Coromandel communities are at a government-mandated democracy crossroads. Representatives at TCDC will likely be exploring options for an eastern Waikato council that would better serve the unique community of interests of peninsula residents and their rural and coastal neighbours. Already floated regionally is the possibility of a Hamilton-based council that would absorb the Coromandel into an all-Waikato supercity.
Councils across New Zealand have been tasked to present proposals to reorganise as unitary councils — local authorities that combine the functions of both district (or city) and regional councils. TCDC, like other councils, is working against an August 9 deadline.
Facing all councils is the question of efficiency, cost and affordability of smaller subregional unitaries, and that is the number one issue for Thames-Coromandel as it assesses potential eastern Waikato groupings. With the Auckland supercity looming as a cautionary example, there is ample evidence that bigger does not mean better and promised economies of scale often fail to pan out. At the other end of the spectrum, there are concerns about affordability — can smaller unitary councils deliver what they need to while keeping costs and rates down?
SMALL UNITARY COUNCILS:
THREE GOOD EXAMPLES
Marlborough, Tasman, and Gisborne councils provide hard evidence that smaller unitary councils comparable to what might be designed for the Coromandel, do indeed deliver. The three councils have been carrying out district and regional functions ever since New Zealand’s two-tier system was established in 1989. Small unitary councils are nothing new, and a preliminary look at the numbers gives guidance and reassurance.
Marlborough District has a (June 2025) population of 50,800. Gisborne District population is 52,700. Tasman population is 59,900. A hypothetical Coromandel/Hauraki unitary council would have a comparable population of 54,300.
As for total council income, Marlborough Council 2024-25 revenue was $218 million. Gisborne Council revenue was $235 million. Tasman revenue was $232 million. Combined Thames-Coromandel and Hauraki total revenue in 2024-25 was $221 million.
Total general and targeted council rates for 2024-25 follow the same pattern. Marlborough rates income, including targeted water, totaled $100.2 million. Gisborne rates income including water was $87.7 million. Tasman rates income was $110 million. Combined TCDC and Hauraki rates income for the period was $157 million. And each unitary council manages a geographic area over twice the size of TCDC and Hauraki combined.
In 2013, when TCDC first explored reorganisation as a unitary eastern Waikato council, staff analysis concluded the proposal could be financially viable. Today’s statistics appear to support a similar conclusion.
THE TASKS AT HAND:
WHAT’S REALLY REQUIRED?
Marlborough, Gisborne and Tasman councils oversee flood protection, environmental management, animal control and biosecurity, transportation, public safety, emergency management, and coastal assets – all workstreams that are generally claimed by regional councils, including WRC. According to their most recent annual reports, the councils succeed in meeting performance targets for all these activities, and do so within budget. While large regional councils like WRC lay claim to special competencies, smaller unitary councils are host to the same high-level professional skills, with the extra benefits of local knowledge, attention to local needs, and local accountability.
Most importantly (and to ease the nerves of reorganisation planners), regional councils do not advertise that many projects, activities, initiatives and works they undertake are not – and never were – required by statute. This is one reason regional councils have expanded in spending and rates demands at the pace they have. Some activities, such as controlling discharges to air and water, are required by statute. Councils are empowered – but not mandated – to take up a wide range of other activities by the RMA, other legislation, or their “power of general competence” under the LGA (2002). Still other major spending, including economic development and community leadership, are entirely discretionary. A line-item look at regional council spending turns up many nice-to-haves and other “completely unnecessaries”.
ABOUT-FACE AT WRC:
MAYORS LOOKING LOCAL
Facing dissolution of WRC by 2028, Chair Warren Maher dialed up communication last week, promoting the benefits of regional oversight from Hamilton. Two days after the May 5 government directive and without consulting the public or the region’s 10 mayors, WRC had announced support for a unitary supercity council for the entire Waikato. WRC’s proposal, however, went down like a spotlighted possum. Following a meeting of the Waikato Mayoral Forum, Maher was forced to admit “the concept of a single Waikato-wide unitary authority appears unlikely.” District mayors and councils across the region are instead exploring smaller groupings, such as a King Country council for Waitomo and Ōtorohanga and a Greater Hamilton council to include districts in the city’s natural urban catchment. Options for groupings best suited to the Thames-Coromandel District will be explored in coming weeks.
Smaller subregional councils like Marlborough, Tasman and Gisborne demonstrate they have the expertise and tools to carry out regional functions, and do so within affordable budgets. And as those promoting the unitary structure point out, bringing those responsibilities back from the regional headquarters expands local control into additional work areas, increases accountability, and broadens the impact of local opinion and voices. Coromandel residents have long argued that functions such as harbour management, pest control, transportation and civil defense are best understood and delivered locally. Many would call that enhancing local democracy.
