Currently, we have the opportunity to provide feedback to the council by completing submissions on the Representation Review, which closes at 5pm on September 5 and the Local Alcohol Policy and bylaws, closing at 5pm on September 12.
Ange Holt
The community board will finalise its thoughts on both submissions at our meeting this week.
We are generally comfortable with the outcomes of the Alcohol Policy and Bylaws. Our involvement from the start, including workshops and an initial submission, has allowed us to contribute meaningfully to the process.
Key changes we influenced include prohibiting off-licenses next to sensitive sites like schools, kindergartens, and churches, limiting the number of outlets in our towns, and empowering the licensing committee to make quality decisions based on evidence.
The Representation Review is necessary because councillors are questioning whether they can govern better with three fewer councillors.
As a community board, we expect a robust discussion on this topic. Here are some questions we will consider before making our submission:
- Representation: Will we be well represented with three fewer councillors? Are we ensuring necessary diversity at the council table?
- Workload: How will this impact the workload when councillors already consider their role a full-time job, especially with increased “red tape” from central government?
- Committees: How will three fewer councillors affect council committees in terms of workload, quorums, and attendance?
- Will councillors need to be on every committee, or will other representatives be co-opted?
- Elections: What impact will this have on getting new councillors elected?
- Financial Impact: Will the funds saved from paying three fewer councillors attract a professional calibre of candidates?
Based on current figures that I have seen, councillors are paid slightly less than the minimum wage for 40 hours, which is likely the time needed to do a thorough job.
Ward Impact: This reduction impacts wards significantly, with the rural ward becoming one instead of two.
The west side of the district, including Pirongia, is likely to have both councillors from our side of the district.
Rationale: Have we been provided with any sound rationale outlining the benefits of having three fewer councillors for the community?
While councillors will be paid slightly more, and decision-making may speed up, is this change beneficial to the community as a whole or just the councillors?
Change can be good, especially when there are clear benefits. However, we need to be cautious and think this through carefully, as our submissions could significantly change how Waipa is represented at the council.
To provide some background, most councillors currently contribute over 30 hours per week.
They handle huge agendas, reading, researching, and speaking to various people to ensure the best outcomes.
For example, our next agenda has over 500 pages, and councillors recently received an agenda document exceeding 800 pages.
They have multiple agendas over a month. They do a huge job for us, one where most people have no idea what time and effort goes into this demanding and often highly criticised role.
Please take the time to complete a submission, as your opinion is important. Let’s ensure our community is well-represented and our voices are heard.
New rural ward, eight councillors?
