Turitea Decision

On 18th October, at an Extraordinary Meeting of the Infrastructural Well-Being Committee, Palmerston North City Council voted to proceed with the change of purpose of the Turitea Reserve to add an additional local purpose - renewable energy generation.

After visiting the Reserve by 4WD, walking around up there, measuring roads and heights of the bush, flying over it to get the bigger-picture view, reading and listening to submissions, and studying up on the Reserves Act, I came to the conclusion that the change of purpose should proceed. To me, the litmus test was, “If a proposal had come forward for a windfarm development that had no impact on the environment and which did not create a loss of visual amenity, would I oppose the change of purpose?” No, because this country desperately needs more electricity from renewable energy sources. I also asked myself, “If the proposal had been for a different type of energy generation, such as a solar generator, that had no impact on the environment and could not been seen from the city, would I oppose it?” Again, the answer was “no”.

Adding renewable energy generation to the local purposes of the Reserve makes it possible for renewable energy companies to consider utilising some of the land within the Reserve. Council has put some very strict caveats on which areas can even be considered for this, which means that nothing can be built close to the water supply or in the scenic reserve. I am comfortable with that.

One of the things that helped me make this decision is my involvement with the Resource Management Act and its processes. I studied the RMA at university and I am an accredited commissioner who has completed all the training. I know that the RMA process is much more rigorous than the process Council went through over the change in purpose. If Mighty River proceed to the consent process, they will have to provide a great deal of information and the potential environmental impact will be researched by experts. Everybody (including me) will have the opportunity to make submissions and to be heard by an independent commissioner. And, if we don’t like the decision, we can appeal to the Environment Court.

In making my decision, I had to consider whether it was appropriate to vote against the change of purpose (which would stop any renewable energy development proposals in their tracks) or whether to vote for it, thereby signalling that PNCC is open to investigations for some land to be used for energy generation. There is land up there that can be utilised for this without any harm to the environment. There are areas that can be used without any sign of this activity from the city. Oh, I looked really hard for reasons why I should vote against it, but at the end of the day, all this decision was doing was opening the door for further investigations to take place.

I believe that it is right to allow those investigations to take place, because until they do, and until there is a proposal going forward for RMA consent, we just do not know what impact, if any, is proposed. It is not a “green light” for a windfarm - that is a separate process under the Resource Management Act and it’s a process in which Council’s role will be limited to just being another submitter. So, I voted for the change in purpose of the Turitea Reserve. This seemed to shock some councillors, given my previous opposition. I was the only councillor to vote against this moving forward last year, and my passion for protecting reserves is well-known, as is my opposition to windfarms being seen on our ranges. That has not changed. This decision, however, was about adding an additional purpose to the definition of local purposes for the reserve. I had to balance my personal views against an objective assessment of the merits of the change of purpose. I had to ensure I was fully informed and making a decision that was in the best interests of the city as a whole. It’s not easy to put aside personal views and to be objective. I wasn’t even sure at the beginning of this process that I would be able to do so. I had a long chat with the Chief Executive over whether I should have even attended the public hearings on this matter, given that I hold strong views. The question he asked me was, “do you believe you can go into the hearings with an open mind?” Tough one to consider, given that most submissions were supporting my personal stance. I believed I could keep an open mind. I also knew that whatever decision council made on this matter has implications for generations to come. When I said in the meeting that I had lost sleep over this matter, I wasn’t kidding! However, even after reflecting on it a week later, I know I made the right decision.

The recommendation from the Infrastructural Well-Being Committee comes before council on Monday night. It may or may not be passed. I will update this post after that meeting.