However, councillor Neil Kirton disagreed.
“They are starkly different beasts,” Kirton, who was part of the council’s original coastal hazards group 12 years ago, said.
He said coastal flooding was a slow process and people had chosen to live by the coast.
The effect of it involved “a small number of high-value properties with the expectation the rest of the region will cover the cost of protecting [them],” Kirton.
He said the threat from the sea was a different matter from providing protection against an event like Cyclone Gabrielle, which caused widespread flooding inland, and that the council should be cautious.
“There is an equity issue that needs to be dealt with.”
Chairwoman Sophie Siers called time and said Kirton’s comments would be more appropriate when the council was deciding whether or not to adopt the strategy.
Van Beek said a strong reply would be returned to Kirton’s views.
“I’ve had this now for the last seven years and I’m not going to put up with it.”
After the meeting, the councillors spoke to Hawke’s Bay Today about the disagreement.
Kirton said it was just “by play”, but van Beek said Kirton was standing on a “political sulk box” and was choosing to make “a lot of noise” about “anything going on in the coast”.
“I don’t know why,” van Beek said.
“It is the council’s responsibility to protect these coastlines, after all it was the council who allowed people to build there in the first place.”
Van Beek said relating coastal communities to privilege was wrong on Kirton’s part.
“While some waterfront properties might have been expensive, many of the people who live in coastal areas are not wealthy.
“And they will all be poor if we don’t protect them.
“We spent $11 million protecting 11 properties in Ōmāhu, so when you consider that, you need to think about who is privileged.”
He said there were cycleways and critical infrastructure that needed to be protected on the coast.
“He [Kirton] is delusional if he thinks the council should walk away.
“This is urgent. If we don’t do anything, time will run out for them. Insurers will walk away, then people won’t be able to live there, but they also won’t be able to leave because their homes will be unsellable.”
Kirton said he was not contesting the need to respond, but questioned who was going to pay.
“What is the equitable solution and where will the burden fall?”
He said the interaction at the council meeting was nothing serious.
“We spar sometimes, but we are good buddies.”
Councillors will hear from the Westshore, Napier and Bay View Residents Association and the Te Awanga and Haumoana Focus Group in April.
The new Coastal Hazards Strategy 2120 was developed by representatives from Tamatea Pōkai Whenua, Hastings District Council, Mana Ahuriri Trust, Napier City Council, Maungaharuru-Tangitu Trust and the regional council.
What has it cost so far
More than $250 million is being spent in Hawke’s Bay to stop rivers from flooding homes in the way they did during Cyclone Gabrielle, the majority of it funded by the Government.
In the past five years, Hastings District Council has spent $1.9m on coastal erosion prevention measures in the district.
Between 1987 and 2024, HBRC and Napier City Council spent $5.5m maintaining a wall of pea metal in Westshore to keep the sea from eroding the beach.
Both Hastings District Council and Napier City Council cut their funding contributions to the Coastal Hazards strategy in 2025.
LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
