Greater visitor numbers to Ruapehu are stretching the infrastructure. Photo/Supplied
A toll may be imposed on the Ohakune Mountain and carpark fees and bed taxes introduced to get more money from tourists in the Ruapehu District.
Ruapehu District Council is considering these measures as the 1 million visitors annually to the region stretch water, roading and sewerage infrastructure.
It is also facing a cut of almost $1 million in roading money if it loses a subsidy from the NZTA for mountain roads.
"It [the infrastructure] is now under greater pressure and has now got to the stage where it's time for visitors to contribute in a small way to the costs they are imposing on the district," said council chief executive Peter Till.
Central government approval will be needed for some of the proposed measures, such as a toll on the road up to Turoa skifields which is in Tongariro National Park. Mr Till said changes in the type of visitors coming to Ruapehu, along with greater numbers in summer months, has required council to provide different types of infrastructure. Cyclists and walkers were now joining skiers, snowboarders and trampers visiting the region.
Funding came from a very small ratepayer base of permanent residents. The council is not in financial difficulty but it does face financial challenges, Mr Till said. He said as well "other central government changes and requirements that are coming our way such as transport and road funding changes, fresh water requirements, and changes to the RMA," would cost money. "If Ruapehu tourism is to continue to grow and develop the visitor industry will need to contribute to that growth and development."
Currently the RDC receives a $900,000 subsidy from the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) for the Ohakune Mountain Rd to Turoa and the Bruce Rd to Whakapapa as they are deemed special purpose roads.
However, an NZTA proposal is before the Government asking that this subsidy be cut. "So if this proposal goes ahead it would mean around $900,000 less in funding per year for these roads. These are the types of issues we are asking Ruapehu's residents and ratepayers to consider."
So far the reality of the financial issues facing the RDC and tourism has not been accepted or understood by some tourism operators, he said.
"Some of the remarks and feedback the council has received over the last few weeks in response to advertised proposals show that the reality and seriousness of these issues have not been accepted or fully understood by some operators."
Options put to the community include:
A decrease in levels of service is one way to keep rates lower. In essence this means that for regulation the council will limit certain services, eg, cleaning of kerbs, footpaths and pavements.
The level of service provided by the council for regulation services is quite high and may give the council an opportunity to make some further savings. This may mean longer response time for dog complaints, etc.
Another option may be to reduce the services at the transfer stations. One way may be to encourage the community to run them, while another might be to limit/reduce opening hours.
Taxing of tourism: Consideration may be given to a carpark tax imposed on those visiting the national parks and/or cycle trails. Another way of collecting revenue may be to introduce a bed tax for all visitors staying in commercial accommodation in the district.
Ruapehu Mountain Motel and Lodge owner Leigh Berry called a meeting yesterday in Ohakune asking other commercial operators to help lodge a collective submission on the issues.
Mrs Berry said introducing paid car parking for those using the national parks could have huge implications for tourist numbers.
"Would our visitors be happy to pay extra, the skiers, cyclists, hikers, sightseers, canoeists, buses, shuttles, workers and local people?"
And just the thought of road toll on the mountain road was horrifying, she said.
"How would the tax be collected and how would any monies collected be proportioned for use like how much to council, local iwi, southern vs northern regions etc."
Mrs Berry asked if the council had even thought about all the other people that use the general roads and services in the region.
"The travellers as they pass through, the farmers and market gardeners trucks and tractors, the many commercial trucks that roar through our region in the middle of the night ... would parking meters in the townships be considered?"
Mrs Berry said her "hackles rise in horror" when she thinks about a bed tax. "Do the guests who stay at the commercial establishments not already pay - through our council rates - for their share of the water and sewage infrastructure? We already pay water rates, around $1700 a year, and pan tax rates, almost $7000 a year."
It would not be "ethical" for the council to increase these rates by 5 to 8 per cent as well as adding a bed tax, she said. "One or the other ... but both is ludicrous."
"It taxes us the property owners. We cannot increase our nightly rates to cover this and attracting guests to our establishments is difficult enough as it is, especially with 400 holiday homes providing cheaper options. "Why pick on the bed, what about a coffee or meal tax, a petrol tax, a post card from the i-Site tax, a loaf of bread tax ..."
In a letter to the Ruapehu Bulletin on March 25, National Park resident Murray Wilson said it was "amazing that our council would even think they could invoke a tourist tax on commercial operators to help solve their financial problems. This tourist tax proposition has been dumped by other New Zealand councils as it is unfair and impractical."