Response 489118314

Back to Response listing

Submission Form

1. What is your name?

Name
Geoff Kreegher

2. Do you support the Council's initial proposal for representation arrangements for 2019?

Please select one item
Yes
Ticked No
Please tell us why
The representation review is for Council to assess its representation arrangements to ensure these are fair and effective to meet the communities’ needs and expectations. The review aligns with the purpose of local authorities to provide for democratic and effective local government (section 3, Local Government Act 2002). Fair – Democratic or Effective it is not. 33.6% of enrolled voters actually voted - Why? Confidence in Council decision making has gone down 24% since 2016. The current Council does not represent the voter. Voters take time and effort to submit or inform Council - do Council listen or take heed e.g.: Free Parking 82% of submissions said No–92% of comments on social media were negative. What did we get “Free’ parking at a cost of $1 million pa. 10 Year Plan Challenge 1 Borrowing to pay for everyday costs 48% supported keeping the rating system same as it was. Council increased rates 9.7% - introduced a UAGC. Challenge 3 Transport most selected option - 50% lower rate of 10%. What did Council do – endorsed the full Transport programme of $251m. Challenge 4 Investing in community infrastructure Over 84% did not think the 9 projects were the right mix. Council amended 8 projects deleted 1 and gave the Central Business Association $100,000 to activate the central city plan. Staff redacting submissions to the 10 Year Plan. Through the ‘back door’ initiated a train proposal for 170 people per day subsidised by the ratepayer without consultation. Just a few examples of why 66.4% of eligible voters do not vote. Council do not listen. No wards—elected members would be voted in ‘at large’, (by the whole of the city) are supported by: • Hamilton does not have clearly defined communities of interest • Hamilton residents use the whole of the city in their daily lives • Home to work movements (Census 2013) The reason to change to electing councillors ‘at large’ rather than through a ward system is to provide effective representation to Hamilton electors, reflecting the city has a relatively compact geographic area and that Hamilton’s communities of interest are not geographically distinct, rather they are spread across the city; Council’s stance on why to retain the two ward system is moot: How does it provide the public with reasonable access to councillors? As opposed to Councillors elected ‘at large’ How does it enable councillors to fairly represent their electoral areas and attend public meetings? Once elected, Councillors represent the City (as a whole) not electoral area How does it provide opportunity for a diverse range of candidates to stand for election when there are better candidates in the other ward but the voter is prevented from voting for them? The statement that the Waikato River remains a defining characteristic of the city and people’s sense of belonging is highly questionable. The majority of residents and ratepayers did not vote for any of the current Councillors – hardly fair representation or democratic. It is about fair representation – representation the operative term. The current Council is not representative – they do not listen to the very people they supposedly represent. Recommendation It is recommended that Council adopt ‘At Large’ (No Wards) system for electing councillors.

3. The Council will hear verbal submissions on Tuesday 9 October 2018. Do you want to speak about your submission at this meeting?

Please select one item
Ticked Yes
No