“I feel we are in a very difficult situation. This is a long-term plan, 2024-2034. The way things are going, we will not exist past 2028, so the relevancy of it is in question.
“Having been urged by all the territorial authorities in our region not to proceed, it will be perceived as very provocative, precipitous, if not arrogant if we proceed down this line.”
Tauranga councillor Tim Maltby joined Shirley in voting against adopting the amendment, saying councillors couldn’t ignore all the territorial authorities in the Bay of Plenty.
“They think we should wait until it is clearer what the successor organisation is. They also want us to consult much more deeply and discuss with them how the changes will be implemented.
“There’s a big danger, I think, if we move before the successor organisation is formed, we’re going to wind up restricting the options for that organisation.
“That’s going to be a democratically elected organisation, so we need to give them the right to make democratic decisions for that organisation rather than try to restrict that.
The remaining 10 councillors voted to adopt the amendment, as a way to protect the assets for the Bay of Plenty and future generations.
Eastern Bay of Plenty’s Kōhī Māori regional councillor Mawera Karetai. Photo / Supplied
The Eastern Bay’s Kōhī Māori councillor Mawera Karetai said the council was in “a tricky time”.
“Volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity define all the decisions that we are making all the time.
“When we were all elected, the motivation of the previous council to protect the asset for the future was already out in the community. Everyone understood that and we were elected to continue that work.
“In uncertain times, you don’t just stop dead and wait for the rest of the world to catch up.
“You have to stick to the path that you’ve chosen and keep on going. We can change if we need to, further along the way.”
Karetai pointed out that the territorial authorities had had plenty of opportunities to engage with the regional council and they had all made submissions during the consultation that supported the amendment.
However, last week’s letter noted that consultation had occurred before the Government’s announcement in May about the Head Start Pathway and associated reforms, which forced territorial authorities to amalgamate.
“As a result, communities, elected representatives, and territorial authorities were not in a position to consider the proposal in the context of the Government’s emerging reorganisation framework,” the letter said.
“The introduction of the Head Start pathway and the possibility of significant local government reform constitute material changes in circumstances since consultation was undertaken on the proposed Long-Term Plan amendments.”
The letter asked for a temporary pause on the decision and that the regional council work collaboratively with territorial authorities across the region to ensure matters are considered in a way that safeguarded the interests of both current and future communities.
– LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.