The decades-long debate over the future of Mullumbimby’s water supply has been resolved, with Byron Council deciding on a hybrid scheme in which water will come from both the local Lavertys Gap weir and the Rous County Council (RCC)regional supply.
Ever since concerns were first formally raised about the poor quality and limited reliability of water coming from Lavertys Gap weir in the 1990s, locals and elected officials have been wrestling with the question of how to provide the town with a permanent, high-quality supply.
Water options
On one side were those who wanted to retain the local supply, either by upgrading the local Lavertys Gap weir and the ailing Mullumbimby water treatment plant, or by building a new water storage dam on land acquired by Council.
Those on the other side argued for Mullum to join the rest of Byron Shire and connect to the RCC regional supply, which they said would guarantee a long-term, high-quality water supply for the town.
At the October 23 Council meeting councillors voted for a hybrid scheme.
Under this system, Council will be permanently connected to the RCC regional supply, but will also remain connected to the Laverty’s Gap weir, with a new Water Treatment Plant being installed to ensure this water remains drinkable.
Policy flip-flops
The decision about which of these two water sources to use at any particular time will depend on a range of factors, including the cost and quality of the water coming from each supply.
In some cases, water from the two different sources may be mixed together.
The October 23 decision is the latest in a series of policy flips by Byron Shire Council (BSC) on the Mullum water supply issue, reflecting changes in the political terrain.
In August 2024, a majority of councillors voted to shut down Lavertys Gap and permanently shift to the RCC supply.
However, following Council elections a few months later the new crop of councillors voted to abandon this policy.
They voted to defer the decision for two years to allow for further economic and environmental investigations, and community consultation.
Council staff then began the unenviable task of putting together a new decision-making process that they hoped would tick all the boxes.
Earlier this month staff presented councillors with information about what a full and thorough reinvestigation of the water supply issue would look like and what it would cost.
The price tag for this investigation? $580,000.
Dual-supply system
A majority of the members of Council’s Water, Sewer And Advisory Committee were in favour of undertaking this investigation, as were the Greens on Council. But when it came to the 23 October meeting, it was a different story.
A motion by Greens Cr Elia Hauge to undertake the further investigation and begin moves to purchase a site for a new dam in Wilsons Creek was defeated by five votes to four.
Instead, a motion by Cr Michael Lyon (independent) to pursue a dual-supply system was successful.
‘I’ve been against this [$580,000 investigation] from the start – it’s redoing the work that’s already done,’ said Cr Lyon, who had previously advocated for a RCC-only option.
‘When the idea for this investigation first happened the quote was $250,000. That’s now gone up to $580,000.
‘This was all being done in the hope that we got to a different answer to what we received last time.’
Cr Lyon said that the idea of spending millions to acquire land in the Wilsons Creek valley and then to build major water capture infrastructure there did not make sense.
‘A 100 cubic-metre hole in the Wilsons Creek valley… moving all that dirt and then creating a wall to create this 200-megalitre dam, and then running it into a Water Treatment Plant at the bottom of the hill, and then pumping it back up to the Azalea Street reservoir… I’ve always been against that concept.’
‘I’m open to a hybrid scheme because that is about connecting to RCC so that we have the secure yield that we need. You’re not talking about the infrastructure of a whole new site, all of the pumps, pumping of water… All of the existing infrastructure could continue to be used.’
Closed door deals
But Cr Hauge disagreed, arguing in the meeting that a further rigorous investigation was needed prior to making a decision, but that Council should begin the process of acquiring land for a new dam in the meantime in case that was the option they ultimately chose to pursue.
‘As an engineer, I’m frustrated that this decision was made hastily, with no guidance from either the Water and Sewer Advisory Committee or Council staff, and through a deal struck behind closed doors rather than open debate,’ said Cr Hauge, who is also the chair of the Water and Sewer Advisory Committee.
‘While keeping a local supply option on the table is better than losing it entirely, the path we’ve taken is far from ideal.’
‘The three questions about site constraints, economic viability, and environmental flows are just the starting point – this community deserves answers before we commit millions of dollars to infrastructure that may not be fit for purpose.
‘Mullumbimby’s water future is too important to be decided by backroom deals.’
Cr Hauge did not provide any evidence to support her allegation that a deal had been done behind closed doors.
She and the other members of the Greens on Council ultimately voted in favour of the hybrid option.
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. 
