Tag: taupo

Friday Foibles: One size fits all?

29 August 2025

Okay Councillor Duncan reporting in again, and for at least another month and a bit I still get to use that title.  Just one more Council meeting to go in September, and I will be so glad to see the backside of it.  That’s not saying I don’t want to be re-elected, but we need some sweeping changes alright if I am even going to consider sticking around another three years.

There is not much happening on the Council front right now because it is the silly election season time, and because of that you can’t expect to get any sensible decisions in Council Chambers. I can tell one or two of them are nervous for their political futures, but as for myself – I can’t imagine why anybody would want to do this job without a very good reason. If my time is up then so be it, I gave it my best. 

Okay so this week we have:  

Free pass, or am I just being an ass? On Tuesday Council voted to approve the Notification of some District Plan changes, the most notable being the introduction of new Maori Purpose Zones (MPZ’s).  I posted on Monday about my dissatisfaction with the way this seemingly race-based planning tool is being railroaded in almost unannounced and voiced this during the meeting (watch it here – please ignore any gaslighting by colleagues that this has all been well discussed before because it has not, and also note microphone management by the Chair). 

I made the point that some other Councils have considered other planning tools to assist development for communally owned land which is hard for the owners to get finance, but it was portrayed that MPZ are a one size that fits all, and that we needn’t bother about legislative requirements of the Local Government Act which requires all practicable solutions be explored and presented. To illustrate, below is a snippet from ChatGPT after I asked it for alternatives:

This matter of elected members being presented with all practicable options before making a decision was a topic which I tabled a Notice of Motion in September 2024, when I wanted Councillors to simply acknowledge an important court case from Wellington so as to ensure this sort of thing always happens. Intriguingly not one of the other elected members were supportive at the time, and the pushback included that it seemingly always happens here anyway. I think this MPZ example clearly shows that it doesn’t.

That a precedent like this for the district gets such flippant attention, to me just shows how much elected members get led by the nose, and how much of a lubricant is anything around here with the label ‘Maori’ on it.    I genuinely do support the intention, but we owe it to the public, and to tangata whenua, to consider all the available tools for the job and not just a one size fits all solution. Apart from all that, what if we were talking: Chinese Purpose Zones?

Mayoral summary spot on: I reckon this summary of the Mayoral race candidates by local Sophie M Smith is a fairly accurate one and very much worth a read.

Credit Card mania, or all just part of the job?  Sophie M Smith’s second piece of investigative work this week was around asserted mischievous credit card use by our intrepid Mayor of Taupo David Trewavas.  I cannot confirm or deny any of the details, but I can confirm elected members have not been formally briefed about it.   

Worship your Mayor? The third of Sophie M Smith’s prodigious output this week was about picking a Mayor. In my time as Councillor this last term, I reckon it might just as well have been Mayor David Trewavas and his Deputy Kevin Taylor running the place, because on any matters of true importance they could invariably be relied upon to shut down any voices of dissent especially my own. As Chairpersons they have the discretion and authority to do this under the Standing Orders of meetings, and there is very little one can do about it. Restoring democracy in Council Chambers is my one of my first priorities if elected, but that will not happen unless the leadership does change. So I really do hope that voters use their brains and not just their heart, otherwise there’s not really much point in having elections, is there?

Maori Wards debate ramping up, or down?  Chris Marshall writes an interesting take on the Maori Ward question, including a spiel by sitting Maori Ward Councillor Danny Loughlin (recall he is also the TMTB Director who didn’t declare any conflicted interest in the proposed JMA partnership deal between TMTB and Council ). I find it interesting that Ngati Tuwharetoa significant landholdings get mentioned in this article, implying it justifies greater democratic representation. So does that mean if Elon Musk bought up large around here, he would get his own ward too?

In the article Councillor Loughlin says: “What our community did get was a whole lot of skills, knowledge and experience that were sorely lacking at the council table. The network and connections that we bring is needed when dealing with complex issues like wastewater in Nukuhau and Tūrangi, expiring landfill consents and a second bridge crossing“. In the past three years I haven’t noticed a whole lot of that happening which couldn’t have happened anyway, but Danny is right in further saying that voters should be looking at the Council’s track record rather than just listening to what politicians say – if you are a ratepayer, I say that you only need to have a look at your skyrocketing rates bills to see that.

Better democracy happens when people actually turn up to vote, and care about who they vote for. I think Maori wards are a much second best to that.

Also of note, it looks like a Hobson’s Pledge campaign against Maori Wards has kicked off.

Mayor’s not talking tripe: Listen to this interview with Whanganui Mayor Andrew Tripe who entered politics straight into the top job.  He shows it can be done if you have the appropriate skills and background – and in fact a lack of institutional experience may even be helpful. Whanganui managed the lowest rates increase in the country at around just 2%, and he managed it via things like reducing his executive team, restructuring to improve efficiency, and seeking alternative funding sources.  Mention was also made of a previous Mayor demanding a CEO depart if they couldn’t deliver a zero rates increase, and apparently the resignation letter was received soon after. So Mayors are not just one voice at the table after all – they do have clout.

Our cowardly leaders: Following the refusal of our honoured Sir & Dame leaders to front up to the Royal Commission enquiry, the Voices for Freedom organisation have released a free copy of their report about how we were all duped during covid.  Just in case anybody was thinking of it, please don’t nominate me for a knighthood because Hell will freeze over before I ever accept one of those. 

Isn’t that what you call an Indian giver? Ngati Tuwharetoa paramount chief Ariki Tuma Te Heuheu Tukino VIII wants the mountain back

Mirror on the wall: Candidate Zoran Rakovic who is standing for Selwyn District is my kind of guy who blends an eloquent writing style with laced humour.  I reckon we need more people like him in local government, and my advice is to get them while you can.

Student Fight back and wins: An Auckland University law student compiled over 680 pages of evidence to win a judicial review case against Auckland Transport (AT) for installed a series of speed humps and because did not properly justify why they would not ‘unduly impede vehicular traffic’.  I think this just goes to show the extraordinary effort required to push back on a Council decision, and also that the law is no panacea for justice. This judicial review established that there was some predetermined thinking going on, but did not adjudicate on whether the decision to install these raised platforms was incorrect. The reality is that we need elected representatives who can think for themselves, who can push back on Council staff with the hard questions before the decision gets made and not after.   

Conduct unbecoming? There was a recent code of conduct complaint against an elected member of Taupo District Council following an incident at a committee meeting which was not audio-visual recorded.  A lawyer was apparently involved, but probably not a very independent one because as far as I can tell there was grounds for grievance. More than anything else though, this episode should highlight for the sake of everybody’s protection, the importance of audio-visual recording any formal Council meetings which include elected members. This is something which I advocated to happen last September in a tabled Notice of Motion but unfortunately could garner not even a seconder let alone vote of support. This needs to change, because to have accountability we also need to have visibility.

Pssst: There was a confidential item 6.2 on Tuesday Council meeting entitled Proposed Commercial Land Sale at 155 Napier Road (which didn’t seem to me to justify secrecy given it is public land at stake). But in case the interested party is listening: don’t expect to get a sensible answer in as silly an election season as this, so perhaps try again after October.

Duncandoestaupo insurance: It has occurred to me that fickle Facebook is capable of cancelling me at any moment and for no legitimate reason, so if you haven’t already please press the subscribe button at the bottom of this page to cover that eventuality and not risk missing out in the crucial weeks ahead.

Friday reality check: Your average government minister be like:

Plan Change 47: Māori Zones or Nothing Else?

25 August 2025

Tomorrow, Tuesday 26 August from 1pm, your elected members of Taupō District Council will vote on a bundle of plan changes – some necessary and worthwhile, others quietly political.

One of them, Plan Change 47, proposes a new ‘Māori Purpose Zone’ – a separate planning framework for Māori land. Meeting agendas can be found here, and I will tell you now that tomorrows is a bit of a long read.

Let me be clear: I support removing barriers to Māori development. But I do not support doing so by bypassing public scrutiny, skipping alternatives, or building a parallel zoning regime.

Here’s the deal:

1️⃣ No other options – such as planning overlays or targeted infrastructure support (e.g. deferred Development Contributions)- have been presented to Councillors. That breaches Section 77 of the Local Government Act, which requires all practicable alternatives to be considered.

2️⃣ No exemption has been granted by the relevant government Minister to proceed. Yet Council is voting to proceed on it anyway – assuming legal approval will magically follow, or that it’ll be politically awkward to reverse later.

3️⃣ It’s being marketed as a ‘housing initiative’. But this is really about changing how planning rules apply based on group identity – not about increasing public housing, affordability, or urban supply.

Sound familiar?

Just like with the Joint Management Agreement (JMA) debate, elected members and the public are being told one thing – while staff quietly push something else entirely. Your elected members have had no workshops or meetings to properly discuss, and it is being bundled up with a pile of other stuff to help get it through.

Yes, this one will go out for public consultation – and that’s the right step.
But: Will you be told the full story?
And when submissions roll in: Will anyone actually listen?

I’m not here to make noise for the sake of it, but my instincts are telling me this is once again being railroaded. And in my experience of these particular Council Chambers, that often means there’s no room made for dissent, and no interest in real debate. Funny how all that changed when there was a lot of people in the room for the JMA decision a few weeks ago.

This isn’t about race. It’s about transparency, process, and one law for all. Isn’t that what we all want?

Addendum: For those interested, it looks like the Māori Purpose Zone was in fact discussed for about five minutes at a sparsely attended Council workshop on 27 May 2025. You can watch the recording here to see how it was presented.

Friday Punchline: Into the Maelstrom

22 August 2025

Councillor Duncan reporting in again, and has anybody noticed there is an election happening in October?  A recent poll I came across on Facebook seemed to indicate John Funnell and Zane Cozens as the current frontrunners, which is quite a turnaround if it’s true (okay, so it will exclude youngsters and oldsters who never touch Facebook).  Because this town has been stuck on David Trewavas for so long it is hard for some of us to imagine having anybody else at the helm, just like it felt when I was a kid with Prime Minister Robert Muldoon.  But just like Taupo weather is so much less exciting than near the coast, I think people here have been way too conservative too long for our own good.  Local government affects everyone, and it is about time this fact gets realised.

This week we have:

Censorship on the field: If you missed my Tuesday post on the absurd Facebook censoring of cutting local political satire, see it here. Because if you want it unfiltered, you’re just gonna have to keep on coming on back to this page.

Stuck with it, or steady as she goes? This happened a several months ago now, and perhaps I just wasn’t looking hard enough but I didn’t see mention of it elsewhere.   Anyway the current CEO of Taupo District Council Julie Gardyne had her contract renewed for another two years starting around July 2026.  This was another one of those decisions of elected members made behind closed doors (this time legitimately because it was an employment matter), but I can tell you the vote was definitely not unanimous.  Irrespective of performance, I objected on the basis that an incoming Council should be given that prerogative and not the current, and at very most the contract extension should have been for no more than six months to let the incoming Council settle down and decide.  But instead it looks like we are stuck with an expensive severance package if any change is so desired, so if that comes to pass then you can thank your current batch of more conservative Councillors. 

Overpaid or under-appreciated? While we are on this subject of our most well-paid of public servants, The Taxpayers Union did a recent Facebook post and also published a Rich List for comparison of CEO salaries around the country.  My own thoughts about this are somewhat ambivalent.  On the one hand, I think the elevation in status and authority of what pre-1989 was effectively just the Town Clerk, is a factor why costs to ratepayer consumers have escalated.  On the other hand, I know of private business owners in my own field who earn much more and for possibly also much less hassle (note: I am not one of those by a very long shot).

GEYSER of opportunity: Interested in investing to benefit local worthy causes of your choice?   Look no further than the GEYSER Community Foundation, which I attended their AGM at the Cosmopolitan Club on Tuesday.  I have never been much involved or even interested in community fundraising, let alone attending an AGM for one.  But this outfit came across as really quite interesting – they don’t just get the money and give it away like most charities and Council do, they invest the capital and give away only a portion of the profits (around 3% currently, but they are aiming for 4%).  They cover the Rotorua, Taupo and also Murupara districts, and last year some 20% of the $234K was distributed to Taupo and Turangi in all sorts of local projects from helping out disabled kids with their music lessons to who knows what.  Anyway, if you are interested in sustainable local investment or even if you want to apply for a grant yourself, they seem like a bunch of smart people and I suggest you give them a call.

Nobby bows down: PLATFORM interviews retiring Mayor of Invergargill Nobby Clark on the widespread problem of leadership vacuum and staff leading elected members through the nose – absolutely relevant to here.

Maori Wards anyone? Someone put me onto this brief interview as a case for Maori Wards, but I have to say it is far convincing.  In addition, a movement called Common Grace Aotearoa is now calling Māori wards a ‘biblical issue’, and I’ve even heard them frame the Treaty before as a sacred covenant. I’m a believer myself and accept that religion and politics do mix, but let’s be clear: the Treaty is a political document, not scripture. Councils are bound by statute, not theology. And as the book of James should remind us, faith without works is dead – the real test for Māori wards isn’t whether they can be justified from the Bible, it’s whether they actually deliver accountability and effectiveness in Council. On the other side of the argument, I find this account here with an analogy to Europe before the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 to be the more compelling. In any case, I personally think in this district that Māori wards are a trivial red herring compared to the broken democracy we have going on right now under the current leadership.

Sensible Speed Limits?   You may have noticed that some State Highway One speed limits between Taupō and Tūrangi were raised a few months ago. In a some locations that may make sense, but I seriously question the lifting from 60 km/hr to 100 km/hr outside Motutere campground which seems unsafe and will likely need revisiting. What’s more concerning is that Council’s ‘submission’ on the changes, signed off by the Deputy Mayor, was only shown to the rest of elected members after it went in. In my view, if we want central government agencies like NZTA to take us seriously, we need to present a reasoned case backed by hard evidence including things like safety data.  Otherwise it’s just advocacy without substance, and too easy to get flipped off.

Liability shared or liability averted? This RNZ interview with a lawyer representing Councils is an interesting take on the governments move to change the Building Act. I am not sure if this will help consumers or not, because it sounds like insurance costs could skyrocket.

Who is really at the controls anyway?  Southland District Councillor Jaspreet Boropai gives a five minute rundown of just what our leaders are prepared to give away on your behalf

Trust your Council? “Only 30% of Kiwis trusted council decision-making, and that was in 2020” – so says Erika Harvey on RCR in this half hour interview.

Anyone have a fence?  I have some election billboards still looking for a home, so if you support me and have a fence which people look at then please get in touch.

Friday Funny from The Onion:  Nowadays news on TV be like…(WARNING: includes some graphic language)

By the way, you are welcome to add your comments and discussion on the page below. Please keep it respectful, relevant, and constructive. First-time comments are held for approval to keep spam out – after that, your posts will appear automatically. Thanks for adding to the conversation!

Censorship on the Field

19 August 2025

Last week, a satirical rugby-themed meme about the JMA decision vanished from Facebook –  and with it, the entire Lake Taupo account that posted it. For the record: I don’t know who they are.

The meme showed three Taupo District Council councillors in a rugby maul, ‘driving the JMA upfield’.  No swearing, no threats – just political lampooning of the kind magazines like Punch had been doing for nearly 200 years.

So why did it disappear? Not because it broke NZ law, or even any of Facebook’s own rules. More likely:

  • Moderators in California couldn’t tell satire from ‘harassment’.
  • A couple of complaints reframed it as a personal attack instead of political criticism.
  • Facebook’s system defaults to ‘remove first, maybe review later’ – but small-town politics 6000 miles away rarely gets that ‘later’.

That’s the danger. In the middle of a local election that is turning out to be quite interesting, controversial but lawful political speech can be erased with a click – leaving voters with a sanitised version of reality. And don’t get me started on our local Facebook community groups, where moderators ban and delete posts and comments as they please (is it surprising that several months ago I was inexpicably banned from the Tūrangi Noticeboard, whose admin just happens to be partnered with a Mayoral candidate?)

To prove the point, I’m reposting the meme above and this time with harmless cartoon faces, alongside it a Punch cartoon from the 1870s. A reminder that lampooning those in power is a sign of a healthy democracy, not a threat to it.

So if you want uncensored local coverage, stop relying on social media’s shifting rules and sign up for my weekly updates in the below subscription box.
No algorithms. No sudden deletions. No California filter. Just Taupō politics, as it really is.

And yes – if you’ve got satirical material worth sharing, please send it my way, and if it’s sharp enough I’ll post it. Democracy and this place called Taupo need more humour, not less of it. Because you know, that’s what life is also about.

Friday Wrap – This Council is Broken

15 August 2025

Councillor Duncan here once again, and now we’re heading into the front end of the election campaign some new faces are starting to appear. One of them, Māori ward candidate Wahine Murch, is calling for a revolution in democracy, governance, and leadership. I may not agree with her on everything, but on this point we’re aligned – this Council is a poor imitation of what it is meant to be for the people it purports to represent, and it has been going on for way too long. It is broken and needs to be rescued.

But talk is cheap, and especially at election time. Belief in good ideas is one thing – delivering under pressure is another. Voters should ask candidates, and especially incumbents who should have been evidencing this to you already: When did you last hold your ground against determined opposition? When did you stand apart from the herd? Walking the talk is harder than it looks, and if you dislike playground politics, you may dislike the reality of local government even more.

Meanwhile, Council is in near-hibernation because our illustrious Mayor apparently finds it too uncomfortable to meet and talk about any issues before the election. Still, a few things are going on:

Councillor Duncan speaks out – Here is my interview with Erica Harvey of Tauranga based Lobby For Good covers how local government protects itself from scrutiny – from both the public and elected members put in there to govern.

JMA sentiments continue to disturb – This document sent to me by a constituent claims ~90% public opposition to the JMA was ignored. I can’t verify the author or data, but the gap between public concern and Council action is clear enough – and a good reason to keep pressing candidates on this. Oh, and we just have to make mention a very special Facebook post with the graphic below by an anonymous identity known as Lake Taupo which shows how much fun AI can be. However, it is quite apparent that some person(s) has reported it to Facebook as a rule breach (which it isn’t, because these are public figures and it is satire), because yesterday afternoon the Lake Taupo identity was deleted. I will probably do a fuller post about this next week, but let me tell you that censorship of that kind is one of the most insidious enemies of your local democracy and we should all be abhorring it. A California based company like Facebook cannot be relied upon to tell the difference.

Kaipara kicks back to the Treaty – Kaipara District Council has adopted an independent legal opinion on Māori obligations that avoids locking in governance  ‘partnerships’ not required by law, and some people aren’t very happy about it. In the past I have questioned some of the terminology in Taupō District Councils own planning documents, but have been abruptly flipped off with comments like: ‘go read some history’. It is quite clear to me now that statements in the Long Term Plan such as ‘Taupō District Council is committed to meeting its statutory Tiriti O Waitangi obligations and acknowledges partnership as the basis of Te Tiriti’ are there by political choice and not any legal necessity. Now that Kaipara has demonstrated that Councils can meet obligations without embedding partnerships into governance, I believe we should revisit these policies to reflect the law and the will of the whole community – and this has clear relevance to things like the proposed JMA partnership deal with Tūwharetoa Maori Trust Board.

Local government under the microscope – Management consultant Kathryn Ennis-Carter offers us a blunt assessment of why change is urgently needed. Worth a listen, especially for any newbie candidates before they get thrown in the deep end.

Signs of silliness – New signs at Five Mile Bay remind people it’s illegal to drive on a footpath, which it always has been. Yet despite a five-page staff paper in May to justify why the signs are needed, people still do it – just amazing, isn’t it? Anyway if you come across such activity and you don’t like it happening, please just report it to the Police.

Roundabouts right, or roundabouts wrong?  Someone asked me about the two Council planned roundabouts the other day, and do they really have to be so expensive at $1.6 M and $3M apiece? The short answer is: No they don’t. To put into context, when I was a Council engineer at Waitakere City pop. 300K, I was in charge of an annual safety budget approx. $2M (2025 dollars) from which we would get at least a dozen projects including at least a few of this nature. Because civil engineering infrastructure like this contribute a mighty portion of Council debt, it is important to employ staff who really know their stuff, and I can’t help but also think that perhaps tools like rates caps would better motivate some lateral thinking.

Pukenamu pushes back – while we’re on the subject of roundabouts, the Environment Court has set a 9th September hearing date for constituent Ivan Jones’ challenge to the Pukenamu Rd roundabout. Back in January I called this exercise a $300K harassment of a residential street — and if it proceeds, it’s being submitted straight to the Taxpayers’ Union Jonesie Awards as an example of wasteful spending.

DIA financial snapshot – The Department of Internal Affairs has just released a set of financial metrics comparing councils nationwide. One figure that stands out for Taupō District Council is our revenue-to-operating-expenses ratio, which has dropped from 121% in 2022 to just 93% in 2024. In plain English, that would appear to mean that we’ve gone from a healthy surplus to barely breaking even – with not much buffer for unexpected costs. At election time, that should make you ask whether the current spending mix is sustainable, or whether we’re quietly setting ourselves up for either more debt or more rates hikes – yet one more argument for rates caps.

Taupo Airport rejig shelved – last month or so an initiative to change Taupo Airport to a full Council Control Organisation (CCO) with independent directors was squashed by several elected members including the Deputy Mayor even before they got to read the 95% prepared staff paper, I say quite transparently because it was felt that the predicted controversy might compromise their chances of getting re-elected. Yes kiddies that is how things work in this town, and I bet those same elected members are now wishing they did the same for the JMA.

Berms and bureaucracy – not that we are so short of space in the Taupo region and the soil is pretty awful anyway, but I think this Aucklander who took on the bureaucracy of Auckland Council to plant a garden on Council berm deserves a medal.  After all if you are expected to maintain it, why can’t you choose what grows there?

Fridays flippant fancy: Why can’t we be more like the French?

Friday Council Circus – Purple Sky Who Can Deny

8 August 2025

Councillor Duncan reporting again, this week we have:

JMA keeps on giving: Earlier in the week there was my JMA debrief, and here is the latest Duncan Garner interview with Christine Rankin on the hospital pass to the next Council along with a message from promising Mangakino electorate hopeful Hope Woodward. I believe this will remain a live election issue, and choose to believe that the majority of voters will act wisely if they are properly informed. Around here that hasn’t been happening for quite some time now, so I hope this JMA saga will be a blessing in disguise for some change to really happen.

Conflicted or conflated interests? An interesting blog put out by local Sophie Smith is inferring some conflicted interests with regard to Taupo District Councillors Danny Loughlin and Yvonne Westerman. Now this is a topic I have come to recognise as quite a grey area indeed. As far as I can tell, the only practical way that non-declared conflicts of interest for elected members get dealt with is: (i) by way of legal hindsight e.g. expensive judicial review; (ii) by way of independent legal foresight; or (iii) public humiliation to exert influence at the next election. On that note, I have submitted a complaint to the Auditor-General to investigate breach of conflict-of-interest obligations with regard to Councillor Danny Loughlin, who despite being a significant party to both sides of the JMA agreement did not recuse himself from the voting. Even though he declared himself not conflicted, just because I say the sky is purple doesn’t make it true either.

Road cone hotline: yes you heard that right, if you spot excessive road cone use anywhere in New Zealand there is now a hotline you can now call to make things right. So don’t be afraid to dob in Taupo District Council or NZTA for wasting your time and money.

Join the dots for your own Council: Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) has just released its long awaited financial metrics for you to be able to compare with other Councils around the country.  I haven’t looked at them yet and am no financial genius anyway, but there will be people out there giving it a crack – so why not have a go yourself?

Conspiracy to take over local government? For a good laugh, you might like to read this attempted hit piece on freedom movement tainted electoral hopefuls from the mainstream media that reads more like a campaign endorsement to me.

Need more money or just wiser decision-making? A new July 2025 report by consultants Martin Jenkins confirms what many locals already suspect: New Zealand’s councils are chronically underfunded compared to their international counterparts. While the report recommends more flexible financing tools and debt options, the real takeaway is this – councils are being asked to do more with less, often without telling the public what trade-offs are on the table. So now more than ever, if local government is to truly serve local people, we need stronger democratic guardrails, greater public input, and clearer political accountability. Did we see any of that during the recent JMA debacle?

Public forums for all to see?  I should probably mention that it is not normal for public forums at Taupo District Council to be recorded for public viewing as happens at many if not most other Councils in New Zealand. I believe it should be standard practice and have tried to argue the case before, but for the public forum at last weeks Council JMA meeting I made a specific request through the Mayor for this to happen. I think everyone deserves the same opportunity not just mayoral candidates or ex-CEO’s, and would like the practice to become standard. Because your voice matters too.

If you want to receive these updates or want others to also receive them, don’t forget to press the subscribe button below and do tell others to do the same.

Friday Art Corner: Truth Coming Out of Her Well by Jean-Léon Gérôme. To further explain: sometimes truth can offend and truth can hurt (that’s what the whip is for).

JMA Debrief

6 August 2025

The highly anticipated Council meeting to decide the fate of the draft Joint Management Agreement (JMA) was held last Thursday 31 July. The outcome – though not final- marks a critical juncture in what has become an increasingly controversial and politicised process.

It also draws a line in the sand for voters: how seriously do your current elected members take representative democracy? Based on the results, for many of them it is quite clearly: not very.

Decision: Deferment to the Next Council

After a packed and emotionally charged meeting, Council narrowly voted for Option 4: to defer the JMA decision to the incoming Council after the October election. This avoided immediate ratification of a flawed agreement, but failed to include any binding conditions. Therefore the door remains wide open for the next Council to proceed without public consultation or legal review.

A motion to make public consultation compulsory was supported only by Councillors Campbell, Rankin, Shepherd, Greenslade and Leonard – and opposed by Taylor, Williamson, Loughlin, Fletcher, Westerman, and Mayor Trewavas. Democracy lost that vote – so please take note.

The final votes on Option 4:

  • For deferment (Option 4): Mayor Trewavas, Councillors Campbell, Shepherd, Rankin, Greenslade & Leonard
  • Against (preferring adoption now): Councillors Taylor, Loughlin, Fletcher, Westerman & Williamson

The Strategic Dance of Deferral

Let’s be blunt: several councillors clearly voted strategically ahead of the election. For example:

The Mayor, who has consistently defended the JMA, now claims he voted to defer merely in order to ‘address public confusion’. Given that his was a deciding vote we can be grateful that expressed public wishes were at least heeded, but to me that just comes across as damage control and not wise or firm leadership.

The Deputy Mayor, who tabled Option 4 as his own idea to the rest of elected members just one week earlier, subsequently voted against it. That action seems less one of principle and more like election optics.

So can we please recognise that this decision wasn’t just about governance – it was also about some people hedging their bets for October.

Conflict of Interest – Councillor Danny Loughlin

Equally troubling was the participation of Councillor Danny Loughlin – a current Board Member of the Tūwharetoa Māori Trust Board, which is one half of the JMA agreement. Despite this fairly apparent non-financial conflict of interest, Councillor Loughlin did not recuse himself.

In the week or so leading to the vote, I requested two things from the CEO:

  1. That legal advice be provided in advance regarding potential conflict of interest issues of elected members; and
  2. That legal representation be present at the meeting if needed.

Both were refused, although I recently discovered that we did indeed have a Council lawyer present at the meeting (who didn’t pipe in to answer any questions).

Under the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968, Councillor Loughlin’s dual governance role appears to breach both ethical norms and legal expectations. Public trust in Council depends on both the appearance and reality of impartiality. This was neither.

Formal letters of complaint have now been submitted by myself to the CEO and Auditor-General, seeking a full investigation.

Legal Advice or Legal Disguise?

During the meeting I also did motion for an additional clause to be added to Option 4, so that Council:

“Commissions an independent legal review of the draft JMA and makes it publicly available, with particular focus on:

(i) Conflicts of interest;

(ii) Legal implications of the expanded scope (LakeTaupō and ‘Further Matters’); and

(iii) Compatibility with national legislative changes including the RMA freeze“.

Perhaps confusing things though and a reason this motion did not receive support from any other elected members, earlier in the meeting a supposedly independent legal review from Buddle Findlay partner Paul Beverley was referenced in absentia. This previously unmentioned document was subsequently found to be a single-page memo only, which confirmed the JMA’s compliance with statutory requirements – but said nothing about risk, process integrity, or governance exposure. It was inferred in the meeting as ‘independent legal advice’ – but in practical terms functions more as a superficial legal cover than actual legal review.

It has now been confirmed that two law firms advised Council throughout this process: Buddle Findlay supported the internal drafting and negotiation of the JMA, while Simpson Grierson provided advice on the ‘assessment of significance and engagement’ – in other words, justifying why no public consultation was legally required. Neither firm was engaged to provide an independent review. Both operated within the Council’s mandate, not outside it. So if or when the public asked: ‘Who’s keeping this process honest?’ the uncomfortable answer is: No one. Council’s legal strategy wasn’t about testing risk, it was about minimizing pushback.

Contrast this with comparable cases:

Why is Taupō District Council being so reckless to settle for less? Perhaps you had better ask your elected members that question, because it won’t be them who picks up the expensive tab for any future legal challenges – it will be yourselves the ratepayer.

If any outsider or a future Council down the track is opposed to the JMA as signed up to in its current form, their best option could be to initiate a judicial review. This would challenge the legality of the agreement’s process, particularly the inclusion of non-mandatory provisions like the expansion to Lake Taupō and the vague but sweeping ‘Further Matters’ clauses. Clear weaknesses are if the public do not get consulted, and if any elected members are found to have conflicted interests. Legal costs of such an exercise could easily be in the six figures to both sides.

Public Input Dismissed

To make matters worse, the Mayor, Deputy Mayor, and senior staff framed the entire controversy as the product of ‘misinformation‘ and ‘public misunderstanding‘.

That is not only patronising – it’s dangerous. It dismisses over 500 pages of public correspondence as the confused rantings of an ignorant mob. Deputy Mayor Taylor mentioned that the views were ‘fairly evenly split’ – but that is a disingenuous claim, because around 100 templated submissions from TMTB arrived just one day prior to the meeting. In the weeks before, those in opposition outnumbered support by around ten to one.

What This Vote Really Means

This decision is a pause, not a solution. No conditions. No community assurance. No leadership.

By deferring the JMA without requiring legal review or public consultation, the current Council has simply passed the political burden to whoever wins in October. It’s not a compromise – it’s a live grenade. Elected members could have made a real call to sign up to it, put it out for public consultation, or scrap it altogether and start again. Instead, temporary shelter has been taken in the delay, hoping public anger will cool and putting it onto the next Council to clean up the mess. That isn’t governance – it’s cowardice camouflaged as caution – and make no mistake, it will be costing you.

Mayor Trewavas could probably have deferred this decision months ago – just as Invercargill Mayor Nobby Clark did in a comparable case. He didn’t.

Instead, we witnessed a major policy vote held less than 24 hours before election nominations closed. That’s not just bad timing, it was arguably strategic. The public backlash which did happen was completely unexpected, primarily because the public wasn’t meant to even be fully aware of what was really going on.

This entire saga has laid bare how such a herculean effort is required to push back against a staff-led recommendation, crafted behind closed doors by those with all the resources and levers to control the narrative. That alone should be a very red flag. Now imagine what could happen when staff from a partnering corporate entity are embedded into Council operations, as was proposed and which so very nearly got signed off. Who do you think is driving policy then, and who’s left to scrutinise?

This isn’t over. The next chapter depends entirely on who voters choose to write it.

What’s Next?

  • Public scrutiny must stay high
  • Council candidates must be questioned
  • Transparency must be demanded from day one

As for me? I’ve witnessed more stupid and pre-meditated decision making in the past three years at this Council than I figure most endure in a lifetime, all wrapped in glorious red tape and presented to you as sane governance.

Friday Council Update: Mayhem and The Madness

25 July 2025

Councillor Duncan here with your Friday Council round-up.

Politics never used to interest me much, and office politics even less. I left corporate life in 2015 for freedom and not committees, so how on earth did I end up here? Because after moving to Taupō, my engineering brain concluded that if you want something fixed, you can’t just complain about it – you have to get your hands dirty.  I don’t regret that decision at all, but I’ll be honest: the path forward after October is looking pretty murky.

The future of Mayor David Trewavas is uncertain in the wake of the JMA fallout. So far, only Zane Cozens is officially in the race, but I’m aware of at least two serious contenders waiting in the wings, and yes – some are encouraging me to also throw my hat in the ring. But the mayoralty is no small job, the pay’s fine but it’s not about the money – it’s about whether you believe you can steer the ship any better than the other guy or gal.

Meanwhile, things in Council chambers have gotten… strange. The Mayor has without explanation abruptly cancelled our regular Tuesday elected member meetings until after the election. I’ve never been a fan of those closed-door catchups anyway, but the timing feels off. There seems to be some acrimony in the air, or is it just me?

Anyway, to the updates:

Let’s Go Taupō Public Meeting – Right On!

On Monday night, Hope Woodward, Ann Tweedy, and Rebecca Stafford of the Let’s Go Taupo team hosted a powerful evening on rates, debt, and the need for change.

  • Hope called for people-first leadership and questioned inflated priorities (for original video see here).
  • Ann exposed the compounding rate hikes and the illusion of fiscal responsibility.
  • Rebecca broke down unsustainable debt ratios and the lack of transparency.
  • Myself also proposed smarter alternatives to overblown infrastructure and called for a culture shift from spending back to service (transcript here).

The vibe was serious but hopeful. Taupō people seem to be waking up, and are tired of being treated like they’re not – finally. Watch the entire meeting here: Part 1 | Part 2

JMA Update – Vote Looms but Questions Remain

The agenda for the 31 July Council meeting is now out, with staff still recommending we adopt the JMA in full. We now are presented with an Option 4 to defer until after the election – which sounds like a compromise, but without commitments to public consultation or independent legal review, I say that deferral is just kicking the can. I’ve also raised concerns about:

  • The Govt’s recent freeze on RMA plan changes,
  • Potential conflicts of interest involving some elected members closely linked to TMTB.

The responses so far? Vague or none at all, and no doubt you’ll probably be hearing more about this topic before the meeting next Thursday.

Trees Get Real Democracy (even if you don’t)

This week, Council spent nearly 40 minutes debating the fate of a few trees in Ferney Place Reserve. The original request? Topping them to improve mountain views for a resident 500m away who is prepared to pay.

The outcome? A full-on misfire, staff treating it as a removal request, and a debate that took twice as long as approving a multi-million-dollar water reform initiative.
The verdict? The trees are staying – for now anyway. Watch it here, much better than anything on Netflix.

Lake Terrace Silver Birches – Going, going, gone

As for the three silver birch trees being removed this week from Lake Terrace, I didn’t support it back in May due to insufficient information and posted my reasons at the time here

LGNZ Decision Clarified

Contrary to earlier reports, Waikato Regional Council is staying with LGNZ—but just barely.

Enrolment Reminder

Not yet enrolled to vote? Deadline is 31 July. Especially for non-resident ratepayers of whom too few take advantage – this is your chance to be heard so enrol here

Tools for the Troublemakers

Looking to challenge authority more effectively? These Council run workshops next week cover information about how to form an incorporated society – which can limit your legal exposure in a dispute with Council or government. Know your rights and get informed.

Friday Funny (or is it?)

I didn’t make this AI image and probably shouldn’t post it, but it’s already doing the rounds so what the heck.

Humour aside, if it’s hinting at something deeper – a merging of performance, power, and perception – then what does that say about local politics in Taupō?

Still Missing in Action: Public Consultation on the JMA

7 July 2025

Thank you to everyone who turned up or tuned in to last Thursday’s Council workshop on the draft Joint Management Agreement (JMA). The public gallery was packed, and clearly this issue has touched a nerve—not just locally, but nationally too. But before another week rolls over this issue, let’s pause and look closer—because the fine print always matters.

Let’s be clear: no final decision has been made yet. But what concerns me—and many others—is the way this process has unfolded. The 2025 draft agreement expands the scope of the 2009 JMA considerably, yet it was progressing quietly behind closed doors. Only when outside attention was forced upon it did this matter finally surface in a more visible way.

Unfortunately, some of the information now coming from Council leadership is adding to confusion. For example:

  • The Mayor erroneously stated in a recent media interview that the JMA would help clean up emergency spills into Lake Taupō. In reality, this is a Regional Council responsibility—just like the threatened gold clam invasion. These are pointedly not covered by the JMA, even though they easily could be if that were the goal. In fact, as a purported mechanism for keeping Lake Taupō clean and green, I have doubts that this JMA contributes anything too meaningful.
  • He also referred to Lake Taupō as a “private lake,” which is not only legally debatable but contextually misleading.
  • The Mayor claimed the 2009 JMA was never consulted on. Yet records indicate it arose from a series of public hui and community engagement processes connected to the 2005 plan change. It may not have met a strict legal definition of consultation, but it certainly reflected a more community-facing era.

Another point worth clarifying: It’s often claimed that iwi or Māori entities own 60–65% of the land in the district, including the lakebed. However, the most reliable figure available for communally owned Māori land is closer to 35%, even with Lake Taupō included. In terms of financial contribution, this equated to just 4.15% of total Council rates intake in 2023/24. That gap between land ownership and fiscal input is worth bearing in mind when we talk about “partnership”.

And then there are the words of one of our own councillors, spoken at the workshop itself:

“Can this documentation be weaponized? Absolutely.”

That should raise more than eyebrows. It should raise accountability.

Bottom line: If the public is confused, they should be invited in—not shut out. If the agreement is sound, it should stand up to scrutiny. But if it contains embedded obligations or shifts in governance, then we owe it to Taupō residents to test that publicly—before it gets signed, not after.

Council staff say that doesn’t need to happen. I disagree.

The JMA will be tabled for decision at the next full Council meeting on 31 July. Councillors will have three choices:

  1. Sign the agreement by majority vote
  2. Defer it until after the election
  3. Open it up for public consultation

You can read the source material for yourself here:

Recent media coverage: here, here & here

As always, I welcome feedback directly—respectful disagreement included.

Let’s not sleepwalk into a governance shift without the public’s eyes wide open. 

“Let’s be careful out there” – and not just on the streets.