With Council seeking community input on its proposal to disconnect Mullumbimby’s local water source and instead be reliant on water supplied by Rous County Council, local Greens candidate and water engineer, Elia Hauge, has added her concerns around the lack of meaningful consultation and process.
As reported last week in The Echo by water and sanitation engineer, Ben Fawcett, the significant decision will come before councillors on August 15, prior to caretaker mode for the September 14 elections.
Staff’s preference is to disconnect the local supply at Lavertys Gap in Wilsons Creek, which has served the town since 1939.
While consultant reports underpin staff’s view, when it comes to cost estimates, Fawcett and Cr Dey claim that the consultants have not provided enough detail to make an informed decision.
Cr Dey said, ‘The real value is in the robustness of a locally-operated supply, with a back-up already connected to Rous. Another aspect not yet considered is whether Lavertys Gap could also supply Brunswick Heads’.
Staff replied on the costings, ‘The ongoing cost of connection to the regional supply over 30 years is less than half the cost of using a local supply with off-stream storage [reservoir]. The Net Present Value (NPV) analysis calculates capital and operating costs of each scenario over 30 years in present-day dollar terms. The NPV of connection to the regional supply (Scenario 3) is estimated at $13.748 million, while for off-stream storage (Scenario 2) it is estimated at $29.538 million’.
Yet Mr Fawcett says that page 165 of the consultant report states, ‘The ongoing costs of a regional supply are higher than the local scenarios.’
‘The future costs of Rous bulk water are not guaranteed’, he says.
Cr Dey maintains WSAC members are sceptical of relying on the consultant’s views. ‘The analysis was not done by the community, it was the thoughts of the consultant’.
Ms Hauge told The Echo that the report that Council is presenting to the public ‘has been prepared by a consulting firm that also does work for Rous Water’.
‘The consultant analysis is supposedly based on factors including community acceptance and environmental protection.
‘This makes no sense at all, because you haven’t been asked about it before now – how does [Council] know your level of acceptance?’
She asks: ‘Is presenting a consultant’s report and asking the community to fill in a survey really a meaningful way [for Council] to engage on this important issue?’
Ms Hauge suggests ‘the gold standard’ of a citizens’ assembly, where a community member panel learns about the issues, hears from experts, and then makes recommendations to Council.
‘While some water system decisions are technical engineering decisions – like what size a pipe should be, or how to design a treatment plant – big decisions about where our water comes from are about our values. That’s why it’s so important that major decisions are led by our community’, Ms Hauge says.
‘Despite the fact that Council has known for years that something needs to be done about Mullum’s water supply, this is the first time you have been asked about it’, she adds.
A community meeting will be held on Monday, June 17 from 7pm at the Mullum RSL. You can find the submission guide and more information at waternorthernrivers.org.
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
