KEY POINTS:
Most of the 3537 submissions to the royal commission were unhappy with one or more aspects of the present form of local government. Bernard Orsman looks at how people rated councils and their staff.
Little wonder the Royal Commission of Inquiry on Auckland Governance is expected to recommend a new super-city council headed by a single mayor with executive powers when it delivers its report to the Government on March 31.
Most submitters confirmed what most people think about local government in Auckland. The seven territorial councils and one regional council are in constant conflict, there is too much duplication, slow decision-making, high costs, and councils are dominated by a bloated bureaucracy of officials who are not elected and not accountable.
A summary of submissions - now available on the commission website - said a "very small number" of the 3537 submissions were happy with the present from of local government. A greater number of more than 200 submitters were sufficiently happy to argue for retention of the status quo.
Papakura and Franklin district councils and North Shore City Council found many supporters. Local identity also loomed large among some submitters. The North Shore, West Auckland and Manukau area were said to have clear identities that should remain.
Here's what submitters had to say:
AUCKLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL
The ARC attracted 124 submitters calling for its retention and 71 advocating abolition.
Many submitters were satisfied with its operations and culture, with one saying the "ARC are more blue-sky thinkers, more likely to make the longer-term benefit choice". Others thought it was a moderating influence on territorial councils, helped to fight inappropriate development, worked well to guard regional parks and was the guardian of the Resource Management Act.
Some - but not the ARC itself - believed its functions and powers should be boosted.
Detractors wanted the ARC abolished, citing extra rates, the body's costs, suggesting it impeded growth of the region and was unrepresentative. Some were peeved at having to pay rates to two different organisations; their local council and the ARC. One submitter called its "just an extra fat cat".
Waitakere and Rodney councils complained about different aspects of the ARC. Rodney was particularly vocal about its "interference" in planning matters and wanted it disbanded.AUCKLAND CITY COUNCILMany were critical of the largest council in the region. Most criticism came from lobby groups, which said the council displayed poor accountability, transparency and democracy.
The power of the bureaucracy was a common theme. Several mentioned the example of the new council logo, chosen by senior staff at considerable expense without consulting elected councillors or ratepayers.
Although the occasional submitter wrote about "friendly and co-operative" council officers, a lot of antagonism was expressed towards council staff, particularly those from Auckland City, who Lynne Gilmore said were "a law unto themselves".
Some residents of former boroughs believed their area had been neglected, or "asset stripped" in favour of Auckland City. The summary noted unsatisfactory relations between the council and community boards.
MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL
Several submitters called for keeping the current council. The main reason was that amalgamation would not save money and local voices would not be heard. Another concern was the loss of local jobs.
Those who wanted change focused on boundary changes. In particular, residents of the eastern suburbs of Howick, Pakuranga and Beachlands pushed a long-held view that there was no community of interest with the other wards of Manukau. Maraetai and Whitford also wanted out.
One submitter said Manukau should be expanded to encompass the Otahuhu, Papakura and Franklin areas.NORTH SHORE CITY COUNCILNo submissions called for the abolition of North Shore - but only four said to keep it.
Said Brian and Irene O'Neill, of Birkenhead: "The present structure isn't broken and doesn't need fixing."
Planner Graham Parfitt said the previous 1989 amalgamation had been a disaster. He listed 13 major projects achieved by the former East Coast Bays City Council when he was a councillor. In nearly 20 years under the North Shore City Council, the east coast bays had had a library extension and a few other minor projects.
Devonport residents emphasised it was a community of interest distinct from the rest of the city.
WAITAKERE CITY COUNCIL
The commission got 31 submissions in favour of keeping Waitakere and four against. A local newspaper campaign calling for the retention of Waitakere attracted a further 217 coupons sent into the commission.
A strong sense of identity and pride in the eco-city came across, and the functioning of the council was mentioned favourably.
"Waitakere is a unique cultural and creative city and taking away the close local ties the council has to its community will cause it to suffer," said resident Julie Nash.
There were fears that in a "mega city", council services might not happen and rates would not be spent locally.
Some businesses criticised council policies in terms of planning and consent procedures. Oratia resident Bryan Trenwith said the council was mainly rural, had few residential and commercial ratepayers and a large socially deprived population. On top that the council had a culture of extravagance and lacked fiscal discipline.
RODNEY DISTRICT COUNCIL
Of all the councils, Rodney came in for the greatest flak. It drew 133 submissions for its abolition and 32 to keep it.
Reasons for abolition included diverse communities of interest - Kumeu-Helensville/Hibiscus Coast/rural area north of Puhoi; the poor performance of the council and high rates.
Several submissions had an emotional tone not evident in relation to other councils. The council was also panned for a lack of community consultation, lack of transparency and not providing for people's needs. Several wanted to abolish the council because of what they saw as a pro-developer policy.
In terms of positive council performance, it was said that Rodney had built trust and won a reputation for excellent customer service, and the council understood and looked after its unique communities.
PAPAKURA DISTRICT COUNCIL
This council had very strong support.
Papakura's relatively small size - population 46,000 - was said to give residents a sense of place and a feeling of belonging in the community. Several submitters noted the mayor and councillors were accessible to the public and provided timely and appropriate responses to local needs.
Others referred to low rates in Papakura, saying the council was more efficient than bigger councils and had the lowest debt per head in the Auckland region.
It was said roading projects were started and finished, parks upgraded and the swimming pools were a good meeting place for many cultures.
Submitters who wanted the abolition of Papakura mainly saw the council as an anomaly and a "waste of time and resources".
FRANKLIN DISTRICT COUNCIL
This was another council with strong support for its retention, with just 15 out of 88 submissions calling for its abolition.
It was seen to work well and not have a community of interest with Auckland, which did not understand its rural needs.
Many argued for greater involvement with the Waikato region, sometimes on the basis that this would be the lesser of two evils. Others felt closer to Auckland than to Waikato.
Three submitters believed Franklin should merge with Manukau City Council.
The Waikato District Council called for the parts of Franklin in Waikato - Tuakau, Pokeno, Mercer and areas south and west of the Waikato River - to come under its wing.
COUNCIL STAFF
Chief executives should hold their heads in shame. Residents, businesses and lobby groups believe Auckland is awash with bloated bureaucracies who do not work by the values of democracy or public service.
The chief executives themselves were singled out as having too much power, acting in an arrogant fashion, wasting money and ignoring the wishes of citizens.
Waiheke resident Susan Pockett summed it up: "We are effectively ruled not by our democratically elected representatives, but by a bloated bureaucracy of unelected and completely unaccountable functionaries, with a culture of arrogant disregard for the will of the people."
The constant use of consultants by councils was another topic that drew a lot of angry remarks. Submitters resented staff leaving councils and then being re-employed as consultants earning exorbitant fees.
