Wellington Airport ‘baffled’ by council decision to eliminate $ 76 million loan for seawall improvement

Wellington Airport CEO Steve Sanderson says he is “baffled” by the city council’s decision to withdraw $ 76 million in funding for the airport boardwalk upgrade.

Councilors voted 8-7 Thursday to remove the loan from the council’s draft 10-year plan due to concerns that the money would also be used for a proposed $ 300 million runway extension.

Sanderson said in a statement after the vote that he was surprised by the council’s late decision to withdraw the funds, which was instrumental in improving the boardwalk.

“We are puzzled by the decision of Wellington city councilors to withdraw funding for the airport boardwalk, which requires essential improvements for resilience, security and infrastructure protection,” Sanderson said.

READ MORE:
* Foster tests new councilors’ appetite for ‘asset recycling’ of Wellington Airport stock
* Wellington Airport’s involvement gives the city a voice in its decisions
* Wellington Airport expansion plan would displace social housing tenants in Miramar

“The council has been debating the wrong issue in combining this project with the runway extension.”

The vote came on the back of a proposal by Councilmember Tamatha Paul to remove funding from the council’s draft 10-year plan.

It was to be loaned to the airport for three years starting in year seven (2027-28) of the plan.

Paul said that she and some other councilors believed that funding for the track project had recently been removed from the council’s budget, but council staff informed her a week ago that it was still there.

The budget showed a funding of $ 76.6 million over three years for “seawalls”, which appears as a loan under operating expenses. The council had previously agreed to a $ 90 million grant for the runway extension, under capital expenditures.

There was considerable confusion among councilors during a long-term plan committee meeting Thursday about where exactly the money was going, and Paul and others believed it was contributing at least in part to the runway’s extension.

CFO Sara Hay suggested that councilors resolve the uncertainty by stipulating that any airport loan would be used only for boardwalk improvements, if Paul’s proposal to eliminate the funds was unsuccessful.

“We are disappointed that the councilors decided to make this decision without consulting the airport and without accurate information,” Sanderson said.

“We would have liked to discuss these matters with councilors, but we were not approached or informed of the intention to raise this matter at today’s meeting.

“We will evaluate alternative financing options, but we would have liked the council to play its role in protecting its own sewers and roads.”

Paul said it was “surprising and insincere” that the airport claimed they were puzzled.

“The airport was aware of this when the council declared a climate emergency,” Paul said.

“The council and the thousands of Wellingtons who participated in the climate strikes are serious.”

Paul said he met with airport representatives on February 5 to discuss concerns about the airport’s terminal expansion plans.

“They should have no doubt of my position on this matter. I am still happy to continue discussing this with them. “

Wellington Airport President Tim Brown sent an email to councilors Thursday morning after learning of the proposal, urging them to withhold the funds.

Brown said removing it would be a “material sign of bad faith” and would have a critical impact on upgrade plans, including an extension of the runway to allow long-haul flights.

“As airlines change their fleet to improve efficiency, the runway requirements change as well,” Brown said.

“For example, Air New Zealand is introducing the A321 aircraft to replace its A320s. The new aircraft uses 22% less fuel per passenger-kilometer. By the time Air New Zealand completely replaces its fleet, runway changes will be required to safely accommodate these larger aircraft.

“Finally, there is the [necessary] extension of the operational and safety length of the runway to allow long-haul flights directly to Asia and North America ”.

Brown said he wanted the council to “stay true to its initial indication of conditional support,” and that a new boardwalk was needed regardless of whether the runway extension went ahead. The track project is currently on hold.

Elimination of the financing of the airport boardwalk: how they voted:

For: Jill Day, Fleur Fitzsimons, Laurie Foon, Sarah Free, Rebecca Matthews, Teri O’Neill, Iona Pannett, Tamatha Paul. Against: Andy Foster, Diane Calvert, Jenny Condie, Sean Rush, Malcolm Sparrow, Simon Woolf, Nicola Young.