Council amalgamation proposal
The Golden Bay Community board, with Mayor Richard Kempthorne and TDC community services manager Lloyd Kennedy. Photo: Neil Wilson.
The Local Government Commission’s (LGC) proposal for the union of Nelson City with the Tasman District is being described as “a generous document” by Golden Bay Community Board chair Carolyn McLellan.
“It’s an opportunity to look at far-reaching, province-wide ways to address regional issues now and into the future,” said Mrs McLellan.
”This could usher in a new era of teamwork, co-operation, trust and communication. The LGC has gone to some trouble to understand our really engaged community. They’re saying we deserve a different level of governance. It’s an opportunity for Golden Bay to shine. It’s great that the report recognises other communities like Murchison too.”
The LGC has decided in favour of the amalgamation model and people have until 19 August to make submissions on the proposal. After submissions have been heard, the LGC will either issue a Final Reorganisation Scheme based on the draft they released last week, or issue an amended Reorganisation Scheme, or not issue a final proposal at all. If they decide to issue a reorganisation scheme of either sort, a vote will take place. More than 50 per cent of the voters in Tasman and more than 50 per cent of the voters in Nelson must then endorse the proposal in a postal vote for it to become our new model of governance.
Mayor Richard Kempthorne said that he was “glad the LGC has released their report”.
“The process is now about the people of Tasman. They need to look at the proposal and make themselves familiar with it and ask questions. We, as a council, just want to do anything we can to help people become aware of the issues.
“The LGC is saying that there are regional opportunities that are being lost at the moment. They’re also saying that an amalgamated council would have greater financial capacity – the ability to borrow more money and do more. To balance that, there are lots of things to be considered, especially around fair representation across the district, and I would urge people to think about them. I think it would be really unhelpful to try to tell people things from a specific point of view. We’d be accused of muddying the waters anyway.”
Mr Kempthorne said that the LGC had obviously looked carefully at the issue of delegation to community boards.
“What they are recommending does go beyond what we have, but we’ve already got quite a lot of what they suggested.”
Hard copies of the LGC documents will be available in the library and at the service centre, said Mr Kempthorne.
“Some people will read them and some won’t. We’ll be putting a summary of the proposal in the Newsline with the aim of getting people to see what is there and then go and look for themselves. I was elected to serve and support the residents and ratepayers, and that’s what I’ll be endeavouring to do. We need to get the information out there so that people can make informed decisions.”
Mr Kempthorne said that TDC staff were finding it quite an unsettling time. “To be honest, the sooner we get through this period the better. The last thing we want is staff working in uncertainty.”
The Mayor said he would be surprised if the poll did not take place. “In any event, the job of the council is to deliver what the ratepayers and residents require.”
If the union did take place there would be the need for some very careful change management, said Mr Kempthorne.
“There will be lots of decisions to make. We’ll all have to stay working as a team - both the council as a unit and the council and its regional boards and associations. There will be plenty of challenges too, but we will just face them one at a time.
“If anybody wants information on any individual matter, however specific, they should feel free to approach the council. We won’t be trying to influence people either way; we’ll just be here to answer questions.”
Mrs McLellan said that it was important for people to get their heads around the LGC documents and to make submissions on them. A key recommendation is that Golden Bay would be represented by one councillor rather than the two we have at present, for example.
“A single councillor and a community board working together can achieve a lot. With the level of delegation being spoken about – granting leases on campgrounds and organising coast care for example - there may be fewer meetings over the Hill for our councillor to attend anyway. The level of delegation is only limited by the vision and faith of the council, really. They just need to allocate a budget to the delegated task. Also, the two different rating systems being used by the councils will require a period of ‘smoothing out’, but people shouldn’t be afraid of that,” she said.
If the union went ahead and Golden Bay was represented by only one councillor, there was a chance that there would be more competition for the four seats proposed on the community board, said Mrs McLellan.
“The money for board members hasn’t moved very much, so that might be a disincentive. We’re busy enough now and there would be more to do under the new model,but wouldn’t it be fabulous if there was a big field of candidates standing for the board? That really would be good for the community.”
Speaking about the targeted rate for communities with community boards, Mrs McLellan had this to say: “If you have a board in each ward, everyone will be treated the same. Then communities could apply to have targeted rates set for specific projects, not to pay for their governance.”
Neil Wilson
