With two weeks to go (9 August) before TCDC councillors meet to decide next moves on local government reform, the question is not which of three advertised “short list” merger options should be pursued. The real question before Council is whether any amalgamation proposal should be submitted by TCDC on 9 August – whether Coromandel communities instead deserve the opportunity in coming months to thoroughly explore homegrown council re-organisation models that might better serve the long-term interests of the district, while protecting local democracy on the Peninsula for following generations.
TCDC does not fit the ‘Head Start’ profile
With its overarching goal of local government simplification, government’s 5 May ministerial directive states unambiguously which districts its “Head Start Pathway” is intended for.
The process, ministers said, is intended to “give councils that are ready the opportunity to take the lead … and the confidence to get on with delivering the new planning system now.”
Ministers noted, “Some councils and mayors have been clear they are ready to move faster.” Ministry guidance describes its “streamlined, voluntary Head Start pathway for councils willing and able to re-organise quickly.”
This is precisely why TCDC leadership has been struggling to meet a shotgun-wedding merger deadline.
TCDC is not one of those shovel-ready councils. TCDC is not part of the government’s “target market” for first-mover Head Start merger proposals – and far from it.
There are some districts, both here in the Waikato and around New Zealand, in a position to immediately proceed with specific amalgamation proposals. That is because certain groupings have always reflected broader, well-defined communities of common interest, and mergers of those councils may present potential operational advantages.
These proposed amalgamations reflecting natural geographic, economic and cultural commonalities make good sense to the relevant mayors, councils and wider communities – and to any impartial outside observer as well.
These councils have been ready to move forward, in some cases for years, but have been stymied until now by long-standing legislative hurdles.
Examples abound. Hamilton City Council has been looking at amalgamation with Waipa and/or Waikato districts – integral parts of the wider urban catchment – since 2010. Waitomo and Ōtorohanga districts, which have worked together closely for years, have been quick to propose an amalgamated unitary King Country Council.
Tauranga Mayor Mahé Drysdale has called merging with surrounding Western Bay of Plenty District “a no-brainer”. Wellington City has long considered potential merger with urban neighbours Porirua and Upper and Lower Hutt. Close to home, Hauraki Plains districts, which make up another (but smaller) community of interests, have also indicated readiness to move quickly.
With the government’s recent green light, all these councils may be ready to submit workable Head Start proposals early next month.
Guaranteed forfeit of local political power
However, as the Coromandel lacks any broad-based and well-defined community of shared interests with neighbouring districts, a TCDC amalgamation either east or west would be extremely risky at best. while offering limited potential upside, if any. Apart from some shared geographic features, limited economic overlaps, and possibilities for additional cooperation in either direction, the Coromandel Peninsula is a very special case – far from a logical match with either the Bay of Plenty or Plains districts. Of greatest consequence and concern, however, is that all three “short-list” options deliver a guaranteed and irreversible long-term loss of local control, self-determination, and democratic process – no matter how the proposed council seats and votes are allocated. Once forfeited or diluted, political power and autonomy are gone forever, as sure as night follows day.
Thames-Coromandel District Council requires time to fully evaluate the range of available options for any eventual council re-organisation and to cost out regional functions – which may change – and potential efficiencies over the long term. Even the well-integrated Wairarapa districts – Carterton, Masterton and South Wairarapa – with their long-standing interest in amalgamation have already commissioned and received high-level independent financial analysis to better inform any decision on advancing a merger plan in August. By comparison, TCDC councillors and the wider public have been pressured to pick partners virtually blindfolded and sound-cancelled. It is little surprise that council leadership and its internal “working group” have failed over more than two months to make any case whatsoever to the public as to why a merger with either Hauraki Plains districts or the greater Tauranga urban catchment is in the long-term interests of the Thames-Coromandel District, its communities and its ratepayers. Absent such a case – and an exceptionally strong one – it would be unlikely, if not impossible, for councillors to responsibly back with confidence any merger proposal at this time.
Government “Backstop” an attractive option
To be sure, TCDC is not being forced to submit any amalgamation proposal by 9 August. While a proposal pulling in TCDC along with Hauraki, Matamata-Piako, and (possibly) South Waikato districts will likely be submitted to government by Hauraki Plains mayors, TCDC does not have to support that proposal and can, if it chooses, actively register its opposition to inclusion.
Opting instead to follow the government’s alternative “backstop” option – despite the word’s negative connotations – would provide an opportunity for substantive, informed discussions with Coromandel communities and time to gather solid research and analysis to inform any ultimate decision.
While there is understandable concern about the uncertainty of the “backstop” path, there is also much that can change in the next two years while Thames-Coromandel weighs its own best options and the government proceeds with those mergers that might make sense.
The current (or future) government could substantially alter its simplification expectations, including allowing for smaller but viable unitary councils such as a potential Coromandel Council. Functions that are currently regional may be redistributed upward or sideways due to pending RMA reform or other legislation. Advice from Wellington is always subject to change, and ministerial intervention on the district’s behalf is always a possibility with enough forceful advocacy from the peninsula and effective Council leadership.
As for timelines, formal discussions with the government on advancing specific “backstop” options will not start until relevant legislation is enacted in mid-2028, by which time Thames-Coromandel could be expected to develop a robust and convincing plan. There is no emergency. Until 15 July, Coromandel residents who complete TCDC’s current merger survey are free to write in their preference for a standalone
Unitary Coromandel Council, should they wish. Residents may also send their preferences directly to any or all councillors before 28 July.
