Agenda of Regional Council Meeting

HAWKE’S BAY REGIONAL COUNCIL

Thursday 25 October 2012

SUBJECT: Representation Review

Reason for Report

1. At the Regional Council meeting held on 14 December 2011, Council was advised of the need for a representation review prior to the 2013 Local Body elections, including the underlying statutory principles and requirements and the timeline to undertake this review.

2. At its meeting on 15 August 2012 Council completed the first stage of the representation review and determined its initial proposal by resolution:

“2. That Council adopts proposal 4 as the preferred Representation Arrangement for the Region; that being for nine councillors representing five constituencies.

2.1 Council will seek to retain the Wairoa constituency as a special community of interest, and also make application for Central Hawke’s Bay to be a special community of interest.

2.2 The proposed names and boundaries of each of the five proposed constituencies are:

2.2.1 Central Hawke’s Bay; the constituency boundary being the same as that for the Central Hawke’s Bay District Council area and apply for this to be a ‘community of interest’.

2.2.2 Hastings South (name to be confirmed); the constituency boundary being that area which encompasses the wards of Kahuranaki and Havelock North along with parts of Heretaunga within the Hastings District Council area.

2.2.3 Hastings North (name to be confirmed); the constituency boundaries being the area which encompasses the wards of Mohaka, Flaxmere, Hastings and most of Heretaunga within the Hastings District Council area, and area units within the Regional boundary belonging to Rangitikei and Taupo District councils.

2.2.4 Napier; the constituency boundary being the same as that for the Napier City Council area.

2.2.5 Wairoa; the constituency boundary being the same as that for the Wairoa District Council area and retaining the ‘community of interest’ for that area.”

3. Council is now required to consider all submissions received on its initial proposal, and advise by public notice the final proposed Representation Arrangements for the 2013 elections.

Background

4. Under legislation councils are required to review their representation every six years. Council has been discussing and considering this issue for the past nine months.

5. The relevant sections of legislation contained within the Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA) which set out the criteria for the review are:

5.1. A Regional Council is to consist of not fewer than 6 members nor more than 14 members (s.19D)

5.2. A region must be divided into constituencies for electoral purposes and that each constituency must elect at least one member of the Regional Council (s.19E).

6. In conducting the representation review a Regional Council must finally determine by resolution:

6.1. The proposed number of constituencies

6.2. The proposed name and the proposed boundaries of each constituency

6.3. The number of members proposed to be elected by the electors of each constituency.

7. In determining the requirement for effective representation and other factors in the determination of membership and basis of election of regional councils the Regional Council and, if involved, the Local Government Commission (the Commission), must ensure:

7.1. That the number and boundaries of constituencies will provide effective representation of communities of interest within the region

7.2. That constituency boundaries coincide with the boundaries of the current statistical meshblock areas determined by Statistics New Zealand and used for Parliamentary electoral purposes

7.3. That so far as is practicable constituency boundaries coincide with the boundaries of one or more territorial authority districts or the boundaries of wards.

8. The three factors Council needs to remember when deciding the final representation arrangements are:

8.1. Community of Interest – this is the area to which one feels a sense of belonging and to which one looks for social, service and economic support. Geographic features and the roading network can affect the sense of belonging to an area. The community of interest can often be identified by access to the goods and services needed for ordinary everyday existence.

8.2. Effective Representation – based on considering the identified community of interest. Accessibility, size and configuration of an area should be considered, i.e would the population have reasonable access to its elected member, and vice versa; would the member be able to effectively represent the views of their electoral subdivision; would the member be able to attend public meetings throughout their area and provide reasonable opportunities for their constituents to have face-to- face meetings.

8.3. Fair Representation – the population of each constituency, divided by the number of members to be elected by that constituency must produce a figure no more than 10% greater or smaller than the population of the region divided by the total number of elected members. Section 19V(3)(b) provides that if it is considered that effective representation of communities of interest requires a Regional Council to deviate from this it can, but the decision will be referred to the Commission for determination.

9. If Council considers that effective representation of communities of interest requires that membership is distributed between them in a way that does not comply with the +/- 10% requirement, then Council must refer that decision to the Commission.

Submissions

10. Public notice of Council’s resolution passed on 15 August 2012 was given on 18 August 2012. Seven submissions were received within the submission period, and are attached in full (see Attachments 1-7). Of the seven submissions received, three submitters requested to present their submissions verbally to Council. These submissions will be presented at:

9.05 am Hastings District Council

9.25 am Hastings District Rural Community Board

9.45 am Mr Alec Olsen

11. The submissions and the issues contained in them are summarised following.

Hastings District Council

12. The submitter proposes that the Hastings District be retained as much as possible as a distinct community of interest and be split along the recognised communities of interest (wards) into a Hastings Rural constituency made up of the wards of Heretaunga, Mohaka and Kahuranaki; and an Urban constituency made up of Hastings, Havelock North and Flaxmere wards plus specified adjacent meshblocks. The proposal is for 1 elected representative for the Rural constituency and 3 representatives for the Urban constituency.

Hastings District Rural Community Board

13. The submitter supports splitting the Hastings District into 2 constituencies, those being a Rural constituency encompassing the wards of Heretaunga, Mohaka and Kahuranaki represented by 1 Councillor and an Urban constituency encompassing the Hastings, Flaxmere and Havelock North wards plus specified adjacent meshblocks, represented by 3 Councillors.

Mr Alec Olsen

14. Mr Olsen requests re-creation of a ‘truly’ rural Hastings constituency, separate from Hastings, Flaxmere and Havelock North and supports the Federated Farmers submission which essentially mirrors the arrangements he suggests would best serve Hawke’s Bay.

Mr Kevin Rose

15. Mr Rose suggests that the constituencies as publicly notified as the initial proposal be named Ngaruroro (Hastings North) and Karamu (Hastings South).

Central Hawke’s Bay District Council

16. The submitter supports Council’s proposed representation arrangements as notified.

Wairoa District Council

17. The submitter supports Council’s proposed representation arrangements as notified.

Hawke’s Bay Federated Farmers

18. The submitter supports Council’s proposal to retain Wairoa as a community of interest, and to apply for ‘community of interest’ status for Central Hawke’s Bay; and proposes an amended five constituency arrangement to better provide fair and effective representation for rural communities; with an urban-rural split in Hastings rather than the North-South split proposed by Council.

Considerations and Process Timelines

19. Council must now consider the issues raised by the submitters and if it wishes to alter its 15 August 2012 resolution the following is allowed for in the Local Electoral Act 2001.

19.1. Under section 19O of the Act if the local authority’s final proposal is the same as its initial proposal, an appeal against it may be only be lodged by a person or organisation that made a submission on that initial proposal.

19.2. Under section 19P, if a local authority’s final proposal differs from its initial proposal then any person or organisation may lodge an objection to any elements of that final proposal, regardless of whether they made a submission on the initial proposal.

20. Because the final decision is the outcome of a participative process it is important that the final proposal either has a clear relationship to the initial proposal, or that any significant changes are the result of submissions on the initial proposal.

21. A final proposal which bears no relation to either the submissions on the initial proposal or the initial proposal itself is likely to be one on which the community has had no real opportunity to express views, and for that reason will generally be outside the statutory framework.

22. On the basis of the theme of the submissions received, and consideration of those matters that can potentially be addressed in one form or another, staff have prepared and attached an alternative resolution should Councillors decide to adopt this alternative Urban/Rural Hastings constituency split as proposed.

23. Whatever resolution is finally passed in regard to the number of constituencies, number of members, the proposed names and boundaries of constituencies, the resolution must state the reasons for any amendments made and the reason for any rejection of submissions received. This is to ensure that the public notice made under Section 19 N(2) of the Local Electoral Act accurately reflects the majority opinion of Councillors as part of their decision making process.

24. The final proposal must be publicly notified within six weeks of the closing of the submission period (Saturday 27 October), and if there are any objections from the public those appeals (close of public appeals period Tuesday 27 November) will go to the Local Government Commission for hearing and determination along with Council’s final proposal.

25. Regardless of whether any appeals are received, Council’s final proposed representation arrangements will be referred to the Local Government Commission for its determination as any arrangements that include ‘community of interest’ considerations must be determined by the Commission in accordance with LEA 19(V)(4). Staff intend to lodge Council’s final proposed Representation Arrangements, including any appeal documentation, by Friday 21 December 2012.

26. The timelines for representation matters are as follows.

Date	Action Required
By Mon 8/10/12 (or earlier) *HBRC 18 September*	Close of public submissions to proposed representation arrangements not less than one month after date of public notice [Sec 19N LEA]
By Mon 19/11/12 (or earlier) *HBRC 25 October* *HBRC 27 October*	Public submissions on proposed representation arrangements heard by local authority within 6 weeks of closing date for submissions [Sec 19N LEA] Public notice of ‘final’ representation arrangements following consideration of submissions within 6 weeks of closing date for submissions [Sec 19N LEA]
By Thurs 20/12/12 (or earlier) *HBRC 27 November*	Close of public appeals/objections to ‘final’ representation arrangements not less than one month after date of public notice [Secs 19O & 19P LEA]
By Tues 15/01/13 (or earlier) *HBRC 21 December*	Any appeals/ objections/ material on representation arrangements review to LGC [Sec 19Q LEA]
By Wed 10/04/13 (or earlier)	Determinations by LGC on representation arrangements review [Sec 19R LEA]
By Sat 11/05/13	Determination subject to appeal to High Court on a point of law (Schedule 5 Clause 4 LGA). Appeal must be lodged within one month of determination.

Decision Making Process

27. Once Council has made a decision on what the Representation Arrangement will be, that proposal will be subject to the consultative procedures under the Local Electoral Act (LEA) sections 19M and 19N, which include a full public notification process and an ultimate right of appeal to the Local Government Commission. Therefore the specific requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in respect to decision making are fully accounted for through the process specified in the LEA.

Recommendations

That, having considered the written and verbal submissions made on the Council's initial proposal, the Hawke's Bay Regional Council endorses its initial proposal for the Hawke's Bay Regional Council representation arrangements for the election to be held on 10 October 2013, which are:

1. Acknowledges the consultation procedures required for Representation Reviews under the Local Electoral Act (sections 19M and 19N).

2. Adopts proposal 4 as the preferred Representation Arrangement for the Region; that being for nine councillors representing five constituencies.

3 Council will seek to retain the Wairoa constituency as a special community of interest, and also make application for Central Hawke’s Bay to be a special community of interest.

4 The proposed names and boundaries of each of the five proposed constituencies as depicted on the map following are:

4.1 Central Hawke’s Bay; the constituency boundary being the same as that for the Central Hawke’s Bay District Council area and apply for this to be a ‘community of interest’.

4.2 Hastings South (name to be confirmed); the constituency boundary being that area which encompasses the wards of Kahuranaki and Havelock North along with parts of Heretaunga within the Hastings District Council area.

4.3 Hastings North (name to be confirmed); the constituency boundaries being the area which encompasses the wards of Mohaka, Flaxmere, Hastings and most of Heretaunga within the Hastings District Council area, and area units within the Regional boundary belonging to Rangitikei and Taupo District councils.

4.4 Napier; the constituency boundary being the same as that for the Napier City Council area.

4.5 Wairoa; the constituency boundary being the same as that for the Wairoa District Council area and retaining the ‘community of interest’ for that area.

5. The LEA s19V(2) population parameter requirements, once Wairoa and Central Hawke’s Bay are treated as a ‘community of interest’ become 155,270 – 8,430 (estimated Wairoa area population) – 13,430 (estimated Central Hawke’s Bay population) = 133,410 ÷ 7 (9 councillors less 1 representative each for Wairoa and Central Hawke’s Bay) = 19,059 per complying constituency. Taking the +/-10% into account, this requires each of the remaining three constituency’s number of electors to be within the range of 17,153 – 20,965 (+/- 10% of 19,059) as reflected in the following table.

Proposal 4 Population Statistics with Wairoa & CHB being ‘community of interest’

Name of Constituency	Number of Members	Population*	Population per Member	% Population Parameter
Central Hawke’s Bay	1	13,430	13,430	n/a
Hastings South	2	37,190	18,595	-2.4%
Hastings North	2	38,440	19,220	+0.8%
Napier	3	57,780	19,260	+1%
Wairoa	1	8,430	8,430	n/a
Regional Total	9	155,270

* based on 2011 rounded population estimates from the Government Statistician

6. The Wairoa constituency was accepted by the Local Government Commission in 2007 as a ‘community of interest’, with the size and diversity of the constituency and reasonable access to representation having been proved, and Council will seek to retain this status. Specifically, the Commission ruled:

6.1 “We first addressed the issue of the proposed Wairoa Constituency and its non-compliance with the +/- 10% rule. After carefully considering the points raised by the Council and also those made by the Mayor of Wairoa and the Wairoa Constituency Councillors, as set out earlier in this determination, we agree that a separate Wairoa Constituency is necessary to ensure effective representation of this community of interest. In summary we agree that:

· Wairoa has a community of interest distinct from the rest of the region, both physically and socio-economically, and this presents particular challenges for community consultation and provision of services;

· The physical realities of the area give rise to particular issues not experienced elsewhere including hill country erosion, pressure on coastal development, pest management, transport infrastructure, biodiversity protection, wetland enhancement, flooding and other natural hazards;

· Effective representation is most unlikely to be achieved by merging Wairoa into another constituency in order to comply with the +/- 10% rule as this would result in a very large area (70% of the land area of the region) with few commonalities of interest and still eligible for only one councillor;

· Effective representation would be compromised in terms of both access to a councillor and representation of the diversity of the constituency; and

· The demands on a councillor servicing an enlarged area would be unreasonable.”

7. In respect to the Central Hawke’s Bay constituency, Council believes there is a case for applying for a distinct ‘community of interest’ status, and that the size of the constituency would compromise reasonable access of the electors to an elected member for this area if enlarged to include areas of Hastings District to meet the +/-10% rule. The elected member would be unlikely to realistically be able to attend public meetings throughout the area and provide reasonable opportunities for constituents to have face to face meetings due to long distances having to be travelled given the size of the constituency required to meet the population parameters.

7.1 The physical realities of the area give rise to particular issues including hill country erosion, pressure on coastal development, biodiversity protection, flooding and other natural hazards. Several communities suffered extensive damage in the 2011 Easter floods and recovery work continues 18 months later.

7.2 In addition to the physical challenges associated with that area, the community is also the site for the proposed Ruataniwha Water Storage Dam, and should this proceed will be faced with land use intensification challenges not faced elsewhere in the Region.

Leeanne Hooper

Governance & Corporate Administration Manager

Carol Gilbertson

Electoral Officer

Paul Drury

Group Manager

Corporate Services

Attachment/s

1 View	Hastings District Council Submission
2 View	Hastings District Rural Community Board Submission
3 View	Hawke's Bay Federated Farmers Submission
4 View	Mr Alec Olsen Submission
5 View	Mr Kevin Rose Submission
6 View	Central Hawke's Bay District Council Submission
7 View	Wairoa District Council Submission
8 View	Alternative Resolutions

Alternative Resolutions

Attachment 8

Alternative Resolutions for Proposal 6

Recommendations

That, having considered the written and verbal submissions made on the Council's initial proposal, the Hawke's Bay Regional Council adopts the following preferred Representation Arrangement for the election to be held on 10 October 2013.

1. Nine Councillors representing 5 constituencies. The Wairoa constituency status as a special community of interest will be retained, and Council will apply for Central Hawke’s Bay to be a special community of interest. After consideration of the key factors of community of interest, effective representation of communities of interest and fair representation for the Hastings District Council specifically, Council has split the Hastings District into predominantly urban and predominantly rural constituencies.

2. The proposed names and boundaries of each of the five proposed constituencies as depicted on the map following are:

2.1 Central Hawke’s Bay; the constituency boundary being the same as that for the Central Hawke’s Bay District Council area and apply for this to be a ‘community of interest’.

2.2 Hastings Urban; the constituency boundary being that area which encompasses the wards of Hastings, Flaxmere and Havelock North and adjacent area units with community of interest commonalities around the three urban wards within the Hastings District Council area.

2.3 Hastings Rural; the constituency boundaries being the area which encompasses the wards of Heretaunga, Kahuranaki, and Mohaka within the Hastings District Council area, as well as area units within the Regional boundary belonging to Rangitikei and Taupo District councils.

2.4 Napier; the constituency boundary being the same as that for the Napier City Council area.

2.5 Wairoa; the constituency boundary being the same as that for the Wairoa District Council area and retaining the ‘community of interest’ for that area.

Map to be inserted following Council’s decision.

3. The LEA s19V(2) population parameter requirements, once Wairoa and Central Hawke’s Bay are treated as a ‘community of interest’ become 155,270 – 8,430 (estimated Wairoa area population) – 13,430 (estimated Central Hawke’s Bay population) = 133,410 ÷ 7 (9 councillors less 1 representative each for Wairoa and Central Hawke’s Bay) = 19,059 per complying constituency. Taking the +/-10% into account, this requires each of the remaining three constituency’s number of electors to be within the range of 17,153 – 20,965 (+/- 10% of 19,059) as reflected in following table.

Population Statistics with Wairoa & CHB being ‘community of interest’

Name of Constituency	Number of Members	Population*	Population per Member	% Population Parameter
Central Hawke’s Bay	1	13,430	13,430	n/a
Hastings Urban	3	56,600	18,867	-1%
Hastings Rural	1	19,030	19,030	-0.005%
Napier	3	57,780	19,260	+1%
Wairoa	1	8,430	8,430	n/a
Regional Total	9	155,270

* based on 2011 rounded population estimates from the Government Statistician

4. The Wairoa constituency was accepted by the Local Government Commission in 2007 as a ‘community of interest’, with the size and diversity of the constituency and reasonable access to representation having been proved, and Council will seek to retain this status. Specifically, the Commission ruled:

4.1 “We first addressed the issue of the proposed Wairoa Constituency and its non-compliance with the +/- 10% rule. After carefully considering the points raised by the Council and also those made by the Mayor of Wairoa and the Wairoa Constituency Councillors, as set out earlier in this determination, we agree that a separate Wairoa Constituency is necessary to ensure effective representation of this community of interest. In summary we agree that:

· Effective representation would be compromised in terms of both access to a councillor and representation of the diversity of the constituency; and

· The demands on a councillor servicing an enlarged area would be unreasonable.”

5. In respect to the Central Hawke’s Bay constituency, Council believes there is a case for applying for a distinct ‘community of interest’ status, and that the size of the constituency would compromise reasonable access of the electors to an elected member for this area if enlarged to include areas of Hastings District to meet the +/-10% rule. The elected member would be unlikely to realistically be able to attend public meetings throughout the area and provide reasonable opportunities for constituents to have face to face meetings due to long distances having to be travelled given the size of the constituency required to meet the population parameters.

5.1 The physical realities of the area give rise to particular issues including hill country erosion, pressure on coastal development, biodiversity protection, flooding and other natural hazards. Several communities suffered extensive damage in the 2011 Easter floods and recovery work continues 18 months later.

5.2 In addition to the physical challenges associated with that area, the community is also the site for the proposed Ruataniwha Water Storage Dam, and should this proceed will be faced with land use intensification challenges not faced elsewhere in the Region.

6. Council has amended its initial proposal for the following reasons.

6.1 to be inserted at the meeting if required