Y James is correct in pointing out that the flooding issue is a legacy issue – the cumulative result of past decisions. The current council's objectives are to:

1. Address the issue cost-effectively.

2. Not leave a similar legacy for future generations.

To achieve these two objectives, the council is creating a 2D flood model of the city to enable it to identify and prioritise problem areas and appropriate solutions – this modelling will be completed by the end of 2014. The council has decided (by majority decision), to fund the resultant work programme via a ratepayer ‘levy'.

As proposer of the motion, my thinking was:

1) It is more equitable to address ‘legacy' issues via rates rather than debt.

2) Any levy should not be token (flooding is possibly a $100 million-plus issue), but should be ‘affordable'.

3) We should commence collecting as soon as possible.

Currently, the proposed levy will be part of TCC's 2014/2015 Annual Plan consultation process.

I would encourage all those who disagree with the levy proposal to submit their alternative approach to dealing with the issue.

And with regard to Y James' comments apportioning blame, perhaps it is worth reflecting on the idea that it is our collective fault (as ratepayers), because we elected the decision-makers who left us the flooding legacy.

John Robson, TCC councillor.