New community debate has swelled from a petition seeking support for separation of the Upper Clutha from the Queenstown Lakes District Council (QLDC).

Public consultation on various QLDC issues, from the recent representation review (in which the council wants to disband the Wānaka Community Board) to the future development of the Wānaka Airport, has reflected a significant level of dissatisfaction and disenfranchisement felt by Upper Clutha residents. 

The Wānaka App has taken a look at the potential pros and cons of the Upper Clutha breaking away and what steps would need to be taken by the Local Government Commission (LGC) to achieve such a goal.

Previous:

Petition started for new Upper Clutha council

Locals support community board, separate Hāwea ward suggested

QLDC: is it value for money?

A recent ratepayers' report prepared by the New Zealand Taxpayers’ Union indicated QLDC ratepayers were paying higher rates than other councils which operated in regions of a similar geographic size with a similar population.

For instance, QLDC average residential rates were $3,165 annually compared to Timaru District Council residential rates averaging around $2,277; QLDC staff numbers 451, compared with Timaru’s 259.

QLDC has higher rates and higher staff numbers than comparable councils Data: New Zealand Taxpayers' Union's ratepayers' report

The Upper Clutha’s population is currently around 15,500 and, while the trend in local governments is to make them bigger not smaller (largely due to economies of scale and efficiency), there are examples where smaller councils, which would be similar in size to a proposed Upper Clutha council, have lower operating costs.

For instance, Central Hawkes Bay District Council, serves a population of about 15,250 with a council staff of 61, and its residential rates average $2,147 per annum.

Upper Clutha district size councils have 85% fewer staff and cheaper rates than QLDC Data: New Zealand Taxpayers' Union's ratepayers' report

Disillusioned and disenfranchised

Many submitters to the recent representation review stated their disillusionment with council’s consultation and decision-making regarding issues which affect Upper Clutha residents.

Wānaka-based councillor Niamh Shaw said she has been aware of a growing disconnect between residents and their council.

“Practically (and truthfully), most council staff live and work in Queenstown, and it is simply human nature to understand and prioritise what you live and deal with every day,” she said.

That growing sense of disenfranchisement has been reflected in the decreasing effectiveness of the WCB, according to many submitters to the representation review.

Submitter Barbara East said she had evidence that the WCB had been “bypassed” on numerous issues, which not only undermined the WCB’s ability to represent its communities but effectively kept Upper Clutha residents ignorant and disengaged.

A judicial review announced earlier this year found QLDC consultation over the lease of the Wānaka airport was noncompliant and overturned the lease. PHOTO: Esther Small

These issues included the Easter Sunday shop trading policy; the Wānaka Airport future governance and management model paper (2017); the inclusion of Wānaka in the QLDC’s policy on Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act (SHAs); parking restrictions in Wānaka enacted after the review of the Traffic and Parking Bylaw; alcohol restrictions in public places; not to mention the numerous leases and licences to occupy public land not signed off by the WCB.

“None of these issues were brought to the WCB meetings as agenda items where the issues are clearly outlined and recommendations made, and locals get to speak at public forum,” Barbara said.

The pros and cons of separation

This is not the first time the idea of the Upper Clutha forming its own council has been mooted.

“While the idea is naturally appealing we would need to be really careful what we wish for,” Wānaka-based councillor Quentin Smith said. 

Some of the issues which need to be considered, he said, are the cost of the duplication of all the administrative and regulatory functions; the impact a reduced asset base would have on the council’s capacity to borrow against it; and the increased maintenance costs of services, such as roading and public facilities (libraries, parks and pools), with a smaller number of ratepayers.

The QLDC has a staff of 451 and operates an office on Ardmore Street in Wānaka with a handful of Wānaka-based staff members. PHOTO: Wānaka App

These could be offset by potential gains including local policies reflecting local decisions to the betterment of its communities; council jobs for locals; and rates spent in the Upper Clutha, Quentin said. 

Local Government Commission steps

The petition circulating requires a group of at least 10 per cent of eligible voters in the affected area, in this case around 1,200 people, to support a request for the LGC to investigate a reorganisation of the current local governance structure. 

Once the group gains the necessary signatures its request for an investigation is submitted to LGC’s chief executive officer, together with a plan or description to identify the affected area; an explanation of the outcome the proposed changes are seeking to achieve; and a description of the issue to be investigated.

When deciding to undertake such an investigation the LGC has to weigh up what impact the investigation will have, such as potential costs and disruptions to QLDC and the likelihood of significant community opposition, among other matters.

If the LGC agrees to proceed then there’s a whole raft of consultation with various stakeholders, including the QLDC, iwi and the public.

The commission must consider if the outcome will provide better local governance, improved productivity, efficiencies and cost savings; enhanced effectiveness, efficiency, and sustainability of local government services; an enhanced ability to meet the communities’ future governance and service needs; and an assurance that it has the resources to effectively perform its responsibilities, duties, and powers. 

This all takes time. In November 2018 the LGC began an investigation to assess a request by Golden Bay locals in the Tasman District to create a community board. Its investigation was completed two years later. The LGC said no. 

The last time the LGC approved the constitution of a new council was over 30 years ago in 1989.

Elected members: words of caution

“It is clear our residents need better representation, or a better system,” Niamh said, but added she would like to understand more about the practical implications of the proposed separation from the QLDC. 

Quentin said he wasn’t surprised by the proposal to break away and welcomed the discussion and the opportunity to consider the pros and cons, including the economic implications on ratepayers.

“Wānaka has long felt disenfranchised, being the smaller sibling to Queenstown, and feels it has very different priorities.”

He added that some locals had suggested splitting from the QLDC in order to amalgamate with the CODC but that idea too “has its challenges”. For instance, the CODC has taken a very different approach to landscape protections than QLDC and its capital works programme is “tiny” compared to QLDC.  

“It is possible that CODC would have significantly less capacity to invest in the Upper Clutha ... than the QLDC does,” Quentin said. 

Deputy mayor Calum MacLeod said he felt there was strength in numbers and said sometimes this district concentrated on its differences rather than commonalities.

“We… have far more in common than we have differences and far greater challenges [transport, climate change, RMA reform, etc] to overcome,” he said. 

WCB chair Barry Bruce, referring to the minister of local government’s recently appointed review panel, which is assessing how local government will look over the next 30 years, suggested waiting until the panel releases its findings in October. 

“Indications given then may or may not lend weight to any changes. I think any discussion prior to this would be premature and inappropriate,” he said.

Meanwhile, the petition to separate the Upper Clutha has received a groundswell of support, with hundreds signing in the five days since it was launched.