Golden Bay ward in 2025 local election
There are a number of candidates standing for election all of whom live in this ward. The candidates have only very few lines to make themselves known in the information booklet which comes together with the voting papers. Then they appear in a speed dating like scenario with all other candidates and are asked to perform well under pressure and express themselves well.
Some have never worked in local politics and may only be known to some through various other activities - do these tell people enough about whether or not a candidate will bring the required skills to the table where the job is to make political decisions? Others do have political experience - have they shown to possess the skills which are needed for a role of an elected representative in local politics?
The new councillors will have to have consideration to the needs and wants of the ward he or she will be representing whilst at the same time having to fairly balance these against overall priorities of the whole district. This is a huge balancing act each councillor is facing when tasked with making good political decisions. It does require good judgement and communication skills.
Given the dire financial situation of this particular council it will be a tough decision between further rate hikes to keep up with infrastructure costs (maintenance and newly built) and losing more current ratepayers to other districts, or less infrastructure and upkeep with less demographic change in respect of the current population. What is the direction for the district preferred by the majority of the district for this coming term?
For this election, there were a total of three meet the candidates events - two in person and one online. Both Collingwood and Takaka were clearly the most attended meetings across the district with well over 100 people attending in both locations. As like really everywhere else, attendees were mostly older folk, not in their twenties, thirties or forties. As though politics was a thing of the past.
Because of inviting major, ward and community board candidates, there was quite a crowd on stage, namely 17 in total - 5 for the mayoralty, 5 for the two ward councillors and 7 for the four community board vacancies. This article focuses on the Golden Bay ward and community board. A summary of the mayoral candidates will be published separately.
The candidates
The Golden Bay ward has got two councillor vacancies to be filled, with one incumbent councillor seeking re-election: Celia Butler. The further four ward councillor candidates are Rodney Barker, Axel Downard-Wilke, Julian Hall and Mark Hume.
The new ward councillors will be aided by their four colleagues on the Community Board to efficiently and effectively collect views on local government matters in the bay which will hopefully assist them in making good decisions around the council table.
This is what the councillor candidates say about themselves: https://www.tasman.govt.nz/my-council/about-us/your-mayor-and-councillors/local-elections/nominations-received/golden-bay-ward
In summary, there are candidates with strong ecological focus in their campaigns, namely Rodney Barker, Celia Butler and Axel Downard-Wilke. Candidates Mark Hume and Julian Hall appear to focus on addressing current inefficiencies in terms of spending and red tape.
Tasman Democracy Inc. would like to highlight that Celia Butler, who is seeking re-election, did choose to receive communications from our organisation as well as from some of our members who in their private capacity were deemed a wellbeing risk to staff according to the CEO Leonie Rae. We appreciate her stance on fulfilling her oath and listening to everyone in the district. Generally speaking, Celia Butler is a rather quiet councillor around the table with rarely an opinion which differs from the majority of council staff. When written to personally, she responds with politeness. She did not express confidence that rates could remain low.
Mark Hume appears to be a well-respected member of the Golden Bay community and appears grounded. He does seem passionate about common sense, but is definitely someone who would benefit from some procedural guidance and is probably not the biggest fan of speaking in front of a large crowd.
Axel Downard-Wilke is relatively new to the bay, but has got a background of working for and with councils for a long time as a consultant. He advocates for less work being done via consultants, but instead more in-house to save costs for ratepayers. He has a focus on transport choices like cycle ways and advised that he would be prepared to agree to strategic alliances around the table to get the required votes. Certainly a man who is well aware of how the current decision-making works. Tasman Democracy Inc. would like to see more debate around the merits of projects as opposed to decisions based on strategic alliances.
Julian Hall seems very grounded and well-versed, connected with the bay. He also has a business background and sound environmental knowledge with a strong focus on cutting down on current council spending. He seems well aware of many issues that concern the public and is happy to listen. He shows a genuine passion for the bay and the whole district.
Rodney Barker seems very strong on environmental matters but we could hardly see any other focus which we think is insufficient given the broad spectrum of local decision-making.
Golden Bay Community Board
The Golden Bay voters will be able to choose their four Community Board members from a total of seven candidates seeking votes, two of those seeking re-election: Henry Dixon and Grant Knowles.
Henry Dixon’s aspiration is “to build on the work we have carried out so far.“ We haven’t seen much of him over the last three years and his presentation did not convince us of his passion for politics.
Grant Knowles: “The community board can provide a sensible voice in the wider district ensuring sustainability and a strong identity while making the most of opportunities.” We see Grant regularly attending Motueka Community Board meetings and being very involved in the Golden Bay Community wearing many hats. We have no doubt that Grant Knowles knows how to make the most of opportunities, but we missed his strong voice for example when the Motueka Community Board was advocating for relaxing the rules around tiny homes.
Sunshine Appleby said that she can no longer afford her rates and “We need a community board that is transparent and welcome of community participation.” We feel this lady has a lot of commitment and passion for local matters and are really concerned that a lady at 82 feels the need to run for a political position.
Clarissa Bruning is in her forties and is “standing to ensure the voices of families, volunteers, and youth continue to be heard in local decision-making.” We were not convinced that she had a strong vision for the district apart from being a younger person bringing a younger perspective. Her contribution did not convince us that she is currently much aware of what political decision-making looks like and she looked out for much guidance from Grant Knowles. In our view, a community board would benefit much from strong individual voices.
Axel Downard-Wilke: is a retired consultant and critical of the dam, strongly advocating for a local trail and against Sam’s Creek. There is no doubt that he would know whom to contact to get things done. Whether the people in the bay consider him as one of them?
Mark Raffills is well-known in Golden Bay (and beyond) with a background in communication and poetry “Representing individual people and local organisations as we pursue local community projects and concerns would be my goal if elected to the Golden Bay Community Board.” Clearly a well-respected member of the Golden Bay community with lots of council experience and being in the public sphere. Clearly well-spoken and educated with an artistic touch. Very much Golden Bay in our view.
Rodney Ward who once served on the community board states: “I'm passionate to represent those who feel they have no say or are drowned out by vocal interest groups and I have the knowledge to assess and question decisions being made with the strength to speak honestly to these.” Interesting perspective with focus on local people and local jobs as well as common sense. Made a lot of sense and had no issue with being critical in a respectful way, also towards himself (his younger self was on the board once but he didn’t think he was doing a great job then). We think the ability to reflect on your past actions is crucial and we were impressed with his honesty.
This is what they say about themselves: https://www.tasman.govt.nz/my-council/about-us/your-mayor-and-councillors/local-elections/nominations-received/golden-bay-community-board
The ward and its current representation
This Golden Bay ward is very particular given its specific location with the only transport access over the Takaka Hill. Unsurprisingly, there is a clear and strong Golden Bay identity. Very strong values around its unique environment. The ward has one Service Centre and a library.
Because of councillors and Community Board the voters get access to a total of six elected members to represent them in local politics. In contrast, the 3,700 voters in the Lakes-Murchison ward get to contact only one elected representative. Even though the community board members aren’t counted for fair representation purposes in a numeric sense, Golden Bay has still a strong over-representation for the 5,590 voters in the ward (one councillor per 2,795 as opposed to one councillor per 5,217 in the Moutere-Waimea ward). Because of the distance and the Takaka Hill, there is a very strong feeling of being remote from Richmond and susceptible to isolation in event of flood etc.
Seasonal tourism is a topic for the bay, from self-contained vans to high end holiday-makers, and concern was raised as to how to proceed with the information centre. The diverse lifestyles including transient lifestyles and more colourful or less conventional or simply more economical and eco-friendly small dwellings are a distinctive part of Golden Bay and it will be interesting to see how strong their voices are. So far, the Golden Bay population remained relatively shielded from tiny home enforcement. The ward is currently represented around the Council table by Chris Hill and Celia Butler with Chris Hill chairing the Environment and Regulatory Committee. She and Mr Kim Drummond, who resigned from his position effective 12 September 2025, decided to initiate the recent Environment Court proceedings for an enforcement order against a tiny home parked on an Upper Moutere property. Mr Drummond’s resignation will surely affect the Golden Bay community board as it was assisted by him as one member of the executive leadership team this term.
In the past, there was an attempt for more decision-making power for Golden Bay by trying to create a Local Board. This was a long process and unsuccessful in the end. Other matters of interest at the moment: dog leashes and dog access to beaches, the info centre and its future, cycle ways. Even though it's not a local politics matter, the Sam’s Creek mine.
The role of an elected councillor
Councillors are governance, not part of management. Logically, their achievements will be measured through the political decisions they make around the council table in Richmond and some of those decisions will be reflected on each ratepayers’ rates invoice, their fees and charges, speed limits, core and community infrastructure and rules coming from bylaws. As plan changes are currently being put on hold by the central government, there may be less on this front for now.
Decisions on bylaws, policies, rates, debt, development contributions, unbudgeted expenditures, decisions to move into a confidential session, decisions to agree or disagree to information in a staff report. Those decisions require a strong commitment for reading a lot in a very short period of time. It requires the mental and intellectual capacity to read the small print and to ask in public when something is unclear, to speak up when needed and to stand up for what is right even though some may not agree. It also requires someone who is willing to understand the legal implications of the decisions lying on the table as well as their practical value and the financial implications of those decisions. The speed limit changes are recent political decisions the whole district is now faced with.
Further, given the realistic workload for each councillor coming to meetings (whether Full Council or the various committee meetings), a huge requirement for each new councillor will be to read a lot - one of the current councillors stated in a meet the candidates meeting that they have to read through approximately 2,500 pages of documents per week. It does not stop with reading, but understanding matters quickly, making up their minds, preparing relevant questions, taking questions coming from the community in respect of those items on the agenda into account, debating in public and finally voting on those matters whilst at the same time adopting past meetings’ minutes which means attesting that they present an accurate record of those.
The required skill extends to understanding the applicable legal framework and whether the proposal sits well within it. To be fair, staff assistance is provided. In CEO Leonie Rae’s words in the pre-election report: “Staff will support all Elected Members with the information and training needed to make sound, informed decisions.” In addition, elected members have the opportunity to seek independent advice from LGNZ or maybe even further afield. Whether or how any additional external support can be financed from the existing budget, we don’t know. We haven’t seen consistent and high-quality staff input across departments in the last term unfortunately and are concerned that councillors and community board members may not be getting the support they deserve and need.
The pre-election report does also state important issues for the upcoming years. Given the recently announced stop on council plan reviews and changes up to 2027, it looks as though this incoming Council will be stuck with current rules for a while without much flexibility and room for making new rules for the district. The upside may be that there might be potential for less packed agendas going forward but there could be a potential for focusing on potential changes in central government when those haven’t been implemented yet and which may not persist after yet another central government election in the next year. So really, a difficult task for all councillors to stay focused on the relevant political decisions in accordance with the current legislative framework.
Summary of the meet the candidates events
The Golden Bay Weekly has written a detailed article about matters raised at both meetings and published it in their 12 September 2025 edition: https://files.elfsightcdn.com/eafe4a4d-3436-495d-b748-5bdce62d911d/81a80e50-03a9-40b2-9945-9d571621ae3f/2025_September12GBWeekly.pdf
Taking this into account, we will keep our descriptions relatively short.
Like in other parts of the district, people seem to have an interest on individual candidates’ views on the Maori ward. It was pointed out that regardless of individual views, the referendum will provide a decision and regardless of the outcome of the referendum, there will be a Maori ward for the next triennium. In addition, there was much concern around the Sam Creek Mine and candidates were asked on their views and whether they would be strongly advocating to the central government on this matter as outside of the local government sphere.
Rates cap was clearly favoured by new candidate Julian Hall, not incumbent Celia Butler. Questions ranged from Maori wards, flood damage, climate change, to gravel extraction, tourism, jobs and Sam’ Creek, cycle ways, red tape, housing and the info centre.
In Takaka the questions were left on a piece of paper on a desk by the entrance and the lady would then choose which of the questions to ask. Time keeping made sense given the sheer amount of people both on stage and in the audience.
However, it would have been nice if people would have been allowed to ask their questions without these being filtered through someone by the entrance door. Effectively, we could not know if these were the most pressing of issues amongst the people or whether these were simply the questions the most suitable to ask for those organising the meeting.
The candidates for the community board and the ward councillors reflect the diversity of Golden Bay lifestyle and it will be interesting to see what the prevailing one is. Will people be more swayed by candidates’ personal view on Maori wards, their stance on Sam Creek, their environmental stance, their stance on addressing current council inefficiencies? What do Golden Bay voters consider relevant and necessary for someone they elect to represent their communities around the council table? What, according to the Golden Bay voters, does a councillor or community board member need to bring to make good political decisions or advocacy work? Whom do they trust the most for making good political decisions on their behalf?
We will see.