My priorities
Hutt City Council has three strategic priorities for our city:
- Providing future fit infrastructure
- Enabling a liveable city and vibrant neighbourhoods
- Supporting and enhancing the environment.
I support these priorities and most of the steps Council is taking towards them. There's been some good achievements recently.
However, Council's approach to achieving them is not sustainable. Substantial change is needed.
My concerns
The limited progress that is occurring is coming at huge cost. Council has severe financial problems due to a lack of control over spending and ensuring value for money. It's confirmed we are paying too much for our assets.
As a result, Council rates and debt have risen alarmingly; far more than should have been necessary. To compound matters, the infrastructure deficit has ballooned out and is now several times larger than it was just a few years ago. The situation is unsustainable.
I first blew the whistle on these issues three years ago and have continued to raise concerns since then. Because of a lack of strong action by Council, I have voted against Council's Annual Plan and the huge rates increases.
I know we can turn this around. However, as the only councillor with extensive financial expertise, I require your support to get reelected, and more support from other elected members after the elections to deliver the change needed.
Actions
Action is needed urgently, in fact it's long overdue. Here's my Financial Plan:
- Reduce Council rates by 40%. It's possible when the regional water entity is set up.
- Cap future rate increases to inflation. They are too high already.
- Rewrite Council's financial strategy. It has failed its objectives.
- Independently review Council's costs. Why have they doubled, what increases were unavoidable, what savings can be made?
- Tighten delegations and controls. No blank cheques. Major spending must be backed by business cases and full public reporting.
- Reduce parking charges. Let's support the vitality of our retail precincts.
My views on some issues
Petone parking. I voted against the introduction of paid parking in Petone. I'm open to considering it in the future, but not at a time when cost of living concerns are high, retailers are suffering, and further Jackson Street disruption is planned for pipe replacements. Our City deserves vibrant retail centres. I will push for a review of parking charges in Petone, and the CBD, given the negative impacts some of our shops are experiencing.
Water meters. I was not originally a supporter, as alternate options to secure water supply were more economic. Things have changed due to population growth and the huge increase in the cost of new infrastructure. Waters meters are now an essential part of future planning.
Regional water entity. I've supported the plan to form a new, asset-owning water entity for our metro region. This will enable more borrowing and help fund needed infrastructure works. However, it is concerning that councils such as the Hutt are intending to transfer operations running at huge losses. The new entity will start on the back foot, having to raise water charges substantially just to balance their books. This makes it all the more important that Hutt City Council reduces rates fairly (i.e. by 40%) when it is no longer responsible for water services.
Ultimately, the effectiveness of management and governance of an organisation is far more important than the structure, and this is where we have been let down in the recent past.
Speed limits. I was against the intention to introduce a 30kph speed limit for the large majority of Hutt streets. Fortunately, this requirement disappeared following the change in government.
Private property considerations. Central, regional and local government all impose rules that restrict private property rights, often for important reasons (e.g. ensuring a minimum level of earthquake resilience and safety). At times Councils impose designations that restrict property rights for the enjoyment of others. Examples are heritage designations on residential homes and restricting development of locations identified as significant natural areas. Any rules of this nature should only be considered in full discussion with those affected. That discussion should be supported by a balanced cost/benefit assessment, favour voluntary adoption, and have addressed the issue of compensation for associated losses. Unfortunately, this has not always occurred.