After that, "councillors and iwi representatives were invited to a briefing to discuss the four options that were most compliant with the legislative requirements to achieve fair and effective representation of communities of interest and reflected the different design principles generated by the community engagement and research''.
"The steer from councillors at this session was that officers should continue to develop option 1, without community boards, for further exploration at an upcoming briefing."
The report said community boards had been a part of the district's representation for many years and had had a role in advocating for their communities "in the face of significant challenges and opportunities within this district".
However, "community boards have not been included in this initial proposal, on the basis that they are likely creating an unhelpful layer of representation that is not representative of a diverse range of voices within their communities, hindering their ability to deliver on the legislative functions of community boards ... Instead, the initial proposal focuses on encouraging a more direct connection between decision-makers (councillors) and the communities they serve".
"Sitting alongside this would be funding and support to empower existing or new community groups to foster community led development and give voice to their communities' needs and aspirations; and resourcing to strengthen councillors' ability to know and understand their communities."
Shelley Warwick, of the Ōtaki Community Board, said community boards felt "under attack".
"I joined the community board after frustration in dealing with council and the NZ Transport Agency on road safety projects in Ōtaki, and have to say I am disappointed to say as an elected member my requests don't go unaddressed as they did at times when I was just Joe Citizen.
"This disappoints me, and this is exactly why we need community board members to be the conduit between the public and the council, and also to call our councillors to account if they are not listening or not performing well.
"This will be put out to the public for consultation.
"It is a way to remove localism and grassroots democracy if it is allowed to go ahead.
"Maybe our boards can do better, but without the ability to be part of the decision-making we have no influence.
"So maybe a review is a good thing to see how this grassroots group can be empowered to better support our communities."
Mayor K. Gurunathan said councils are required to review their representation arrangements at least every six years.
"Council is the voice of local people. Councillors must represent and balance a range of interests, so it is important our community feels they're represented fairly and effectively.
"Our current arrangements have been in place since 2004, so it's timely we take a fresh look to see if they remains fit for purpose. This involves looking again at our wards and boundaries, the number of councillors and whether they're elected locally or across the district, and whether we have community boards."
He said councillors had been working through this since early this year.
"We've seen the results of research and engagement with our community and considered a range of possible representation options. The results of public surveys, interviews and workshops that were undertaken earlier in the year indicated our community has mixed views about the ways our local democracy is working. Councillors are taking this feedback and advice on legislative requirements into consideration to develop an initial proposal which we'll consider at our next meeting, before going out to consultation with our community. We will look forward to hearing the views of the community and will maintain an open mind."
Under the Local Electoral Act 2001, councillors can put forward only one option for consultation. Following consultation, councillors will consider the community feedback and whether any changes are required before making a final decision in November. The final proposal will go to the Local Government Commission for a determination if there are any appeals or objections, or if the final proposal doesn't comply with the legislation in any way (such as meeting rules around the need for similar ratios of councillors to ward populations within 10 per cent).
The meeting agenda, council report and research results are available on the council website. Find out more at: www.kapiticoast.govt.nz/your-council/the-role-of-council/representation-review-2021
