External consultants and lawyers appear to be the sole winners from the complaints process, earning, in most cases, thousands of dollars to investigate each complaint.
The total cost of the code of conduct complaints investigated externally cost ratepayers more than $180,000 in the past year.
Sure, that figure is a minuscule drop in the bucket of the $3.6 billion outlaid on general public services by councils but it doesn't account for the amount of time wasted.
Elected officials are placed there to manage $124 billion of our assets, to prudently make decisions on how 11 per cent of public spending is apportioned.
At least half of the complaints investigated in the past year - many made either by chief executives or their elected council colleagues - found no breach had been made. Or if it had, it was not material, so no further action was needed.
Reading between the lines, as often as not the complaints were frivolous or about some petty matter.
The example this sets for the staff and contractors employed in delivering the council objectives is appalling. It's often also a distraction and is a further cost in wasted time downstream. It also further diminishes the credibility of the entire organisation.
Meanwhile, councils are attempting to tackle mammoth tasks such as crumbling or inadequate infrastructure; prepare for the increasing risk of natural disasters; working with central government, iwi and stakeholders to address the increasing impact of environmental issues; preparing for the rapidly growing and ageing population; address the housing supply and quality; promote economic development; and support art and culture to uplift and improve the cultural well-being of all New Zealanders.
The infrastructure challenges alone are stretched across housing, building, transport, broadband, tourism-related, three waters and flood control.
With about 1600 elected members across almost 80 councils, charged with making important and sometimes far-reaching decisions, there are bound to be conflicts of opinion and clashes of personalities. But they are there to serve the communities which elected them, not to serve their own egos or to bully others.
Undoubtedly, some code of conduct complaints will be justified. Such cases are also an anathema among a body of people who have sought community backing for a position committed to public service. Such members need to get into line with proper and decent conduct or get out.
For the sake of all our stomachs, not to mention our hard-earned rates, councillors and board members need to put on their big person pants this year and get on with the business at hand.
