A Māngere family is faced with a difficult decision after learning that their home is considered an “intolerable risk to life”.
After waiting two years for answers, the Taufoous are now forced to choose between staying uninsured or leaving the community they have built over decades.
Auckland Council claimed that the buyout was fair and voluntary but local leaders, including Councillor Alf Filipaina, said families should have access to all relevant information before making their decision.
Daisy Taufoou, who has lived on Hinau Rd for 42 years, was shocked to return to her flood-damaged home only to discover that it was categorised as high-risk.
Along with her husband, children, and elderly parents, the family has decided to proceed with the Auckland Council’s voluntary buyout process to understand the implications of their choices.
They must notify the council of their decision by July 17. Like their neighbours, they wished to stay, but after extensive deliberation, they felt they needed to explore all options before making a decision.
Taufoou said the buyout situation felt like a “lose-lose” for many families on Hinau Rd.
“It’s been an emotional rollercoaster for us trying to decide what to do,” she said.
“We have decided to move forward in the process so that we can understand what we’re saying yes or we’re saying no to. Because, at any time, we can still say no and pull out.
“It’s a lose-lose. If we go, we lose our community. If we stay, we lose insurance and can’t get cover for the next flood.”
Unlike some homeowners eager to receive a Category Three designation to escape flood-prone properties, Taufoou and her neighbours never wanted the buyout label. They wanted to remain in their homes.
She criticised the limited timeframe they were given to decide on a buyout process after a lengthy two-year wait to learn their street was classified as Category Three. She said it had taken countless hours of unpaid effort to pursue reports and briefings.
“Our whole street have repaired their homes or renovated their homes fully and we’re all back into our homes. And then to hear, two years later, that it is an intolerable risk to life… just doesn’t sit right with us.
“Unlike the council staff who work on this eight hours a day, we have full-time jobs, kids and elderly parents. We’re doing this in the evenings and weekends, just to figure out what’s true.”
Nick Vigar, Auckland Council’s head of Planning for Healthy Waters, said Māngere was prioritised for major flood reduction projects, but assessing how upgrades like the Walmsley Rd Bridge would affect each home’s risk took time.
“Hinau Rd sits very low and close to the stream, which means that, even with these major upgrades, the risk to life during another major storm would still be too high,” Vigar said.
“Because of this, these homes remain eligible for a voluntary buyout. We know this is incredibly difficult, so we extended their timeframe and put extra support in place to help residents make an informed choice.”
Vigar said the upgrade to Walmsley Rd Bridge and the wider Māngere Flood Resilience Project would reduce flooding for many homes but Hinau Rd was an exception due to its location in the more hazardous 10-year floodplain. This meant floods might occur more frequently than in surrounding areas.
“The unfortunate thing for Hinau Rd is that, while they are part of the big floodplain, they are developed in an area which we currently call the 10-year or 10% floodplain. That means those properties can expect to get hit more frequently than everyone else,” Vigar said.
Taufoou said the council’s data did not align with the reality residents experienced. She insisted drains and upstream ponds had not been adequately maintained and minor repairs were neglected.
“They keep talking about the bridge, but what about the drains? The worst of the damage came from blocked stormwater drains. It just doesn’t seem fair to decide our lives on one big flood when fixing the small things could help,” she said.
Vigar said the council wished it could have provided families with answers sooner, but final modelling and funding approvals required time to complete.
“It would have been preferable to come to them earlier and say, hey, this is the situation, but the reality is it took time to secure funding, do the design, update the flood models and get approval. It’s really unfortunate for these people,” he said.
Vigar admitted the technical language around flood risk could be difficult for families to understand. He said opting into the buyout process did not commit families to follow through with it or agree to a set buyout price.
“We talk about flood risk, 100-year events, 10-year events. It’s really technical. I always worry that people won’t fully understand what that means for them.
“Opting into the buyout process does not lock a homeowner into going through with the buyout or a specific buyout price.
“But it does give homeowners access to a dedicated property adviser, plus $5000 for legal and valuation costs, to help them understand what they would get from Council, including reimbursement for insurance repairs they have already done in good faith.”
Vigar said the added risk of losing insurance complicated the decision.
“More and more, the insurance industry is requiring higher premiums or declining cover for flood-prone properties. It’s not just about risk to life. There are real difficulties for higher-risk properties to get insurance,” he said.
Filipaina said the council’s proposal aims to provide people with choices, but that they need all the information to make informed decisions.
He said Hinau Rd was one of the streets most at risk despite nearby flood mitigation works.
“We as an Auckland Council… we cannot say that if there’s another major flood or cyclone that you will end up being safe,” Filipaina said.
“This is why we’re asking you to please consider the buyout option. If you have all the information and it says to leave, but you don’t want to leave, well then you take on the burden if anything happens.”
Taufoou said her neighbours have rallied to push back against the proposal, organising street-wide meetings with the council and seeking support from Community Law and local board members to challenge the findings collectively.
She said they still worried about the future of the land if they decided to leave. “What we did was unique. No other area has come together like this to challenge the council as a street. We’re proud of that.
“You can’t tell me Māngere won’t be developed later. If we leave, will this land really stay empty? That’s hard to believe,” Taufoou said.
The council stated that no final decision had been made about the land, but its policy meant that most Category Three sites would remain undeveloped for flood resilience or public use. Future residential development was “highly unlikely” because of the high hazard risk.
For now, Taufoou’s focus was on staying informed, asking questions, and reminding families that they still had the option to walk away if the buyout does not feel right.
“It’s about being able to reach out and ask for help and question things if they don’t make sense. I don’t want any of our families to feel like they’re alone in this,” Taufoou said.
Local Democracy Reporting is local-body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
