Vote now! Or you'll get more noise (and stench, or water-borne illness) gifted to you from local government

Have you heard the one about the councillor who sued his own council over a fight about a $12 parking ticket, taking his case to the highest court in the land and landing ratepayers with a more than $100,000 legal bill — and climbing?

In April of last year, Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta announced a review of local government. She said councils were facing a wave of reforms (think Three Waters, Resource Management Act) that would significantly affect their traditional roles and functions, and the time was right to determine what NZ's system of local democracy should look like to make sure it's fit for the future.

Why review the future of local government? Let's look at our present.

Turn your attention, for example, to the imported-but-now-departed Australian boss of a council-owned company in charge of more than $5 billion of ratepayer-owned assets leaving his highly-paid job abruptly that it has now been revealed owes more than US$16 million to people he’d been in business with before he came to New Zealand that also has active warrants for his arrest for drink driving?

Perhaps you may have heard about the councils’ undermining democracy and failing to release information to the public under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act being investigated by the Ombudsman?

Or did you hear about the council review that uncovered sexism, discrimination and “sarcastic barbs” between elected councillors and council staff?

Or how about the councillor who only turned up to five-out-of-29 council meetings (base salary $54,000) as a protest about the “anti-democratic way” the council was being led?

Oh, Tauranga’s entire council was sacked and replaced with commissioners?

Christchurch City Council not insuring its then-new multi-million dollar plant that was damaged to the tune of $11 million in the Christchurch earthquake, or the plant which is now making local residents physically ill because of a putrid stench emanating from it — business as per usual.

Local government puts to rest the argument that any publicity is good publicity. 

The data on voter turnout remains stubbornly low, despite how badly our elected representatives embarrass themselves or cravenly seek attention, it seems to do nothing to encourage more voting.

Some councils are so incompetent and dysfunctional they’re a virtual cottage industry, and yet the constant reports about the incompetence and bungling and vomit-inducing abdication of councils’ very real and serious duties haven’t done anything to motivate voters, at all. 

It’s just more noise (and stench, or water-borne illness) gifted to you from the your local government, thanks for paying for it with your rates.

Data from the Department of Internal Affairs shows city council voter turnout across the nation was 39% for the 2019 local government election.

For regional councils that number was 45%, and district councils 48%.

In Auckland, New Zealand’s largest city, only 34.7% of those eligible voted in 2019 with the turnout lowest among those aged 26-30, with only 20% of those eligible voters bothering to have their say in the most recent election. 

Older voters were more motivated to cast a vote in the city of sails, with 61% of eligible voters aged between 76-80 voting.

In many areas of Auckland, a mere 5000-6000 votes would have been enough to get you a spot as a councillor that comes with a salary of more than $100,000 a year.

In Christchurch, voter turnout for the city council election was 41.1%. In Dunedin it was 45.6%.

The appetite for running for a seat around the council table is also weak.

Local Government NZ (LGNZ), the association of councils, has expressed concern about the falling numbers of people who want to put themselves forward to stand for councils.

It says the previous local election in 2019 saw the lowest number of nominations in relation to available seats since LGNZ began collecting data, and feared it was looking even worse in 2022.

Why might these numbers also be dwindling? Once they are elected, LGNZ says, a decent chunk of those voted in find serving their community “thankless and underwhelming.”

Another LGNZ survey from July found nearly half of local politicians had experienced racism, gender discrimination, or other forms of harmful behaviour while doing their job in public office.

The majority described the experience of being on councils as rewarding, more interesting than expected and enlightening, but a number found it to be disappointing, frustrating and a nightmare, LGNZ says.

“At the parliamentary level a bevy of state agencies exist to encourage citizens to stand for office and provide support to those who are successful,” LGNZ says.

“These include the Electoral Commission, Parliamentary Services and political party organisations themselves. The same is not true for citizens elected to local government.”

But who wants to hitch their wagon to what can frequently look like a very expensive circus, in the midst of a review?

As LGNZ national council member and young elected members committee co-chair Lan Pham says, those elected in October "will have a unique opportunity to re-design and shape local government and the role it will play in leading communities into the future". 

“An opportunity that we haven’t seen since 1989,” Pham says.

Local government and public policy analyst Peter McKinlay says council seats don't appeal much to the people who might have the right governance skills.

You could pitch a council seat without saying it was a council role, describing the balance sheet and responsibilities and they'd be interested. But reveal its as an elected member of a council? The eyes "go dull", he says.

The dramatic local government reforms of the 1980s ripped up legislation and pulled apart structures, including what our councils did, and did away with the simplistic rubbish, roads and rates mantra which defined councils of old.

McKinlay says elected members were disconnected from the everyday running of council, and council employees now reported to a new boss; the chief executives who were introduced as part of the reforms to take over the day-to-day management of council business.

In some cases now elected members are virtually shut out of implementation, McKinlay says.

The rules that were meant to keep councillors at an appropriate arm's length have shut them out of the real work of direction setting, oversight and monitoring of council activity.

And although shut out, McKinlay says the role of councillor is now full time and increasingly complex. He says our local politicians get no opportunity to get independent advice, and are reliant on the say-so and work commissioned by the chief executive.

How can they effectively govern without any support?

Councils are just a big businesses. Look at how they responded to Covid, McKinlay says. Councils were "very much focused on the needs and interests of the council as an organisation".

Nothing about communities. 

McKinlay says what we have got instead of good governance from local government is total neglect, highlighted by the reports into Tauranga and Wellington’s woes.

“Neither report addressed governance," McKinlay says. "There was talk about councillor behaviour and so on, but no analysis of what’s the underlying governance issue that needs to be dealt with here.”

Governance is conflated with councillor behaviour, he says, and councillor behaviour is a symptom of poor governance.

Local government, he suggests, is like buying a Lotto ticket.

"You get what you get."

And what we're getting clearly doesn't mean much to many of us.

And perhaps it doesn't mean much to central government, either. It hasn't committed to doing anything at all with the review, when it comes. It will be considered in due course, it says.

The scoping draft, which has been delayed, will give us the first glimpses of what the review will dig into.

The terms of reference for the review gives some heartening hints. It says there is an opportunity to strengthen the role of local participation in governance, and directs that the scope should include a future view of governance. That's two clear mentions of governance.

It also paints a bleak picture of the backdrop for the next crop of councillors.

Covid-dented finances, climate change and its impacts including potentially shifting communities as the "retreat of last resort", and uninsurable communities, reducing greenhouse gases, not to mention the ongoing battle over density and housing affordability; this is a long way from roads, rates and rubbish.

Councillors need support and tools to help them make better decisions, and to fulfil the full time governance role they are entrusted with.

McKinlay says what is needed is not new legislation, but a culture change and a change of practices. LGNZ says councillors desperately need high-quality support.

If we expect professionalism from our elected councillors and local boards, the council environment should itself be professional and that includes places for councillors to work, and resources for them to carry out their work, like having professional advice and the ability to commission that advice, whether that's people or the capacity to  — horror  — do their own research, so they can do a better job of adding value to what we're getting from management.