Below is my letter to The Editor in reponse to an article and letter regarding the Long Term Plan. My opinion only, although i do make reference to ECan policy.

The Editor

I write in response to the article “ECan rates to increase by 17.9%, The Press 27 June and letter to the Editor Saturday 29th June “Unaudited rate Rise”.

The article identified three Councillors, who voted against the Councils 2024-34 Long term plan because it contemplated $110 million in new borrowing to cover operational spending over the ten years.

Two of the Councillors ‘likened the borrowing to buying groceries with a credit card’ and that it “is burdening future generations with operational costs from today”, while S M McNeill letter likened it to “eating all the food before a three day hiking trip.

In fact, the borrowing is to fund the development of the numerous statutory plans and regulations, which take some years to complete, thereby ‘living’ well beyond the ten-year period of the long-term plan. ECan record this as natural capital, a policy adopted by Council in the previous trimester.

Therefore, if a food analogy is needed, these are the cookbooks that will ensure current and future generations have recipes for the annual plan ‘groceries’ they purchase.

As to the comments in the letter that the long-term plan (LTP) seems to be unaudited, the LTP was audited by Audit NZ and position presented to Council before it was adopted. Finally, in regards to a business rate, it is my understanding that CCC have a business rating unit multiplier and Environment Canterbury could do this too, my advice would be for a letter or submission to ECan directly.

GB