In Rangitīkei, incumbent mayor Andy Watson said he did not support the plan in its current form.
"Everyone agrees reform is necessary but the loss of local voice is unacceptable. This legislation was proposed on the basis of choice and cross-subsidisation. Choice is off the agenda and there is no current proposal/legislation to support cross-subsidisation."
One of Watson's three challengers, Simon Loudon, said he was in two minds. Based on the Scottish experience, Three Waters would be "a hugely expensive 20-to-25-year fix", he said.
"The Rangitīkei District Council simply hasn't the resources to sort its Three Waters infrastructure. Such an investment is beyond our council. Council focus needs to be other core services, like roads that have for far too long been ignored."
But he said the council had a history of non-compliance.
"Its efforts only tread water. I advocate that more thought needs to go into our rural water schemes."
The two other Rangitīkei hopefuls, David Christison and Quinton Berrett, did not respond to the survey.
In Whanganui, all three mayoral candidates oppose the Three Waters plans.
Incumbent mayor Hamish McDouall said while reform needed to happen, the Government's model had some "serious flaws".
"I'm not convinced that key questions – compensation for the sale of community assets, how promptly local service delivery will happen and the status of Te Awa Tupua – have been addressed adequately."
Andrew Tripe said he was "firmly against" the Government proposal.
"I am not opposed to reforms and change. However, I believe there is a better alternative that means we retain full ownership of our water assets and that we don't cross-subsidise other councils who haven't invested. Communities For Local Democracy have a great alternative model."
Daniel (DC) Harding was also opposed to the plan for Three Waters.
"Innovation is what's required here – not the centralisation and modernised confiscation of property. I do believe that tangata whenua and councils should be working in partnership to ensure that water infrastructure is sound."
In Ruapehu, where there are four contenders for the mayoralty, two are opposed and two in support.
Adie Doyle said: "The Government's model tramples on property rights, will not give a voice to local ratepayers or mana whenua and could be a significant fiscal risk to the New Zealand taxpayer. The Communities For Local Democracy model could achieve the same, if not better, outcomes while retaining community ownership and local voice."
Weston Kirton said he would have liked a regional solution, but the Government had chosen its path to fix the urgent problems with water infrastructure.
"It's happening, and we need to make sure Ruapehu gets a fair deal and doesn't end up with higher rates bills as a result. That's where our focus needs to be rather than play politics, as some on our council are doing."
Elijah Pue supported the reform.
"Change needs to happen. Council can't, and will never be able to, afford the change that needs to occur. Water mains are bursting all over the district, and council can only afford to put a plaster on. We can't afford to fix the issue, so government investment is critical."
Fiona Kahukura Hadley-Chase said the Three Waters plan was not perfect but action was needed.
"We all need to contribute to a change in mindset to ensure that we offer clean drinking water to all peoples and ensure that our waste waters are dispersed properly and do not leak into our rivers and waterways."
In South Taranaki, incumbent mayor Phil Nixon said the current plan was "definitely not" the way to go.
"Change is certainly needed but the proposed four-entity reform is not good for our future. We are losing local ownership and local control – one size fits no one."
The survey was sent out to all 291 mayoral candidates and garnered 202 responses, representing a 69 per cent response rate.
• Public Interest Journalism funded through NZ On Air
