Representation review hearing for Tasman District Council

The Tasman District Council has just recently had their hearing with the Local Government Commission in respect of their representation review proposal. A representation review is mandatory for councils every six years. Councils are required to assess whether their current representation is fair and effective. This relates primarily to how the council is organised in terms of its ward boundaries, whether these wards respect current communities of interest, how many councillors are to be standing for each ward and whether or not to have community boards.

There was an early consultation held at the end of 2023, in which members of the public could let the council know what they consider the council should pay attention to for their upcoming representation review. This was published in the Council’s Newsline from 17 November 2023 unfortunately with not a lot of details and with a different timeframe (15 November - 15 December, but consultation was open until 13 January 2024). Unsurprisingly, a very low number of responses was received, namely 16, not only because of the conflicting timeframes, but also because it was Christmas and holiday season.

Interestingly though, prior to that the Council held 3 workshops (one in September and two in October to confidentially talk about the upcoming representation review).

Following the early engagement the Council prepared their initial proposal. This started with another confidential workshop in February and another one in April 2024. It needs to be said as it was also reiterated before the Local Government Commission that the Council formed the view that as there was so little feedback the Council elected and told elected representatives that the feedback which was received would not be considered. The Council also provided the Local Government Commission with slides as to what was part of the workshops and quite consistently with the Council’s stance, the views of those providing early feedback weren’t.

Thanks to those slides one can see that certain arrangements were not favoured. By whom? By staff presenting to the Councillors? By Councillors? What did they actually hear? A workshop is not a meeting substitute, but this is clearly the case in Tasman where we have all those discussions behind closed doors, nobody gets to see what is being presented to the Councillors and what then functions as their foundation for making decisions. Sad, but real. The public cannot be part of the process, not even as a passive listener or observer.

On 17 July 2024 the initial proposal appeared on the Council’s agenda and was voted on by Councillors. The Council has put in their proposal at the same time when the community was asked to put in their submissions on the Public Water Supply Bylaw, the Dog Bylaw, the Navigation Safety Bylaw, the Cat Bylaw and the Public Places Bylaw. These were a busy few weeks for Tasman residents and maybe the Representation Review proposal got a bit overlooked by the public struggling to get through all these Bylaw consultations happening at the same time.

Public feedback was possible and 93 responses were received. Submitters commented on Maori Wards which was no longer part of the review process. Some voiced opinions on the existing community boards, others on how many councillors should represent Golden Bay and some on the proposed boundaries. Nine submitters made comments that the existing boundaries for the Moutere-Waimea ward are of concern and should be changed. Following that, there was a submission hearing held at the Council chambers where submitters could speak to their submissions.

After the hearing the Council made a resolution to retain their initial proposal on 2 October 2024, which subsequently became their final proposal. Three Councillors voted against, namely Councillors Walker, Dowler and Greening. Any submitter who is of the view that their points contained in submissions were not reflected in the Council’s final proposal had the right to appeal against the Council’s final proposal decision.

Then there was the hearing with the Local Government Commission on 19 February 2025, in which the Council was asked to justify their proposal and two objections to that proposal were heard. A final decision will be made by the Local Government Commission latest at the beginning of April. A recording of the Local Government Hearing can be watched below.

There is a very specific situation in the Tasman District which makes it compulsory for the Council to be heard by the Local Government Commission for each representation review. This is because of the geography of the Golden Bay ward. Due to its location, it is either significantly overrepresented (by having two councillors) or significantly underrepresented (by only having one councillor). The Council’s proposal was to retain two Councillors for this ward and also to retain the Community Board with another four Board members.

Further, there is the Lakes-Murchison ward which covers a huge geographical area, but has a very low population and is therefore only represented by one councillor and does also not have a community board. The representation of this ward with one councillor is within the acceptable legal bounds. Equally, the Motueka ward, which is represented by three councillors and another four community board members is within the limits.

However, not so the rapidly growing Richmond and Moutere-Waimea wards. Richmond is just coming out of balance, but the Moutere-Waimea ward has been for some time, even during the last review six years ago. The imbalance is becoming more pronounced. 71% of the district’s population is not fairly represented with the Council’s proposal. This was unfortunately not communicated to the public, but addressed to the Local Government Commission by us, Tasman Democracy.

The Council was confident that it had via its elected officials properly informed the people in various community group meetings and sensed no appetite by those to make any changes. No response received means everyone is happy. A low number of responses means they don’t need to be taken into account. Is that in accordance with the law? Not so clear. It is clear however that such a hearing is a quasi-judicial proceeding and strictly bound by rules.

The Commissioner thanked Tasman Democracy for their compelling case and it was also interesting to see that a former council staff, who was also invited to speak to her appeal, came to a very similar view as Tasman Democracy Inc. The lady focussed on the communities of interest and how someone from the Moutere-Waimea ward is currently unable to be fairly represented when one has many connections of necessity to Motueka, but no voice in Motueka, as opposed to being a tourist in parts of one’s own ward rather than being necessarily a community of interest when it comes to schools or other connections of interest.

We are waiting with excitement what the finding of the commission based on the evidence before it will mean for our district. For more information, one could read our full appeal document, explaining the issues with the Moutere-Waimea in much detail.