Inside the Unitary Council Proposal
The Government will soon decide whether Wairarapa becomes a standalone unitary council or part of a larger Wellington–Wairarapa unitary authority. In either case, the new structure would begin at the 2028 local elections, when the Greater Wellington Regional Council would be phased out and its functions transferred to the new body.
Many people are unaware of the details in the Wellington–Wairarapa Mayoral Forum’s proposal for a regionwide unitary council under the Government’s “Head Start” programme. The full document is available on the South Wairarapa District Council website, and this article summarises its key points.
A Wellington–Wairarapa Unitary Authority would comprise a regionwide Unitary Council and five Community Councils, including one for Wairarapa.
A Wellington–Wairarapa Unitary Authority would comprise a regionwide Unitary Council and five Community Councils, including one for Wairarapa. Their size is yet to be determined. Community Councils would sit within the regional governance structure and include elected councillors and a Chair.
The Unitary Authority would be led by a Regional Mayor elected at large, with executive powers. Its governing body would include Unitary Councillors and the Chairs of the Community Councils; all elected from the Community Council areas. Under this model, Wairarapa would have two representatives on the governing body.
The Unitary Authority would be led by a Regional Mayor elected at large, with executive powers. Its governing body would include Unitary Councillors and the Chairs of the Community Councils; all elected from the Community Council areas. Under this model, Wairarapa would have two representatives on the governing body.
Governance responsibilities would be split between the regionwide Unitary Council and the Community Councils. A core principle is allocating functions to the level best placed to make decisions, reducing duplication while maintaining strong local influence.
Functions requiring scale, specialist capability, longterm planning, network optimisation and purchasing power would sit with the Unitary Council. It would set strategic direction, make regionwide investment decisions, establish minimum service levels and deliver services at the scale that best serves communities.
Functions dependent on local relationships, place based decision making and community preferences would sit with Community Councils. They would have clearly defined responsibilities and devolved funding to support local priorities, service delivery and community outcomes.
Examples include decisions on local parks and facilities, local events and grants, town centre initiatives, waste minimisation activities and local transport priorities. Community Councils would also play a key role in catchment based governance and planning, with delegated responsibilities for spatial planning, environmental management, freshwater and flood protection under the Government’s new planning system.
Through these functions, Community Councils would provide a formal mechanism for incorporating local knowledge and community priorities into regional decision making while maintaining a co-ordinated regionwide approach. Catchment level engagement is also intended to strengthen relationships with mana whenua, including obligations under Treaty settlements.
The proposal emphasises that building and maintaining community confidence will be critical to any transition. While the Head Start timeframe limited early engagement, the detailed design phase is expected to include further involvement from communities, mana whenua and partners. This work will shape implementation and support transparency throughout the transition.
The proposal submitted was measured against the Government’s five criteria for successful “Headstart” applications:
- Supports the new planning system
- Simplifies local governance
- Economies of scale
- Maintains local voice
- Deliverability
Although rates affordability was not a formal criterion, the Forum asked consultants Martin Jenkins to assess financial impacts for Wairarapa. Morrison Low undertook a similar exercise for the three Wairarapa councils. The reports reached different conclusions, partly due to differing assumptions and the exclusion of some regional activities in the Morrison Low analysis. An in-house review by Masterton District Council concluded that, without the subsidy from Wellington ratepayers, a Wairarapa only unitary council would cost local ratepayers between 13% and 16% more per year.
