17th May 2012

Kaipatiki Community Big Loser in Auckland Plan

• Kaipatiki 9th out of the 21 Boards under the Council’s deprivation index (ranked 13/21 where 1 is the most deprived board area).
• Kaipatiki 6th out of 21 boards in providing rates per head of population (ranked 15/21 for where 21 pays the most rates).
• Kaipatiki has 6th largest population out of 21 boards, but receives the least amount of rates return per head of population by a large margin.
• Kaipatiki missed out on funding for twenty years when Takapuna and Albany were the focus.
• Inadequate funding to be entrenched for 10 years so Kaipatiki may be forced to delay essential projects and upgrades.

“I am still in shock at the Auckland Council’s proposals to fund the Kaipatiki Local Board at the lowest level out of all 21 Boards" said Kaipatiki Local Board member Grant Gillon today.

The proposal still shows a ten year plan that is based on old legacy funding entrenching past inequities.

“For twenty years, Kaipatiki’s suburbs missed out as North Shore City focused on Takapuna and Albany”, says Grant Gillon.

“Millions of dollars were previously poured into the new city centre of Albany which no longer features on Auckland Council's list of regional centres. Suburbs such as Glenfield, Northcote, Birkenhead, Birkdale and Beach Haven were given assurances that it would be their turn for improvements once the Albany centre was developed. Those assurances seem to have been forgotten by the decision makers in Auckland Council today.

A majority grouping during the last term of North Shore City attempted to rectify the imbalance as the amalgamation juggernaut approached. North Shore City Holdings was sold for over $14m and the majority of the proceeds were to enhance languishing projects in the Kaipatiki community.

Unfortunately, disgraceful electioneering tactics delayed some projects and thwarted others. As a result, the proceeds were redirected to projects in other areas. Now Kaipatiki has to pay for their communities’ needs out of debt funded borrowings instead of cash from the sale of North Shore Holdings.

The budgetary impact is two-fold. Firstly, With the Auckland Council funding boards on legacy budgets, Kaipatiki’s legacy budget has been unfairly reduced by losing those NSC projects (eg resanding of Little Shoal Bay).

Secondly, the cost of capital (inflation and interest) for the very same projects (supported by the community and the new Board) means that it is costing Kaipatki many millions more to get the same projects delivered. Previously they would not only have been included in our legacy budget they would have been paid for by cash instead of debt thereby reducing the cost to the community.

So now, Kaipatiki is struggling to provide a similar level of service to that which Kaipatiki residents had already helped elsewhere for over two decades.

"Poorer suburbs will never be able to catch up with their more wealthy neighbours under the Auckland Council proposal,” said Dr. Gillon.

In addition, Auckland Council's own figures place Kaipatiki as having the highest level of user-pays for services out of every board area in Auckland (the next highest is Otara-Papatoetoe and the least seems to be Upper Harbour) so Auckland Council is already charging Kaipatiki residents for services which other areas receive out of the General Rate.

But, the proposed Auckland Plan budget means that Kaipatiki residents will also be amongst the board areas worse off compared to the other 21.

Kaipatiki is number 13 out of the 21 Boards (1 being the most deprived board area) under the Council’s deprivation index and yet is ranked 15/21 (21 paying the most rates).

Although having the 6th largest population, Kaipatiki receives the least amount of rates return per head of population by a large margin, of all the Boards.

Kaipatiki's capital budget is already well below what many other Boards are enjoying and this will be a further blow to a community that has been overlooked under previous administrations.

As a result Kaipatiki might be forced to delay, yet again, much needed enhancements to local communities such as town centre upgrades, walking and cycling tracks and sports fields upgrades.

And this shock proposal entrenches previous legacy inequities for ten years.

The wealth creation of the world's best city must be dispersed amongst the communities within based on need not on existing wealth.

ENDS

© Scoop Media