’.

5.6 Staff view is that the storage and display of the Waka and other taonga is consistent with this purpose. Council previously decided in principle that the site would be a suitable location for the waka.

5.7 There is currently a pioneers memorial at the tip of this site, this has been there for many years after being relocated there from another part of Tākaka. It is anticipated that as part of the project the working group will work with the Golden Bay Community Board to relocate the memorial. This may be within the museum precinct or elsewhere.

5.8 There are some large trees currently on the site which will need to be removed as part of any development. This may need to be addressed in the resource consent application. The removal of the trees is welcomed by the museum management team as they create ongoing building maintenance issues for them.

5.9 The community will be asked whether they consider this site to be suitable for a facility to store the waka before the decision comes back to Council.

Use of land during the construction period

5.10 During the construction phase of this project the site will need to be closed to the public to allow the construction company to meet their Health and Safety obligations.

5.11 This means that the Council will need to enter into a lease with the entity constructing the facility and restrict public access.

5.12 During consultation the public would be informed that notice will be given once the Council has made its final decision. This would restrict access to the site during the construction phase and going forward once the facility is built.

Ownership of the facility

5.13 Before the construction begins a decision will need to be made on the ownership of the building – i.e. whether it is owned by an Iwi entity or by Council, or other alternatives.

5.14 This decision will need to be made as part of the long-term plan process as taking ownership for the building will have several ongoing operational costs for its eventual owner. The working group considers that it is too premature to consider this decision now, as further due diligence needs to be undertaken to better inform all parties.

5.15 An approval to access the land now will not predetermine or undermine an outcome on this matter. The working group will not be able to proceed with leases or construction until this matter is determined, which will happen in due course when there is more confidence in the final building proposal and costs.

5.16 It is also noted that depending on the eventual ownership model, the Council will need to enter into either a ground lease or ground and improvement lease with the entity managing the facility.

Consultation process

5.17 Once approval is received staff will create consultation material onto Shape Tasman and put an advertisement in the Golden Bay Weekly to advise people of the proposal and let them know how to have their say. Staff will also look to advertise on Newsline (depending on publishing deadlines).

5.18 The Golden Bay Community Board and local Iwi representatives will also be approached and asked to submit and publicise the on-going consultation.

5.19 Members of the working group will also be encouraged to advertise and publish the on-going consultation through their networks.

5.20 Depending on engagement with the community there is an option for the consultation to be extended to allow for a public meeting to discuss the proposal.

5.21 It is proposed that the consultation be open for three weeks.

6. Financial or Budgetary Implications / Ngā Ritenga ā-Pūtea

6.1 There are minor budgetary implications for consultation which will be on Shape Tasman, Newsline and advertised in the Golden Bay Weekly. It is anticipated that these costs will be less than $200, not including staff time.

7. Options / Kōwhiringa

7.1 The options are outlined in the following table:

Option		Advantage	Disadvantage
1.	Agree to consult with the community on the waka project as a stand-alone consultation in the near future.	Community views sought on this project in a timely manner.	Minor financial costs and staff time associated with consultation (e.g. article/public notice in Golden Bay Weekly).
2.	Agree to consult with the community by including the proposal within the draft Golden Bay Ward Reserve Management Plan (RMP), expected to be publicly notified in September 2026. The Local Purpose Reserve land parcels where the waka is proposed to be housed will be included within the RMP.	Community views on this project can be captured as part of the wider Golden Bay Ward RMP review project.	Timing may not be ideal for the wharewaka project. Under the Reserves Act, draft RMPs must be open for submissions for two months, followed by hearings and deliberations. The final RMP will not be adopted until February 2027 at the earliest. The wharewaka project may be ‘lost’ among the range of other proposals being consulted on for the draft RMP project.
3.	Decline to consult and take no further steps to support the project.	No further cost or staff time will be spent on this project.	Detrimental to the Council’s relationship with its Iwi partners. The wharewaka project will no longer be feasible at this site and there will be considerable sunk costs. The public may not have the opportunity to see an important cultural artifact.
4.	Seek more information from the working group.	Further information can be provided that may better inform Council decision making.	Delays consultation and additional staff time associated with producing a further report. There may be risks to the timing of funding tranches for the working group.
5.	Decline to consult and make the decision on the use of site.	No consultation costs. Certainty for the working group on the way forward.	Risks community disengagement and challenge if not consulted on.

7.2 Option one is recommended.

8. Legal / Ngā ture

8.1 Under the Local Government Act 2002 the Council is required to consult or engage with the Community when making decisions. The level of consultation required is set out in Council’s significance and engagement policy. In this case the significance is considered to be medium, so consultation is required under the Local Government Act 2002.

8.2 The Council is the administering body of this site under the Reserves Act 1977. Under section 40 of the Reserves Act the Council is charged with ensuring the use, enjoyment, development, maintenance, protection, and preservation of the reserve for the purpose for which it is classified. In this case the reserve has been classified local purpose (site of a museum).

8.3 Under section 61 of the Reserves Act the Council may do such things it considers necessary or desirable for the proper and beneficial management, administration, and control of the reserve and for the use of the reserve for the purpose specified in its classification.

8.4 Council may also lease the local purpose reserve to any body or society under the following terms:

8.4.1 the lease shall be for a term not exceeding 33 years, with or without a right of renewal, perpetual or otherwise; and

8.4.2 the lease shall include a condition that the land leased shall be used solely for such purposes as are specified in the lease.

8.5 Council staff’s view is that the use and lease of this site is consistent with the purpose of the Reserves Act.

9. Iwi Engagement / Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Māori

9.1 Iwi are fundamental to this project and have been working with Council staff since its inception. Included in Attachment two is a letter of support from the Iwi claimants.

9.2 Wider Iwi engagement will be sought through consultation.

10. Significance and Engagement / Hiranga me te Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Whānui

10.1 This is a decision to consult on a number of matters. While this decision is of low significance the ultimate decision of Council is likely to be high.

	Issue	Level of Significance	Explanation of Assessment
1.	Is there a high level of public interest, or is decision likely to be controversial?	Low	Decision to consult.
2.	Are there impacts on the social, economic, environmental or cultural aspects of well-being of the community in the present or future?	Low	Decision to consult.
3.	Is there a significant impact arising from duration of the effects from the decision?	Low
4.	Does the decision relate to a strategic asset? (refer Significance and Engagement Policy for list of strategic assets)	No
5.	Does the decision create a substantial change in the level of service provided by Council?	No
6.	Does the proposal, activity or decision substantially affect debt, rates or Council finances in any one year or more of the LTP?	No
7.	Does the decision involve the sale of a substantial proportion or controlling interest in a CCO or CCTO?	No
8.	Does the proposal or decision involve entry into a private sector partnership or contract to carry out the deliver on any Council group of activities?	No
9.	Does the proposal or decision involve Council exiting from or entering into a group of activities?	No
10.	Does the proposal require particular consideration of the obligations of Te Mana O Te Wai (TMOTW) relating to freshwater or particular consideration of current legislation relating to water supply, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure and services?	No

11. Communication / Whakawhitiwhiti Kōrero

11.1 The Anaweka Waka working group have engaged with the Golden Bay Community Board and elected members have had an opportunity to view the waka.

11.2 The next step will be wider consultation on Shape Tasman and, depending on the level of interest, some public meetings could be held. Notification will also be put in Newsline and potentially the local paper.

12. Risks / Ngā Tūraru

12.1 This is a decision to consult so there are limited risks associated with this decision. Once community feedback has been received a further paper will be provided outlining any risks of the final decision.

13. Conclusion / Kupu Whakatepe

13.1 The Anaweka Waka is a hugely significant cultural taonga that has particular significance to Golden Bay and the local Iwi. This decision is the first step to finding a permanent location to house and display the waka in Tasman.

14. Next Steps and Timeline / Ngā Mahi Whai Ake

14.1 Consultation materials will be put on Shape Tasman.

15. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

1.⇩	Attachment one Letter of support from Manatū Taonga	14
2.⇩	Attachment two - Letter of support from Anaweka Waka Steering Group	15

7.2 Three Waters Maintenance Forecast Overspend - 2025-2026

Decision Required

Report To:	Tasman District Council
Meeting Date:	7 May 2026
Report Author:	Mike Schruer, Waters and Wastes Manager
Report Authorisers:	Richard Kirby, Group Manager - Three Waters
Report Number:	RCN26-05-2

1. Purpose of the Report / Te Take mō te Pūrongo

1.1 To gain approval for unbudgeted forecast maintenance expenditure in the 2025/26 financial year which is forecast to be $75,000 for stormwater, $714,000 for Wastewater and $1,065,000 for Water Supply.

2. Summary / Te Tuhinga Whakarāpoto

2.1 For this financial year 2025/2026, the Three Waters Group forecast maintenance over-expenditure of $75,000 for stormwater, $714,000 for Wastewater and $1,065,000 for Water Supply. An increase in reactive maintenance costs is the main driver of the forecasted expenditure overspend.

2.2 Funds collected via targeted rates and/or fees and charges for one activity cannot be used in another activity. The only exception is that Council can utilise funding from the General Rate and the Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC) for any activity.

2.3 A process has been undertaken to find maintenance cost savings, however, there is little room to reduce Three Waters maintenance costs without impacting on compliance with quality assurance rules and resource consents. This increased cost of maintenance has been incorporated into the draft Annual Plan 2026/2027 process. At financial year end there may be other areas of TDC that could help fund the overspend in this area.

2.4 Systematic failure of a pipe in Fairfax St, Murchison has required immediate renewal to retain the water supply service, reduce breakage and ongoing reactive repairs costs. Funding has been transferred from the Waimea Plains Project for 2025/2026 as it won’t be spent entirely. It is intended that once the Waimea Plains Project is scoped that should the funding need to be increased it will be considered at that time.

3. Recommendation/s / Ngā Tūtohunga

That the Tasman District Council

1. receives the Three Waters Maintenance Forecast Overspend - 2025-2026 report, RCN26-05-2; and

2. notes the forecast unbudgeted maintenance expenditure in the following activities:

2.1 Stormwater – up to $75,000

2.2 Wastewater – up to $714,000

2.3 Water supply – up to $1,065,000; and

3. approves the unbudgeted maintenance over-expenditure of up to:

3.1 $75,000 for stormwater,

3.2 $714,000 for Wastewater,

3.3 $1,065,000 for Water Supply; and

4. notes that once the end of year accounts for each of the Three Waters activities are finalised, that Council decide how the deficits, if any, are funded.

4. Background / Horopaki

4.1 During the development of the 2025/2026 Annual Plan, the budgets for Three Waters Operations and Maintenance were reduced by Council in the hope that reactive maintenance would reduce compared to previous years. These reductions were made in the wider context of reducing the overall increase in rate revenue for 2025/2026. Some routine maintenance budgets were also reduced.

4.2 However, Council is now three quarters of the way through the financial year and the reactive maintenance in the water supply and wastewater activities is continuing to follow the trends of previous years. Staff are forecasting unbudgeted overspend simply repairing, maintaining or clearing blockages in our reticulation networks or treatment plants in addition to the costs of responding to the July 2025 storm event.

4.3 A report on the Three Waters Operations and Maintenance forecast was presented to the Council on 11 February 2026 advising of the likely unbudgeted over expenditure.

4.4 Much of the reactive maintenance expenditure is a result of insufficient pipe renewals undertaken over previous years and an ageing pipe network. The graphs Figures 1 and 2 indicate the level of deferred renewals in 2026 and looking forward there is a bow wave of renewals expenditure facing the Council. These are mostly asbestos cement, concrete pipes, and a limited amount of “Blue Brute” PVC and earthenware.

4.5 The inflow/infiltration budgets have been reduced in recent years. The intention of these budgets was to identify locations of inflow from private properties and low cross connections and infiltration through structural defects allowing groundwater or stormwater into the wastewater network. Failures do occur unexpectedly and come at significant cost. This is due to out-of-hours work, disruption to routine work, consequential damage and inconvenience to customers. Identification and scheduled repair of these defects are considered cost effective as they minimise further deterioration, reducing the risk of more significant failures.

Figure 1: Pipe Renewal Profile Graphs for Water Supply (based on age)

Figure 2: Pipe Renewal Profile Graphs for Wastewater (based on age)

4.6 The wastewater and stormwater reactive maintenance is also strongly influenced by weather events, which are difficult to predict. The two weather events in June/July 2025 are such an example.

4.7 The Total Outturn Cost (TOC) agreed with the contractor is primarily based on meeting the Council’s levels of service requirements and its compliance obligations. The TOCs related to routine operations are slightly higher than budget but not as significant as the reactive maintenance TOCs.

4.8 If overspends are expected to occur and there is no offsetting underspend, then staff are required to obtain approval from Council for unbudgeted expenditure. Noting that this approval is required prior to the overspend occurring.

4.9 Staff expect the overspend of existing annual budgets to start in late April 2026. Some reactive maintenance budgets have already exceeded the budgets set for particular cost centres, such as wastewater pump stations and Low Pressure Pump Station systems (LPPS) and water supply reticulation, treatment plant and pump stations.

4.10 The operations and maintenance forecast for each of the Three Waters compared to the TOC and the budgets in the Annual Plan 2025/2026 are shown in Table 1 below. The “other” category is for works undertaken by contractors other than the Three Water O&M contractor and therefore does not have a TOC budget. Much of this “other” work has been done by other contractors also doing reactive maintenance work due to the main contractor not having the resources due to the high level of reactive maintenance they have been required to undertake.

4.11 The detail related to specific over-expenditure is discussed further in section 5 below.

Table 1: Three Waters Maintenance Expenditure Forecast

Activity	AP 2025/26 O&M Budget	TOC 2025/26	Forecast 2025/26	Budget less Forecast
Water Supply – routine	$2,162,000	$2,216,000	$1,913,000	$250,000
Water Supply – reactive	$2,157,000	$3,415,000	$3,299,000	-$1,142,000
Water Supply - other	$275,000		$448,000	-$173,000
Total Water Supply				-$ 1.065,000
Wastewater – routine	$1,311,000	$1,445,000	$ 1,077,000	$234,000
Wastewater – reactive	$919,000	$1,147000	$ 1,778,000	-$859,000
Wastewater - other	$36,000		$125,000	-$89,000
Total Wastewater				-$ 714,000
Stormwater – routine	$285,000	$330,000	$346,000	-$61,000
Stormwater - reactive	$226,000	$222,000	$123,000	$102,000
Stormwater - other	$52,000		$168,000	-$116,000
Total Stormwater				-$ 75,000
Totals	$7,423,000		$9,277,000	-$1,854,000

4.12 Staff have made every effort to try and mitigate the forecast overspend. A process has been undertaken to review levels of service and find maintenance cost savings. However, there is little room to reduce Three Waters maintenance costs without impacting on compliance with water quality assurance rules and conditions of resource consents.

4.13 This increased cost of maintenance has been incorporated into the budgets in draft Annual Plan 2026/2027 and will be further reviewed and incorporated in the budgets in the Water Services Strategy 2027/2037.

4.14 Despite these measures, staff still expect there to be a deficit compared to what the Long-Term Plan (LTP) predicted for 30 June 2026.

4.15 If we combined all the revenue and all the expenditure across the three waters then the overall impact is a net forecast deficit of circa $153,000.

5. Analysis and Advice / Tātaritanga me ngā tohutohu

5.1 The next part of this report explains what the high-level drivers are for the overspend at the account level.

5.2 We have excluded the rising cost of fuel and consequential cost increases from this report as there is so much uncertainty. However, based on current use, for every $1.00/litre rise in the price of diesel would result in an additional cost for this financial year 2025/2026 to be around $30,000 across all three waters.

Stormwater - forecast maintenance deficit of $75,000

5.3 Although staff forecast a deficit in the stormwater maintenance costs, this is offset by an underspend in the stormwater operating expenditure. The operating expenditure is tracking to be around $99,000 below budget. This is due to lower than budgeted spending in other operational areas, largely driven by delays in modelling and the development of catchment management plans.

5.4 Most routine maintenance and other costs relate to storm clean up and vegetation maintenance of waterways – with additional focus, they are trending lower than last year, but still above budget. Reactive maintenance at present remains below budget, although a significant rainfall event between now and the end of the year could adversely impact this.

Wastewater - forecast maintenance deficit of $714,000

5.5 The Wastewater activity maintenance forecast over-expenditure is primarily due to the increased reactive maintenance and storm response that has occurred. $236,000 of this is due to Council’s share of the Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit operational costs and has been included in the event rate that is proposed in the Annual Plan 2026/2027.

5.6 There have been some cost savings in the routine maintenance from efficiencies and streamlining of work. Most of the savings were due to the respective resources being diverted to respond to the July 2025 storm event. This diverted them away from being able to carry out the programmed routine operational tasks.

5.7 Under the contract Council is only funding one wastewater team. This team covers both routine and reactive maintenance. The staffing capacity is based on having sufficient capacity to carry out the routine maintenance whilst having some capacity for reactive maintenance. However, despite this, the reactive maintenance was far greater than anticipated. The reactive maintenance budget for the Total Outturn Cost (TOC) had been based on the actual cost trends incurred from previous years.

5.8 The reduction in routine maintenance includes frequency or level of cleaning of some assets, such as air valves and wet wells; detail of checks moving to more visual rather than full strip down. None of these compromise the level of service nor breach compliance requirements, but they are short-cuts in maintenance that will ultimately require attention in the future.

5.9 There has been an upward trend in the number of low pressure pumpstation callouts as the number of installations have increased over the years (refer Figure 3 below).

Figure 3: Low pressure pump systems maintenance

5.10 For the larger wastewater pumpstations, there have been several reasonably high-cost reactive fixes so far this year. Seven responses have incurred an overall cost of $113,000. These responses included replacing carbon for odour control, generator faults, damaged pumps and replacement of damaged impellors, variable speed drives and biofilter fans.

Water Supply – forecast maintenance deficit of $1,065,000

5.11 Higher reactive maintenance costs have been incurred throughout the year. Around 93% of the forecast maintenance expenditure is primarily because of the increased level of reactive maintenance. To date, 82% of the reactive maintenance has been spent on water reticulation.

5.12 However, it should be noted that as at 31 March 2026 the operating revenue for Water Supply is circa $1.3 million above budgeted revenue. If this trend continues for the last three months of the year, revenue could be $1.6 million above budget. That being the case then this would cover the additional reactive maintenance expenditure, and overall deficit would be covered.

5.13 The routine maintenance budget is underspent primarily because some planned routine activities were assessed as not required based on current asset condition. The most significant variance relates to the Motueka Water Treatment Plant routine maintenance, with an estimated saving of approximately $70,000. This was due to cartridge filters not being required as expected. This is because the new product that was trialled has performed better than anticipated. The remaining underspend reflects smaller savings across multiple schemes, where works were either deemed unnecessary following inspection or deferred to the next inspection cycle.

5.14 The reactive maintenance budget for the TOC is based on the actual cost trends from previous years.

5.15 Ageing infrastructure, because of deferred pipe renewals over the years (refer Figure 1), has led to an increased number of pipe failures and water outages and consequent high levels of reactive maintenance. Most of the reactive maintenance costs are related to pipe failures.

Water Supply – Renewal Budget for 2026/27

5.16 Frequent failures over recent months in the Fairfax Street water main, Murchison, meant that its renewal became a priority. This water main was renewed. The ‘urban water account reticulation renewals’ budget for 2025/2026 had already been spent on pipe renewals. So, funding for the Fairfax Street water main renewal was funded from the Waimea Plains capital project budget. This budget was considered not likely to be fully spent by 30 June 2026 so was utilised to fund this renewal.

5.17 Once the detailed scope for the various sub-projects within the Waimea Plains Project has been completed, we can then determine whether the remaining funding is still sufficient. If it is not sufficient, either the scope will be revised to meet budget, or additional funding will be requested of Council.

5.18 Council is currently up to 25-30 years behind where it should be with our renewals programme and this is starting to have a negative effect (increased costs) on our maintenance expenditure in our ongoing aim to maintain our levels of service.

6. Financial or Budgetary Implications / Ngā Ritenga ā-Pūtea

6.1 The maintenance expenditure is exceeding approved budgets for all three water activities. At this stage staff forecast maintenance expenditure at 30 June 2026 to exceed budget by up to $75,000 for stormwater, up to $1,065,000 for Water Supply and up to $714,000 for Wastewater.

6.2 In the interim, staff need Council approval to spend overspend the current budgets to continue to undertake the necessary reactive maintenance. It is intended that the impact of the increase in unbudgeted maintenance expenditure be presented to Council at year end once all the account balances for the year have been confirmed.

6.3 If there are deficits at year end, Council could decide to implement what it decided last year which was to fund any deficits over future years. It could also decide to increase maintenance budgets in the Water Services Strategy to reduce the risk of over-expenditure in future years.

6.4 At financial year end there may be other areas of Council that could help fund the overspend in this area, but Council will deliberate and make that decision after year end.

7. Options / Kōwhiringa

7.1 The options are outlined in the following table:

Option	Advantage	Disadvantage
1.	Approve funding the ongoing unbudgeted maintenance expenditure and once the end of year financials are completed decide on how any overall account deficits should be funded.	Unbudgeted forecast maintenance expenditure is approved until 30 June 2026. Council will continue to deliver its services to the customers and continue to comply with statutory requirements and consent conditions.	This puts more pressure on future maintenance budgets which may need to be increased to accommodate the additional costs of maintenance.
2.	Decline to approve funding the forecast maintenance expenditure in each of the Three Waters Activities. .	There are no advantages with this option. .	This approach is not a realistic option as Council cannot immediately cease maintenance to its essential services without potential disruption to consumers and the risk of not meeting its compliance requirements. This is not a practical option as staff do not have delegation to spend beyond the approved budgets. At this stage of the financial year, it would be impossible not to overspend whilst still providing the required levels of service and still meeting ongoing compliance requirements.

Option

Advantage

Disadvantage

Approve funding the ongoing unbudgeted maintenance expenditure and once the end of year financials are completed decide on how any overall account deficits should be funded.

Unbudgeted forecast maintenance expenditure is approved until 30 June 2026.

Council will continue to deliver its services to the customers and continue to comply with statutory requirements and consent conditions.

This puts more pressure on future maintenance budgets which may need to be increased to accommodate the additional costs of maintenance.

Decline to approve funding the forecast maintenance expenditure in each of the Three Waters Activities. .

There are no advantages with this option. .

This approach is not a realistic option as Council cannot immediately cease maintenance to its essential services without potential disruption to consumers and the risk of not meeting its compliance requirements. This is not a practical option as staff do not have delegation to spend beyond the approved budgets. At this stage of the financial year, it would be impossible not to overspend whilst still providing the required levels of service and still meeting ongoing compliance requirements.

7.2 Option 1 is recommended.

8. Legal / Ngā ture

8.1 The Council has set budgets in the Annual Plan 2025/2026, and this report highlights that due to the increased reactive maintenance and the increased costs associated with the July 2025 event, those budgets will be exceeded.

8.2 At year’s end the Council will need to consider the end of year balances for each of the Three Waters accounts and determine then how they will be funded should that be required.

8.3 Staff cannot exceed the approved budgets and need the assurance that funding for ongoing expenditure above current budgets are approved.

8.4 This report ensures that the unbudgeted maintenance expenditure is appropriately authorised, and funding approved.

9. Significance and Engagement / Hiranga me te Whakawhitiwhiti ā-Hapori Whānui

9.1 Staff have assessed the significance of most of the decisions proposed in this report. The significance of the combined set of changes including the authorisation of additional unbudgeted expenditure is considered to be medium.

9.2 No formal engagement is proposed as the elected members can rely on their knowledge of the views and preferences of their communities in making a decision.

	Issue	Level of Significance	Explanation of Assessment
1.	Is there a high level of public interest, or is decision likely to be controversial?	Medium	Generally low but some members of the community with a particular interest in Council finances will have a higher interest.
2.	Are there impacts on the social, economic, environmental or cultural aspects of well-being of the community in the present or future?	Medium	The Annual Plan for 2026/27 and the following financial years will increase rates to recover the rates overspend and additional interest payments.
3.	Is there a significant impact arising from duration of the effects from the decision?	Low	The Annual Plan for 2026/27 and the following four financial years will increase rates to recover the rates overspend and additional interest payments.
4.	Does the decision relate to a strategic asset? (refer Significance and Engagement Policy for list of strategic assets)	Low
5.	Does the decision create a substantial change in the level of service provided by Council?	Low
6.	Does the proposal, activity or decision substantially affect debt, rates or Council finances in any one year or more of the LTP?	Medium	In the context of the whole funding envelope for the Three Water activities, the impacts of repaying the deficit over the following years will have a minor adverse impact on future fees and charges for the three water activities.
7.	Does the decision involve the sale of a substantial proportion or controlling interest in a CCO or CCTO?	No
8.	Does the proposal or decision involve entry into a private sector partnership or contract to carry out the deliver on any Council group of activities?	No
9.	Does the proposal or decision involve Council exiting from or entering into a group of activities?	No
10.	Does the proposal require particular consideration of the obligations of Te Mana O Te Wai (TMOTW) relating to freshwater or particular consideration of current legislation relating to water supply, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure and services?	No

10. Communication / Whakawhitiwhiti Kōrero

10.1 The Council anticipates communicating this decision to the community.

11. Risks / Ngā Tūraru

11.1 The key risk is that if approval to spend spending unbudgeted maintenance expenditure is not given, there will be disruptions to services and potentially major disruptions for longer periods of time until at least more funding comes available in the Annual Plan 2026/2027 is approved.

11.2 This report has included comments on some routine maintenance that have been deferred to reduce expenditure. This carries a risk where the consequences of deferred maintenance may result in much greater expenditure in the future to restore services. In effect we should still undertake routine maintenance as “a stitch in time saves nine”! If Council approves committing unbudgeted maintenance expenditure, then we will include routine maintenance and no longer defer it.

12. Climate Change Considerations / Whakaaro Whakaaweawe Āhuarangi

12.1 The overall impact, if any, on climate resilience and adaptation is likely to be minor.

13. Alignment with Policy and Strategic Plans / Te Hangai ki ngā aupapa Here me ngā Mahere Rautaki Tūraru

13.1 The Council is attempting to deliver on its vision Thriving and Resilient Tasman Communities and the strategic priorities in the LTP 2024-2034. This approval will ensure it is very transparent around approving over-expenditure and remain aligned with its Strategic Plans.

14. Conclusion / Kupu Whakatepe

14.1 The approved budgets in the Annual Plan 2025/2026 are insufficient to cover the increased costs of undertaking the maintenance within each of the Three Waters activities. This report requests approval to fund the forecast unbudgeted maintenance expenditure so that Council continues delivering the Three Waters services by undertaking the necessary level of maintenance through to the end of the financial year.

15. Next Steps and Timeline / Ngā Mahi Whai Ake

15.1 To continue undertaking the necessary and routine maintenance within each of the Three Waters activities through to the end of the financial year June 2026.

16. Attachments / Tuhinga tāpiri

Nil

Tasman District Council Agenda – 07 May 2026

8 CONFIDENTIAL SESSION

8.1 Procedural motion to exclude the public

The following motion is submitted for consideration:

That the public be excluded from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.

This resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting in public, as follows:

8.2 R26-16 International Cricket - Saxton Field Outfield Renewal

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution