IAWAI Water Services Strategy

I am nearing the end of my working life and have lived and worked in the Waikato for many years. I have seen a number of plans and promises over time, and I am increasingly concerned about the long-term direction of this strategy.
One of my main concerns is the health of the Waikato River. It is a vital part of this region, and it is difficult to understand how we can continue discharging treated wastewater into it, particularly so close to drinking water intake points, and still claim we are improving outcomes. While treatment processes have improved, it is well known they do not remove everything, and the long-term effects of contaminants building up over time are not clearly addressed.
I am also concerned about the scale of investment being proposed and whether it is truly necessary. Over the years, we have seen growth projections come and go, and I question whether current assumptions are realistic. There is a real risk of committing to large infrastructure projects that may not reflect actual demand.
At this stage in life, I am particularly aware of the importance of leaving things in a better state — both environmentally and financially — for the next generation.

Partially support

In principle, I support the idea that growth should pay for growth.
However, that principle only works if it is based on clear evidence and applied consistently. I am not convinced that it has been demonstrated that past growth has failed to pay its way, and without that clarity, introducing additional charges raises questions.
There is also a concern that costs may not stay where intended and could end up being spread more widely across ratepayers over time. Any approach needs to be transparent, justified, and grounded in realistic assumptions.

No

No I support user pays model
These types of dwellings play an important role, particularly for older people who may wish to remain close to family or for families supporting ageing relatives. They generally place less demand on infrastructure and should be recognised accordingly.
It is important that policies support these practical living arrangements rather than making them more difficult.and unaffordable

Website, Social media, Public signage, Letter / Flyer, E-newsletter, Apps, Focus groups

Partially support

In my experience, engagement does not feel as genuine or as early as it should be.
Too often, the community becomes aware of decisions after much of the direction has already been set. This makes it difficult to feel that input is truly being considered.
For decisions of this scale and long-term impact, it is important that engagement happens earlier and that the community is given a real opportunity to understand and influence the options

No

I am concerned that the waiver policy introduces the ability to reduce or remove development-related charges without clearly identifying how those costs will be recovered.
In my experience, when costs are removed from one place, they tend to reappear somewhere else — often falling back on existing ratepayers over time. Without clear criteria, transparency, and public reporting, there is a risk that decisions could be inconsistent or made without sufficient oversight.
While there may be valid reasons to support certain types of development, this should be done in a transparent and accountable way, with a clear understanding of who ultimately pays. Otherwise, the policy risks undermining fairness and placing additional financial pressure on the wider community. Needs to be transparent and criteria based
________________________________________

No, these are my own personal views

Rukuhia

Waipa District