Amalgamation petition: everyone is a little bit right
The Aldo Miccio-initiated local body amalgamation petition seems set to become a new battlefield in the ongoing conflict between the Golden Bay Community Board and its parent body.
The issue concerns the obligations of the Local Government Commission should the petition gain enough signatures to trigger an investigation of amalgamation.
Board chairman Joe Bell, in his report to the September meeting, refutes part of the TDC CEO Paul Wylie’s report on the petition’s implications.
Mr Wylie’s report to council states that if the petition does succeed, “the Local Government Commission will be obliged to proceed solely on the basis of a union”. This would rule out any major reorganisation of the governance of the region. Mr Bell says that Mr Wylie’s view is incorrect.
To get clarification TDC sought the advice of the chief executive of the Local Government Commission (LGC), Donald Riezebos.
“When looking at other proposals the advice the Commission has received is that a modification or variation could not go so far as to turn the proposal into an entirely different proposal,” Mr Riezebos told the council. “If the Commission decided to proceed with a proposal for the union of Nelson City and Tasman District it could perhaps modify the proposal by, say, transferring a small area of the city or district to a neighbouring district. However the core element of the proposal would still have to be for the union of Nelson City and Tasman District. The options open to the Commission are therefore a union of the two districts (with or without some modification or variation) or the status quo.”
“On the matter of a separate council for Golden Bay-Motueka as part of a reorganisation. Mr Riezebos said: “To my mind this would go beyond the scope of a modification or variation.”
This advice is in conflict with Mr Bell’s report in which he cites several parts of the Local Government Act.
“The law provides for consideration of reorganisation proposals. It is not up to council staff to seek to influence this process. There is a responsibility to ensure that matters are considered impartially on the facts,” says Mr Bell in his report.
TDC Mayor, Richard Kempthorne welcomed the Commission’s advice in a press release on Tuesday, saying, “The commission has confirmed that claims made in the petition and in press releases, stating that the commission will review a range of local governance options, are not correct. Mr Riezebos has made it quite clear that the commission has to concentrate on just two options. Those options are the status quo, or the dissolution of both existing councils and the creation of a new single council. There is no room in the petition request for other suggested options, such as separate councils for Golden Bay and Motueka, or a new rural council based on those two wards, or a new regional council separate from the city and district councils.”
Mr Kempthorne also commented on the likelihood of a poll taking place if the petition gains enough signatures.
“This doesn’t guarantee a poll,” he said. “While the commission will investigate and consult, there may never be a poll of electors. In both of the last two cases the commission determined that the petition requests would not provide good local governance and declined to proceed to a poll. It will be over to the commission to decide, but recent history shows that there has to be real evidence of some very powerful reasons for a reorganisation before the commission puts everyone to the costs and disruption of a poll. Concerned members of the public are invited to visit council’s website and check out both the guide and the commission’s advice.”
On Wednesday, the amalgamation petition organiser, Aldo Miccio, released a statement saying that the LGC had confirmed that the LGC can suggest “different options for rural representation as part of its investigation into a potential union”. The press release explains that the method of electing members of a newly-amalgamated council could include a ward system or an ‘at large system. The commission also had the flexibility to rule communities like Golden Bay isolated and therefore exempt them from some aspects of the representation rules.
The GB Weekly contacted Mr Riezebos to seek some clarification. He explained that some things would be a matter of interpretation and that, to some extent, everyone was a little bit right.
He confirmed the advice he had given to the Tasman District Council and Aldo Miccio and quoted above.
As far as Joe Bell’s suggestion about a separate proposal for a Golden Bay-Motueka District is concerned, he said that such a proposal would have to be initiated in the same way as the proposal currently under discussion - by a petition of electors, in this case 10% of people on the electoral roll for Tasman District. If the Commission did receive a proposal for a Golden Bay-Motueka District as well as one for a union of Nelson and Tasman, the Commission would probably consider both proposals as part of the same exercise.
Donald Riezebos said, “There here has been a lot of talk about options in discussions about the petition. While the options for the overall structure are limited by what comes through the petition process, there would be options for things such as membership on any new council and a community board structure. These are things the Commission would look at when considering a proposal.”
Neil Wilson
