Buy-out of private properties affected by slips Debate

Economic Benefits - Costs

Option 2

The majority of residents recognize the financial prudence of accepting the government's support package under Option 2, noting that it provides substantial aid that would otherwise be lost, thus mitigating the financial burden on the council and ratepayers. Concerns are raised about setting a precedent for future buy-outs; however, many see this as a necessary and humane response to a unique and severe situation, emphasizing the importance of community support in times of disaster. Additionally, there is a strong sentiment that the council should proceed with the buy-outs promptly to relieve the affected homeowners of ongoing uncertainty and stress, thereby leveraging the government's funding to achieve a cost-effective resolution.

Table of comments:

Point No	Comment
89.2	In principle I do not agree with a buy-out of properties that could be considered high risk (Will we be paying for all of Monaco next, when it all floods?), but if, as it seems, the council wishes to buy out affected properties the buy-out offer assistance of central government is a generous.
184.2	I generally support the Council's recommended proposal, but do worry about the precedent that this sets for future events.
730.2	That those affected have had to wait so long in limbo is a travesty whilst the North Island Councils have been far more proactive for their flood affected people. Given that the government is providing an extra 6million $ for flood works it would be foolhardy not to accept this package.
745.2	Option 2 is the right thing to do for our fellow ratepayers in desperate times. As noted, it will not set a precedent for the future but is a human response within our community in very difficult circumstances
864.2	What will the impact of the buyout be on rates?It would be helpful to understand the buy out in the context of the council's wider climate resilience strategy.
883.2	We need to have a process in place so ratepayers aren't exposed to the moral hazard of homeowners living in risky places & expecting a Council bailout if their home is red stickered. There are parts of Nelson like Monaco which have been obviously at risk from climate change & storms for decades - ratepayers shouldn't be expected to buy out people living in those areas as they've made the choice to buy property in a high-risk area.
977.2	This is fair.
987.2	What will the impact of buy outs be on rates?We also note that climate resilience is not a topic of consultation, it would be helpful to understand the buy out in the context of the councils wider climate resilience strategy as future buy out's are rapidly becoming unsustainable.
1085.2	don't know much about this, sounds fair
1212.2	All the background work has been done to achieve this. I don't see how it's affordable to keep doing this going forward, but we would all want an end outcome such as this given a disaster or potential for disaster.
1225.2	I support the Second Option – provided- it is applied strictly- with no extension of eligibility;- with no extension of quantum of compensation;and provided the Government meets its share as set out in the draft LTPMy Comments include that I consider it “wishful thinking” (and completely unrealistic) to say (p 20 of the draft LTP) that such buy-outs would not set a precedent
1240.1	option two needs to happen at soon as possible, this has caused huge stress and been extremely unfair for the home owners involved. Council has already purchased 10 of the 14 homes, these 10 of which were council land slips onto private (these 10 were not separate to the 14, they are part of the 14) The buy out needs to happen for the remainder of the 14, as the properties included in the remainder, some in far worse condition/ red stickered than the ones already paid out and although the others may be private on private at one point in time council did consent these properties. Option two must happen and as soon as possible. Also by paying out the remainder, council is eligible to receive the government package, because there is only a few more properties to pay out this is the most cost effective option too.
1290.2	The people affected by the slips have been living a nightmare - let's finally give them some certainty so they can get on with their lives. Each severe weather event is a different situation, so this will not set a precedent for future events. I'm sure if we all put our feet in the shoes of those affected we would want our fellow ratepayers to have our back in what has been a terrible situation. Given the government's generous support package, there is only one option that is financially sensible for the council to take that also gives the households affected a decent outcome.
1338.2	I have voted for this SOLELY because it's an all or nothing deal -- and I firmly believe that government should be offering this package WITHOUT the requirement to purchase private properties impacted from slips on their own land.