Press releases

Local Water Done Well Redux July 18th 2025

A number of people have asked me if the Council's decision to reject expert advice and adopt the two-council model instead of the four-council option favoured by experts and those who formally responded to the Council's survey on Local Water Done Well could be rescinded. The short answer is no. A subsequent decision by Whanganui Council to go with Ruapehu sealed the deal. However, there are important lessons to be learned from the consultation process and how the decision was arrived at for the new council that will be elected in October.

It has emerged in press reports that, while the Council was holding public meetings in Taumarunui and Ohakune and surveying residents, members opposed to the four-council option were also consulting with iwi, Te Waiū-o-te Ika and Te Awa Tepua/Te Kōpuka on how they should vote. No mention of this was made during the public meetings by them or in their speeches in favour of the Whanganui option, only a vague reference to the importance of local voices. Councillor Neeson, who is standing for Mayor and who spoke in favour of going with the Whanganui option, wrote in last week’s Bulletin: “ We had a four-hour intensive debate, quizzing our staff member who created the report and considered all the options and alternatives.” Unfortunately the behind the scenes consultation with Te Waiū-o-te Ika and Te Awa Tepua/Te Kōpuka was not mentioned in the debate, which was, from subsequent statements, a foregone conclusion for those members supporting the Whanganui option. The council officer reporting to members on the options available might as well have been giving them the weather report.

Council has a long history of going through the motions with consultations and then going with a predetermined option. At least this decision has shown some consistency in that regard. However, the councillors who pressed forward with the after-the-fact argument that there was a need to honour the obligations to Te Waiū-o-te Ika and Te Awa Tepua/Te Kōpuka need also be aware of their obligations to open debate and honesty of intent. If there is primacy in the debate for the Whanganui option because of obligations to Te Waiū-o-te Ika and Te Awa Tepua/Te Kōpuka then these obligations should have been centre stage in the consultation with the community and in the debate on what was the best option for Ruapehu. It should not have been an after-the-fact explanation of why those who can least afford it will be paying an extra $1000 for their reticulated water. If Mātauranga Māori is to form an integral part of our governance, then there is a clear need to avoid polarisation and take people with you.

Open governance in Ruapehu June 15th 2025

The May council meeting heard a proposal from Councillor Janelle Hinch for Council to submit in opposition to the Regulatory Standards Bill. Speaking to the proposal, Deputy Mayor Vivienne Hoeta stated that Council had entered into partnership agreements with iwi. and went on to say, “The bill would have implications for the council in law and law-making, and the council should voice its opposition with an individual submission. The council had recently signed partnership agreements with post-settlement governance entities and iwi in the wider region.” “We can’t be signing partnership agreements and then just sitting back and doing nothing about it.” “We have strong relationships and we are practising and giving effect to the Treaty of Waitangi in what we do.”

However, as a concern of open governance, there doesn’t seem to be any reference to the partnership agreements on the council website, nor the agreements themselves. As someone who, as an elected member, made governance proposals regarding the Council’s relationship with local iwi through an enhanced Māori Council, I would welcome the opportunity to peruse the agreements the Deputy Mayor refers to. I wrote to the council on June 1st requesting copies of the agreements. Council responded by treating my request as an Official Information request. At the time of writing June 15th I have had no response to my request.

Let’s be clear, iwi do have a positive governance role to play in our district, especially given our demographic. However, if the Council is to enter into partnership agreements on governance with any unelected bodies, they must be open, transparent, and accessible on the council website for all to view.

John Chapman to stand for Council July 1st 2025

Veteran community board member John Chapman has announced his intention to stand for council. Chapman, who sat on both the National Park and Waimarino Community Boards, said: “ I’m delighted to have the opportunity to once again serve my community and continue the work I began as a board member in enlarging the scope and responsibilities of our boards and pressing for a board in Taumarunui Ohura. Whilst the changes in Council’s structure at the last election brought about greater engagement with Māori and the wider community, one crucial part of our community, the rural agriculture sector, has been left out. I would like to see the next Council give positive consideration to the establishment of a rural ward in the district. Our agricultural sector provides the lion's share of our local economy, and if we are to grow as a district, then they need to have a seat at the table. That said, the recent budget blowouts have demonstrated a clear need for real-time monitoring of council expenditure by council members.”

Chapman went on to say:

"Ruapehu District Council faces enormous challenges over the next decade in its governance of the district. The loss of jobs in the south and the closure of the Chateau in the north have negatively impacted our local economy still recovering from COVID. The challenges of rebuilding our economy and governing effectively and affordably for all our communities will take a team that will listen to our communities, work across our administration, community boards and iwi to meet those challenges. A team that, once elected, can set aside political differences and work together for the benefit of all our communities.

A $700K Overspend July 29th 2025

$700,000 isn’t just a line item—it’s life-changing money. At today’s median house price, it could buy two homes in Taumarunui, with enough left over to cover agent and legal fees. Imagine what our community could have done with that kind of funding.

So when news of the overspend broke, public outrage was more than justified. One mayoral candidate claimed it wouldn’t have happened under her watch—as a sitting councillor—except it did. It happened right under the full council’s nose. But here’s the real issue: our current system made it impossible for them to know.

In New Zealand, councils operate under two distinct and legally separate structures: Operations and Governance.

Operations includes council officers and the CEO, responsible for day-to-day administration.

Governance includes the Mayor and elected councillors, who set direction—but are barred from operational oversight.

Councillors approved a Parks and Recreation budget. From that moment, it became an operational task. The Mayor and councillors lost visibility, despite being held accountable in the public eye. The buck doesn’t stop with them—it stops with the CEO.

In light of this, Mayor Kirton’s call for an independent inquiry was the only responsible path forward. Until all facts are uncovered, further action would be premature and misguided.

But there’s a bigger problem: communication. The council has failed to clearly explain how decisions are made and who holds responsibility. That vacuum has been filled by social media commentators, fueling confusion and division. We’ve fractured into two camps—those who want expanded services, and those who just want clean water, paved roads, and low rates.

Now, central government is stepping in.

The Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill, introduced last week and already through its first reading, doesn’t just “rein in costs” as Minister Simon Watts claims. It represents a fundamental shift in what councils are here to do. The bill strips away the “four well-beings”—social, economic, environmental, and cultural—that once defined council purpose. In their place, it imposes mandates:

Prioritise core services.

Deliver rigorous financial and performance reporting.

Publicly disclose all contractor and consultant spending.

For our incoming council, this means a tall order: deliver more, with less. The era of outsourcing and consulting is ending. Staff must upskill, and ratepayers must recalibrate expectations.

We’re entering a new phase of local governance—one that demands transparency, competence, and resilience. We deserve accountability not just in hindsight, but as a standard practice. And that starts with understanding how our system truly works.

Council CEO Salaries August 8th 2025

With local elections looming, we hear calls for good people to stand for Council. But the reality is sobering: even the most community-minded Councillor enters a system where real power lies not with elected representatives, but with highly paid staff—particularly CEOs. Community Board Members can’t even speak to our CEO without going through their Chair.

This shift isn’t accidental. It followed past corruption scandals, especially around zoning and land use, aiming to protect decisions from political interference. But now, the pendulum has swung too far.

Ratepayers who fund Councils are excluded from decisions on staffing structures, budgets, and salaries. Council CEOs are public servants, yet their pay is increasingly corporate-level. Our local CEO earns a reported $350,000 annually—a figure unthinkable in most rural communities.

So, who sets these salaries? We’re told the Remuneration Authority does, but how transparent is that process? What criteria are used? The public isn’t consulted or even informed. Benchmarking against corporate pay accelerates executive salaries, while essential workers, road crews, librarians, and customer service staff stay on modest wages.

This isn’t jealousy. It’s a fairness issue. It’s a question of democratic accountability. Ratepayers foot the bill yet have no say, and even elected officials struggle to question staff decisions. So what, exactly, are they being elected to do?

Let’s be clear: this isn’t a dig at individuals. Many Council executives are hardworking and care deeply about their communities. The problem lies in a system that’s drifted into opacity and unresponsiveness.

We don’t need more oversight bodies. We need transparency. Visibility around pay, genuine community control, and political courage to say public service must mean service.

This election should be about rebalancing the scales. Councils should work with their communities, not above them.

Time to Reconsider Council’s Costly Water Decision August 8th 2025

As local elections approach, the debate over water infrastructure has become a defining issue—one that deserves careful, nonpartisan scrutiny. A majority of mayoral and sitting council candidates have endorsed the Whanganui option, diverging from Mayor Kirton’s support for the four-council model. The implications are significant: ratepayers face substantially higher costs under the current plan.

This matter should not be reduced to political positioning. At its heart lies a question of affordability—something that affects every household in our district. While some have cited the Whanganui River as a reason to support the Whanganui option, it’s important to note that the river’s legal and cultural status is already protected under the Ruruku Whakatupua Deed of Settlement, signed in 2014 and backed by legislation. That protection is not contingent on which water model is chosen.

The evidence presented at the council meeting made a compelling case: the four-council option was the most economically viable. Choosing the more expensive alternative, despite clear data, raises concerns about whether the decision was made in the best interest of the community.

Mayor Kirton has since presented further documentation suggesting the decision may breach government guidelines on affordability. This presents council members with an opportunity, not to revisit old divisions, but to reassess the impact of their choice with fresh eyes and a shared commitment to fiscal responsibility.

Regardless of political affiliation or preferred candidate, this issue warrants deeper investigation. In a district where many residents are already facing financial pressure, the long-term cost of water should be weighed carefully. Leadership means making decisions that serve the public good, not just in principle, but in practice.

Rural wards in Ruapehu August 2th 2025

When the Council restructured to include Māori wards, it opened a rare window, one that only comes around every six years in local government. It was the perfect moment to also create a rural ward. But that opportunity was missed.

Why rural wards?

The agricultural sector comprises 21% of our local economy, worth 13.4 million dollars. Our farms contribute the lion's share of our rates. Rural wards ensure that rural communities have dedicated representation on the council, which can be particularly important for areas where the population density is lower and might be difficult for a rural candidate to get elected without a dedicated ward. Bringing the voice of our largest industry sector to the table would be of enormous benefit to the Council.

Rural communities face distinct issues, including limited access to public transport, slower internet connectivity, fewer healthcare services, and infrastructure that often lags behind our townships. These challenges require tailored solutions, not one-size-fits-all policies. A rural ward would empower elected representatives who understand these realities firsthand, enabling more responsive governance and equitable resource allocation.

Moreover, rural residents are stewards of the land. They manage farms, forests, and conservation areas that sustain the district’s economy and environment. Their perspectives on land use, climate resilience, and sustainable development are crucial to shaping Ruapehu’s future. Without a rural ward, these insights risk being sidelined.

Creating a rural ward strengthens democracy. It ensures that council representation reflects the geographic and demographic diversity of the district. When people see their communities represented, they’re more likely to engage with local government, fostering trust and participation.

Ultimately, a rural ward isn’t just about fairness—it’s about building a council that truly serves all of Ruapehu. By giving rural communities a seat at the table, we honour their contributions and invest in a more inclusive, balanced, and resilient district. It takes a team to govern Ruapehu.

Funding Ruapehu August 22nd 2025

When it comes to local government, we all want champagne services on a beer budget. The recent council overspend has prompted a wave of council and mayoral candidates pledging fiscal discipline as their core platform. But the issue isn’t that the council throws money around like a lottery winner—quite the opposite. With a low ratepayer base, there simply isn’t enough funding to cover the essential services we’ve come to expect.

The challenge is structural, not reckless. Ratepayers expect well-maintained roads, reliable waste services, public amenities, and emergency infrastructure, but the financial resources to deliver these are stretched thin. Ruapehu, like many tourism-heavy districts, faces the added pressure of supporting thousands of visitors each year, without receiving a fair share of the economic benefit they generate.

In regions like Ruapehu, where tourism is both a lifeline and a logistical challenge, the question of who pays for the wear and tear left by visitors is becoming increasingly urgent. Every year, thousands flock to the district’s natural wonders—Tongariro National Park, Whakapapa and Turoa ski fields, and the famed hiking trails—bringing economic vitality but also placing strain on local infrastructure. Yet while tourists spend freely and generate significant Goods and Services Tax (GST) revenue, that money flows directly to central government, leaving local councils like Ruapehu to foot the bill for maintenance, upgrades, and essential services.

Currently, there is no formal mechanism for returning a portion of GST receipts to the regions that generate them. This creates a funding imbalance, especially for small councils managing high visitor volumes. Redirecting a share of GST revenue from local tourism back to the Ruapehu District Council would be a transformative step. It would allow the council to reinvest in tourism infrastructure, improve visitor experiences, and support local businesses—all while easing the financial burden on ratepayers.

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment has previously partnered with Ruapehu District Council through initiatives like the Ruapehu Regional Visitor Development Plan (RRVDP), aimed at enhancing tourism and economic resilience. Allocating GST revenue would build on this foundation, offering a sustainable funding stream to support long-term growth.

Such a move would also acknowledge the unique challenges faced by tourism-dependent regions, especially in the wake of climate disruptions and infrastructure strain. By sharing GST revenue central government would not only support Ruapehu’s development but also signal a commitment to fair and inclusive economic policy.

Don’t Strip Councils of the Four Wellbeings—They’re the Backbone of Our Communities August 28th 2025

After more than a decade in and around local government here in Ruapehu, I’ve seen the four wellbeings—social, economic, environmental, and cultural—treated like political currency. They’ve been removed, reinstated, and now risk being sidelined again. But here in the heart of Ruapehu, where community is not a concept but a lived reality, wellbeing is not a luxury. It’s a necessity.

The “back to basics” rhetoric being used to justify recentralisation is not about saving money—it’s about shifting power. It strips councils of their mandate under the guise of efficiency, ignoring the fact that local government is the layer of democracy closest to the people. When you weaken councils, you weaken the very communities they serve.

This government claims to support localism. It says it wants communities to deliver on their own aspirations. Yet removing the four wellbeings flies in the face of that promise. It’s a missed opportunity to collaborate, to stretch central budgets by unlocking local wisdom and innovation. Councils are not contractors—they are partners. And in regions like Ruapehu, that partnership is sacred.

Let’s talk numbers. Over 80% of rates—closer to 90% in many councils—already go toward water, roads, and core infrastructure. The remaining 10–15% funds the soul of our towns: sports fields, libraries, pools, and community houses. These modest investments catalyse enormous impact. Councils partner with community groups, iwi, and social agencies to deliver outcomes that central government simply cannot. They leverage volunteer hours, local sponsorships, and community spirit to create festivals, revitalise town centres, and build safer, more connected neighbourhoods.

That’s why the independent Future of Local Government review panel—guided by voices from every corner of New Zealand—recommended entrenching the four wellbeings in legislation. The advice was clear: wellbeing must not be subject to political whim. Councils must be empowered to reflect what matters to their communities.

The review leaders from every council in the country. listening to iwi, NGOs, businesses, and community champions. The message was consistent: councils are not just service providers. They are enablers of aspiration. They are the kaitiaki of local dreams.

And let’s be clear—councils do take their fiscal responsibilities seriously. Rate-setting is transparent, democratic, and accessible. Far more so than central government budget processes. Elected members should be accountable to their communities, not to party lines or Wellington corridors.

Central government doesn’t fund local economic development, tourism, urban regeneration, or many climate adaptation projects. Yet these are the very things communities expect—and councils deliver. Often with minimal funding and maximum innovation.

If councils can’t do this, who will?

We’re running out of time. Social cohesion is fraying. Trust in government is slipping. From Cape Reinga to Bluff, we face mounting pressures: Deepening poverty, unaffordable housing, and health inequities. These are complex, intergenerational challenges. Central government cannot solve them alone. They must partner with local government and communities. To force a capable, willing partner out of the room now is not just short-sighted—it’s reckless.

What we need now is leadership that instils hope, that understands complexity, that builds long-term solutions with communities—not for them. We need leadership that sees councils not as cost centres, but as catalysts. That sees wellbeing not as a trend, but as a duty.

This is the work of local government. Grounded and Hopeful.

And here, under the watchful eye of Ruapehu, we know that the winds may shift, but the mountain stands firm. So too must our commitment to the four wellbeings. Because they are not just policy—they are people, they are place, and they are promise.

The Silent Backbone of Ruapehu Governance
September 7th 2025

When the current Ruapehu District Council term began, it did so with sweeping structural changes: a reduction in general council seats to six, the establishment of three Māori wards, and the creation of a new community board—Ōhura Taumarunui. These changes weren’t just cosmetic. They were meant to usher in a new era of governance, one where a leaner council would focus strategically while empowered community boards took on the heavy lifting of local leadership.

I was part of those early discussions as a member of the Waimarino-Waiouru Community Board. The vision was clear: community boards would no longer be peripheral—they would be central. Yet, the silence around these boards is deafening. Even candidates standing for both council and board positions seem reluctant to acknowledge the boards’ expanded role. Why?

Community Boards in Ruapehu are far more than advisory panels. They are the connective tissue between residents and council, the first responders to local concerns, and the stewards of grassroots governance. They weigh in on bylaws, oversee community funding, approve plantings in public spaces, and ensure local events are coordinated with care. They represent their communities, build relationships with iwi and stakeholders, and monitor council services with a watchful eye.

But their work is not without challenge.

Many communities are isolated, with unreliable internet, making participation difficult. Boards operate with limited authority; their recommendations can be sidelined by council decisions. And despite their importance, they remain largely invisible to the public, buried beneath layers of bureaucracy and inaccessible documentation.

Relationship-building is another uphill climb. Boards must navigate diverse interests with diplomacy and cultural sensitivity, all while earning trust in systems that have historically felt opaque. Add to that the strain of limited funding.

Yet, there is progress. Tools like Resolve have streamlined operations and improved transparency. But technology alone won’t fix what’s missing: recognition. If we truly want community-led governance, we must start by acknowledging the boards that make it possible.

It’s time for council and community board candidates to speak up for the boards that speak for us.

Art Isn’t a Luxury—It’s Ruapehu’s Untapped Economic Engine September 17th 2025

This week, the Ruapehu Art Awards open at Memorial Hall in Taumarunui. Alongside the Waimarino Art Awards, it’s a celebration of creativity, community, and culture. But let’s be honest: while we applaud the artists, we continue to ignore the deeper truth. Ruapehu’s vibrant arts sector is not just a cultural asset—it’s an economic force we’ve failed to harness.

Our artists shape how we see ourselves. They transform blank walls into stories, forgotten buildings into destinations, and isolated communities into hubs of connection. Events like the Adventure Highway Art Trail don’t just beautify—they generate revenue. Linked to tourism, the arts contribute to New Zealand’s $17.5 billion GDP from tourism in the year to March 2024. Yet in Ruapehu, the arts remain sidelined—treated as decoration rather than infrastructure.

Let’s walk the talk

We talk about “liveability” and “community development,” but what does that mean if we don’t invest in the very things that make places worth living in? Art changes perceptions. It draws visitors. It sparks ideas. It builds identity. If we want more than seasonal ski homes and transient tourism, we need to build a district people want to belong to—not just visit.

The Blueprint Is Already Here

Ruapehu isn’t starting from scratch. We have the Twin Rivers Gallery, Ruapehu Community Arts Centre, Volcano Vibe Arts Collective, Raetihi Arts Trust Gallery, and the tireless work of Mark Tyrrell in the north and Paula Charlton in the south. These aren’t hobbyists—they’re community builders. The success of the Taranaki Arts Festival proves what’s possible when councils back creativity with real support.

So why not us?

Imagine a Ruapehu Arts Trust—district-wide, council-supported, and empowered to unify these efforts into a coherent strategy. Imagine a Ruapehu Festival that threads together our diverse artistic strands into a single, powerful narrative. Imagine the Chateau not as a relic, but as a beacon of artistic energy—a venue that draws visitors year-round.

Art Is How We Build a Future Worth Staying For

If Ruapehu wants to be more than a seasonal playground, we must invest in what makes us unique. The arts are not a side dish—they’re the main course. They’re how we build pride, attract talent, and create a district that’s not just liveable, but magnetic.

The question isn’t whether art matters to Ruapehu. The question is: will our council finally act like it does?

Reason or Rhetoric: What Kind of Council Do You Want? September 24th 2025

The recent decision by a majority of sitting councillors, with the notable exceptions of Mayor Weston Kirton and Councillor Brend Ralph, to reject the advice of council officers on Local Water Done Well, and instead vote for an option that will cost town water ratepayers an extra $1,000 per year, brings the stakes of this election into sharp focus. Voters now face a clear choice: support a council that abandons reason and evidence in favour of ideology, or elect leadership committed to transparent, evidence-based decision making that puts community wellbeing first.

Why evidence based decision making is crucial

Evidence-based decision making improves public trust by showing that leaders are acting with integrity, transparency, and competence—not just following personal agendas or reacting emotionally.

Transparency builds credibility

When councils share the data, research, and community feedback behind a decision, people can see the logic. It’s no longer a mystery or a political move—it’s a reasoned choice. That openness helps residents feel respected and included.

Results speak louder than promises

Evidence-based policies are more likely to deliver real outcomes. When people see that a new waste system actually reduces landfill, or that targeted road upgrades improve safety, they trust that council decisions are working. Trust grows when promises are backed by proof.

Consistency over ideology

Ideological or emotive decisions can feel arbitrary or biased. Evidence-based governance applies the same standards to every issue—whether it’s rates, infrastructure, or community services. That consistency reassures people that decisions aren’t being made to favour one group over another.

Better consultation, better buy-in

Using evidence means listening to experts, to community voices, to lived experience. When people see their input reflected in the data and the decisions, they’re more likely to support the outcome—even if it’s not perfect.

In Ruapehu, where rate hikes and opaque spending have shaken trust in council, evidence-based leadership is a path to repair. It says: “We’re not guessing. We’re listening, learning, and acting with purpose.” That’s the kind of governance people can believe in.Write your text here...

Why It Takes a Team October 1st 2025
Three years ago, Ruapehu District Council underwent a major representation review. It introduced three new Māori wards, reduced general seats to six, and replaced the Taumarunui Ward Committee with the new Ōhura Taumarunui Community Board. Community boards were given expanded powers, and several partnership agreements were signed with iwi. These changes were meant to strengthen representation, deepen engagement, and build trust across our district.

Councillors were expected to take on more strategic roles, while community boards would lead local engagement — building connections and doing the heavy lifting of governance. But despite the promise, the model hasn’t delivered.

Why? Because it takes a team. And the team hasn’t been supported.

Council has been slow to embrace the new structure. Community boards haven’t been given the space or respect needed to grow into their enhanced role. Some councillors have resisted sharing decision-making, and the result is weakened engagement and missed opportunities.

This isn’t just a structural issue — it’s cultural. We need councillors who understand their strategic role and boards that are empowered to lead locally. We need collaboration, not control.

I’ve served on two community boards and helped create the Ōhura Taumarunui Board. I’m the only candidate who has consistently championed statutory boards and their role in strengthening local democracy. I know what they can achieve when they’re trusted and resourced.

If elected, I’ll fight to make this model work — not just in theory, but in practice. Because good governance isn’t a solo act. It takes a team. And Ruapehu deserves a team that works together, listens deeply, and leads with integrity.Write your text here...