The Mayor is promising an outstanding new "gateway to Kapiti Island". In his column of 13 May he says that for decades a gateway has been sought. He says:
(1) it will only cost $4 million;
(2) will create local jobs and
stimulate the economy; and
(3) will provide the poor Department of Conservation with a "proper facility" to manage bio-security for visitors.
Let us remember this Council believes in significant sea level rise. Its website predicted that by 2050 it will rise over 1 metre- i.e. the "Gateway" will be washed away in 30 years. Marvelous use of ratepayer money.
The Mayor says anyone criticizing the project, whether, because of their concerns about its effect on continuing rate increases (or for other reasons), are dismissed as "naysayers". The dictionary defines a naysayer as a person who habitually expresses negative or pessimistic views: casting gloom". Denigration of an opponent can be far more satisfying than debating mere facts.
Naysayer or not, I suggest ratepayers are entitled to know the following:
1. Why this project gets priority over providing Waikanae with a library?
2. How accurate are the costings? (Remember the Aquatic Centre went from $9 million to $22 million, A District Plan that went from $2 million to $15 million.).
3. A major reason justifying the "Gateway" is to provide DOC with a good bio-security facility . Why then are they not contributing?
4. Why, if KCDC's objective is to create local jobs, did the Council reject the less expensive and more exciting plans of a local architect, preferring an out of town firm?
C B Ruthe