Napier City Council has called for Registrations of Interest (ROI) to purchase or lease the National Aquarium of New Zealand.
To continue ‘as is’, the Aquarium building needs work to maintain a workable and engaging experience with suitable conditions for the facility’s animals and for people who visit and work there. This would place a significant burden on ratepayers.
Under a ‘status quo’ option presented in recent public consultation, the estimated cost to Napier ratepayers in 20225/26 is around $3.9 million. After the consultation, one of the options agreed to by Council was to explore exiting the Aquarium activity by transferring ownership to a third party.
“We’ve heard from the community that increasing costs need to be managed, therefore, keeping the Aquarium in its current form is no longer a realistic option,” says NCC’s announcement.
Napier Mayor Richard McGrath says: “We’ve heard clearly from our community that they want us to stick to the basics. I’m all for Napier being a great visitor destination, but there are others who would be better placed to operate tourist facilities.”
NCC has placed some conditions that must be addressed by any applicant. For example, any proposal to transfer NANZ to a new operator, whether through leasing or selling, would require the new facility to remain as a visitor attraction with biodiversity, educational or conservation characteristics.
NCC says it is seeking expressions of interest from “the open market (nationally and internationally) from suppliers that have had experience with operating recreational, tourism, biodiversity and educational focused assets. Council does not wish to receive registrations from parties that have little to no experience in recreational, tourism, biodiversity and educational complex management.”
The sale or lease of the Aquarium would not include sale of the land.
The ROI is open until 16 January and can be viewed here (with much effort).
If a suitable proposal is received, it would go through a full due diligence process, and then community consultation would take place in mid-2026.
Seems like a heavy lift to create an ‘educational’ facility that must be commercially viable in a micro-market like Hawke’s Bay. In theory, a suitable applicant could still seek NCC financial support in one form or another, but clearly NCC’s imperative is to cut its losses.
Unspoken is whether public viewing of captive animals in a provincial lock-‘em-up behind glass/bars facility (this isn’t a game reserve or natural habitat, after all) is still viable under any ownership! Hasn’t that ship sailed?
How about something more high-tech — perhaps an IMAX facility featuring the amazing science and nature documentaries produced in that format?
Or just wait for sea rise to wash the place away?
just turn it into a library and community hub/ event destination
I keep saying we need to turn it into a marine research, education, rescue and tourism centre, with onshore and offshore research pods, glass bottom boats and world class facilities. It would bring in real money, and make the bay more than just a dangerous view.
Our bay just sits there, with no swimming or boating activities, practically ignored and a wasted opportunity.
Marine scientists, seismologists, vulcanologists, ecologists and tourists would flood Hawke’s Bay for the opportunity to explore and study the bottom of the bay.
Why aren’t we utilising that big, beautiful, natural wonder in our own front yard?
We need to stop putting lipstick on the pig and start really investing in the future, of the bay AND the planet.
Hawke’s Bay is more than just a pretty postcard picture. Let’s prove it!
It’s looking more and more like a “white elephant” – if no interest does Napier close it completely and write off the value while repurposing it (maybe into Council offices??)
Hows its a white elephant exactly Grant ? Is make bold statements but present no factual rationale.
Love an opinion but maybe share a little more rather than rant
2 Million Dollars a year “propping up a dead duck”, with next to No exibits, sharks got released-good! Is totally unfair ON strugling ratepayers!
END OF