We recently found money in the 2024/2025 Annual Plan wasn’t spent on what it had been allocated for, and the elected officials didn’t decide on how else it would be spent.

We recently found that a big chunk of money in the 2024/2025 Annual Plan was not spent on what it had been allocated for, and we were very surprised to learn the elected officials had no part to play in that money being spent on something completely different.

We’ve been saying lately the Alliance is busier than we thought we’d be with a new team voted in at the Council, but the history of the 2022 – 2025 NPDC is still apparent as we go about what we do.

We had no idea the people we voted for don’t get to vote on whether Annual Plan budget is spent on something different, and we think you will be surprised too.

It has happened a few times that we accidentally come across something that is concerning, and this was one of those occasions.

We went to the very first Public Engagement meeting and several people spoke about Fluoride.

There was a discussion during these 2 presentations that money had been put aside in the 2024 Annual Plan to test water sites and set up a non fluoride water supply station (like a community water tap access point with no fluoride in the water).

An NPDC staff member consulted her laptop about the budget and whether any was left. A test was done on water quality by the racecourse, but no one was too sure what had happened after that.

At the meeting she said she could see the budget and there was some money left but she would need to look in to it further and get back to the Councillors on the Public Engagement committee.

One of the presenters followed up on the budget and was told it had all been spent and happened to mention it to us in passing while we were putting our February story together.

We had no idea how much was in this budget – we didn’t expect it to be very much. So, we decided to do an OIA and find out what had happened with this Annual Plan budget.

It turned out the original budget was $355,671.00. The cost to analyse the water at the Racecourse cost $348.45 incl GST.  That was it - $348.45 was spent on one water test - and then there was no more money left in the Annual Budget for this project to go ahead.

We understand around $30k has built fully functional free standing fluoride free water stations in several other regions in NZ – but this Annual Plan project never got to the point of finding out how much could be done - for so little – here in New Plymouth.

So, if the community wasn’t asked how they wanted to spend the money if it wasn’t going to be used as it stood in the Annual Plan,

And,

The elected officials didn’t get to vote on how this money would be spent elsewhere,

Who made the decision not to spend it on the fluoride project in the Annual Plan - and where else did they spend it ?

No names were given about who made the decisions but it was jointly decided by – governance and management – “unnamed” NPDC staff - decided NOT to spend it as outlined in the Annual Plan – and decided not to ask the elected officials to decide - how else to spend this budget.

And what was it spent on instead ?

• $150,000 was utilised to replace a sludge cone trigger at the New Plymouth Treatment Plant.
• The remainder ($205,323) was allocated to the replacement of fish screens at Lake Mangamahoe.

The questions this raised for us:

• Is this the tip of an iceberg where money is spent on things other than what has been approved in the Annual Plan or LTP’s ?
• Why would our elected officials not make these decisions ?
• Isn’t that why we vote for the elected officials – to make these decisions ?
• Where is the authority line between decision making by the employees of the NPDC and the people we vote for ?
• We didn’t know there was a decision line – we thought our elected officials made the decisions on our behalf – that is why we turn up to vote.

The important thing here is to make sure this way of running the council is not the norm and does not continue.

And, the people who were promised an attempt to create a stand alone fluoride free water station in New Plymouth in the Annual Plan – which would likely only cost about 15% of the budget that was available – where does that leave them ?

One water test. How does that relate to an honest attempt to supply a non fluoride water supply ?

The budget change in the Annual Plan, that wasn’t voted on by the elected officials, is some of that going to be replaced in the Annual Plan ? To deliver what was promised to the community.

We will follow up with the ladies who did the presentations at the very first Public Engagement meeting and let you know what happens from here.