Thames-Coromandel District Council is on the back foot, as neighbouring councils put forward re-organisation plans that, left unchallenged, could drag in the Coromandel on unfavourable terms, silencing local voices and diluting local democracy for decades to come.
Hauraki District Council last week opened pubic consultation on three amalgamation proposals in response to the Government’s Simplifying Local Government directive. Only one of the three options has any chance of gaining public support. That option calls for a sprawling local authority taking in all of Hauraki, Matamata-Piako, South Waikato, and Thames-Coromandel districts stretching from the top of the peninsula down through the Hauraki Plains all the way to Tirau and Tokoroa. The proposal does not require consultation with, or approval by, Coromandel residents and ratepayers to gain government acceptance. The four-district scenario is likely to be backed up by analysis showing financial viability and public support, and would likely meet all the government’s requirements for efficiency and deliverability. Two other survey options – one for an all-Waikato supercity and the other an all-Waikato council minus Hamilton City – are likely to generate little interest.
While Hauraki Mayor Toby Adams and his Council have proceeded smartly to identify the best political outcome for his district before the looming August 9 deadline, TCDC leadership has so far dithered with process and public relations. After six weeks, a preliminary survey of Coromandel residents asking “what matters most to you” and “what people want to see from the reform process” has been the only word out of Thames headquarters. Terms of reference for the mayor’s five-member sub-Council working group will not even be formally adopted until next week.
FOUR DISTRICTS: CHALK AND CHEESE?
For Hauraki and its southern neighbours, wrangling Thames-Coromandel into an Eastern Waikato council is a tempting option, despite the Coromandel representing next to nothing in the way of a natural “community of interest” – geographic, economic and social – with the other three districts. Put another way, Thames-Coromandel District is largely a misfit. Geographically, it’s a long and rugged peninsula with over 400 km of coastline and a handful of settlements and small towns largely isolated from the rest of the North Island – the Hauraki Plains included. And as no one needs reminding, the number one economic driver by far is tourism with its related service, retail, hospitality and construction sectors.
Primary economic drivers in Hauraki and south, in contrast, are all about dairy, dry stock, meat processing, forestry, mining, agriculture and manufacturing. The districts are economically unrelated to points north. And for residents and businesses in the three southern districts, the natural urban catchments are nearby Hamilton, Tauranga and Rotorua – definitely not Thames or Whitianga. The four districts would overlap, however, in respect of Waihou catchment management.
With rating unit numbers boosted by thousands of coastal community holiday homes, the Coromandel, first and foremost, would be a financial milking shed for its farming and forestry council-mates, should the Hauraki re-organisation plan eventuate under unfavourable terms. Still worse, assuming council representation based on population, Thames-Coromandel with 27% of the four-district total would be apportioned just four seats on a hypothetical 16-member Council board. Community Boards as they presently exist would be just a memory.
As the weeks tick down and with TCDC still in the starting blocks, the urgent question is whether Mayor Peter Revell and his Council have the political will and negotiating skills to navigate the political waters, effectively challenge the Hauraki proposal, and develop an alternative option that meets government simplification criteria, while preserving local democracy for the Coromandel. As most observers agree, this is the most critical issue facing Coromandel communities, and one that will define local government on the peninsula for generations to come.
EFFECTIVE LEADERSHIP AND NEGOTIATING SKILLS
According to the government’s Head Start Pathway directive published May 5, individual territorial authorities (like TCDC) cannot submit a re-organisation proposal, such as a stand-alone unitary council for the Coromandel Peninsula. As the government rules presently stipulate, TCDC must join with a neighbouring council to jointly put forth any proposal, such as a Hauraki-Coromandel grouping.
But there is a fundamental problem with the rules. Thames-Coromandel District shares a border with only one other district – Hauraki. Hauraki has expressed no interest publicly in working with TCDC on a jointly acceptable proposal.
Out of 43 territorial authorities in the North Island, only one other district (Far North) borders just one other district. Out of all 67 territorial authorities (district, city and unitary) in the entirety of New Zealand, only two other districts (Far North and Invercargill) border just one other district. With only a single bordering district to plan with, unless that district engages cooperatively, TCDC has no option to submit a proposal to government under the rules as they stand.
But when stymied by rules and regulations, effective politicians, lawyers and consultants find “workarounds”. With its unique geography, economic base, and strong district-wide rating valuation base, the Thames-Coromandel District has a strong case to plead with decision-makers in Wellington, and a strong hand to play with partner districts, when it comes to negotiating an equitable amalgamation outcome. The question is whether that forceful and persuasive leadership will emerge from Thames headquarters in time to head off a local democracy disaster.
Weightings For
Local Government Reform
TCDC PRESS RELEASE
The Thames-Coromandel Simplifying Local Government Working Group has released the weightings will be used to assess and shortlist options for local government reform, marking a significant milestone in the process.
The weightings reflect the Working Group’s view of what matters most when considering future governance arrangements for the district and will guide the evaluation of potential options before recommendations are presented to Council.
The agreed weightings are:
- Keeping local voices strong – 30%
- Better value for ratepayers – 25%
- Less bureaucracy and clearer decisions – 25%
- Better planning for the future – 10%
- Making change practical and achievable – 10%
Mayor Peter Revell said the weightings strike a balance between ensuring local communities continue to have a strong voice while also recognising the need for efficient, effective and affordable local government.
”The Government has provided five criteria against which reform options must be assessed. The Working Group has spent considerable time discussing the relative importance of each and has now agreed a framework that will help guide its decision-making,” Mayor Revell said.
