What's more, because the representation model proposes leaving Flaxmere with 14 per cent less representation than all other wards (breaching current Local Government Commission rules), Council will need to go hat in hand to the Local Government Commission to seek special approval to adopt the model – of which there are no guarantees.
While this proposal was supported by most of council, I (along with three other councillors) voted against it because I do not believe it will provide effective or fair representation for our community.
During a brief Representation Review pre-engagement phase, Council completed an online survey to gauge ratepayer's appetite regarding the future size of Council.
89 Per cent of respondents who answered the question indicated that they would like fewer or the same number of councillors sitting at the Hastings District Council table.
Their reasoning echoes my own concerns, including comments like "…the larger the committee the less that gets achieved", "more gardeners, not councillors" and "the last thing I want as a ratepayer is more people to slowdown decision making and point the finger at each other when poor decisions are made".
In my view, the Hastings District Council representation proposal is flawed. Not only will it result in the under-representation of a vulnerable community (Flaxmere) and reduce Council diversity (I recommend reading Youth Council chair Keelan Heesterman's talking point for an excellent summary of this), but I also believe it will lead to increased inefficiencies at Council and reduce the accountability of elected members to ratepayers.
Already touted as a 20 hour a week role (although anyone doing the job well will tell you far closer to 30-plus hours per week is required), the part time role of a Hastings District councillor is proposed to be watered down even more.
The addition of more councillors to an already large council will only lead to less engaged representatives (as they busy themselves with more "side hustles" to subsidise their lessened Council income), less efficient decision making (as even more agendas are introduced to the table) and greater confusion over who ratepayers should contact and hold accountable.
Meanwhile fewer councillors mean higher expectations imposed upon, and greater focus demanded from, elected members. It also means greater clarity over who ratepayers should contact and greater transparency about who is, and is not, delivering results.
Whether you think Hastings District Council's representation proposal to increase the number of councillors is fair, or if you would prefer another model, make your voice heard at www.myvoicemychoice.co.nz before 5pm October 1.
Remember, it's often not until you are impacted by a Council decision that you consider how you are represented. Now is the time to sit up, take note and have your say, before the opportunity passes for another six years.
As always, I remain open to contrary views, and I look forward to reading and hearing all submissions before finalising my decision on the Hastings District Council representation review.
Wendy Schollum is a Hastings District Councillor.
