Residents’ group appeals review
Decision on council representation and make-up of electoral wards lies with Local Government Commission
The Rotorua Residents and Ratepayers group has appealed against Rotorua Lakes Council’s representation review decision. Last week, Local Democracy Reporting revealed that there were 12 appellants and objectors to the council’s representation review decision, including Te Tatau o Te Arawa and local businessman Justin Adams.
The decision, made in November, was to adopt a governance model of one Ma¯ori ward seat, one general ward seat and eight at-large seats.
The council also voted for chief executive Geoff Williams to pursue a local bill allowing a council-preferred — but currently unlawful — model of three Ma¯ori ward seats, three general ward seats and four at-large councillor seats. The local bill, if passed in
Parliament, would make it lawful.
Representation reviews can be appealed by submitters or objected to by those who did not submit.
Appeals and objections are then provided to the Local Government Commission, which can overturn councils’ decisions.
Councillor Reynold Macpherson, who is also the chairman of Rotorua Residents and Ratepayers, said his group was also one of the 12 that had appealed against the decision.
The appeal asked the commission to back the option he believed was the most popular with submitters — a model with three Ma¯ori ward seats and seven general ward seats.
Macpherson said the model adopted in November was, in his view, “created at short notice without being notified or consulted”.
He viewed pursuing the local bill as “another barrier to Rotorua keeping democratic representation”, describing it as a cogovernance model.
In his opinion: “This move was clearly intended to circumvent the Local Electoral Act used by the Local Government Commission to guarantee democratic representation.”
Macpherson’s statement said problem, in the group’s view, was that “one community of interest aspiring to co-governance was given primacy by bad-faith processes in the representation review” over “other diverse
the and legitimate communities of interest”. He said his group believed the adopted model and the council’s support of the bill had “the potential to deter candidates, impair voter turnout, artificially divide communities of interest and adversely affect how elected members access constituents and vice-versa”.
Macpherson said the group’s preferred model was “simple and democratic”, it maximised the “effectiveness of representation from diverse communities of
boosted
interest” and representational fairness.
The appeal and Macpherson’s statements were put to the council and mayor Steve Chadwick.
A council spokeswoman said the council maintained its position from last week that while the process was underway, it would be inappropriate for the organisation to comment on the nature of appeals.
Chadwick declined to comment. Last week, Local Government Commission senior advisor E-J Ruthven said the Commission would determine the representation arrangements for the council for the 2022 local election by April 11.
Ruthven said the next steps for the commission were to assess the validity of the appeals and objections and whether to hold a hearing.
“As the commission has not yet completed these steps, we are not currently able to share the appeals/ objections, who they are from, or any details regarding them.”
Ruthven said if a hearing was held appellants would be invited to present their views and it would be open to the public.