SDC review concerns island board members

The Stewart Island Rakiura Community Board is concerned about the future of local representation on the island.

The Southland District Council conducted initial informal public consultation during an island ‘‘fete’’ in November last year.

Council chief executive Steve Ruru detailed the outcomes of the novel public consultation in his report to community boards this month, although information concerning the Representation Review was omitted during the Stewart Island meeting, its chairman Jon Spraggon said.

‘‘The information regarding the review was delivered to the board two days after the meeting had taken place, which we were pretty unhappy about.

‘‘That’s meant we need to arrange another, informal meeting shortly to discuss it’s contents which, on first glance, also don’t look very satisfactory.’’

Spraggon wouldn’t be drawn on the nature of the initial proposals until the board had reconvened.

‘‘We need to have a chance to actually discuss what’s here before we can comment,’’ he said.

Council initiated the Representation Review in 2015 to focus on ‘‘developing the community governance and representation framework to work more effectively and efficiently for council and the Southland district.’’

In April, the council will receive the Representation Review Initial Proposal covering subjects including the purpose of governance entities; their roles and responsibilities; delegations and powers to act; operating protocols; relationships between governing entities and community groups; and possible future developments.

This would then be opened for public consultation throughout May.

A finalised proposal, open for appeals or objections, was not expected until mid- July at the earliest.

Other matters raised during the November fete tallied broadly with community board understanding of current public concerns, Spraggon said.

These included a review of the Stewart Island Visitor Levy Bylaw, its first since it was initiated in 2013.

‘‘The levy has been very effective in its initial format and, as a board, and in the community more generally, the feeling is that format shouldn’t change,’’ he said.

Since its launch, the $5 per visitor levy had raised a total of more than $400,000, earmarked specifically for visitor-related assets or infrastructure.

‘‘We don’t want to see funding application criteria widened so it can be used for things like peoples wages. If that occurred, there would be no money left for footpaths and walking tracks, for example.’’

Work remained to be done on the island’s wharves, footpaths and public toilet infrastructure, and this should continue, he believed.

Southland District Council community partnership leader Michelle Stevenson described the fete event format and feedback as ‘‘very positive’’.

The concept was formulated by an independent consultant to the council, with a subsequent follow-up workshop also planned.

‘‘Hearing from our communities helps council make informed decisions about the future of infrastructure and social infrastructure on the island, and wider district,’’ Stevenson said.

Topics raised at the event were wideranging, and given the success of the format during its initial outing, it was likely to be used again in future.

‘‘It’s been one of a number of opportunities for residents on the island to have their say, and has been received with very positive feedback overall. We hope to run a number of these style fetes around the district for wider community leadership planning in future.’’