Regional Council Informal Workshop Pack   DATE: Tuesday 19 March 2024 COMMENCING AT TIME: 9:30 am VENUE: Council Chambers, Regional House, 1 Elizabeth Street, Tauranga

 

Informal Workshop Papers

1         Introduction to the Bay of Plenty Regional Council Representation Review 2024                                                                                              1

2         Options Discussion - Bay of Plenty Regional Council Representation Review 2024                                                                                              1

Attachment 1 - 2024 Representation Review Draft Options Comparison Table         1

Attachment 2 - 2024 Representation Review Shortlisted Options - Maps and Population Statistics                                                                                                           25

 

Informal Workshop Paper
To:	Regional Council
	19 March 2024
From:	Claudia Cameron, Committee Advisor and Steve Groom, Governance Manager
	Karen Aspey, General Manager, People and Leadership

 

1.       Purpose

This paper provides general introductory and background information regarding the process of conducting a representation review, including information about previous reviews undertaken at Bay of Plenty Regional Council and the way in which we have carried out this review to date.

The companion paper “Options Discussion – Bay of Plenty Regional Council Representation Review” provides information specific to the consideration of options for the 2024 representation review.

2.       Legislative Background

Under the Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA) Council is required to undertake a review of its representation arrangements at least every six years. A review includes identifying the number of constituencies, the names and boundaries of each constituency and the number of councillors to be elected by the electors in each.

Changes to the LEA in 2023 have been factored into the current work and timelines. Detail of these changes can be found on the Local Government Commission website[1]. Relevant legislative requirements can be found in Appendix 1.

The BOPRC Māori constituencies were established under the Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Māori Constituency Empowering) Act 2001[2].

Reference will be made, and links provided, to relevant legislative sections throughout this paper.

3.       Bay of Plenty Regional Council Representation Review Timeline

Process	Timetable	Complete
Council resolution on electoral system (FPP/STV)	9 August 2023	Yes
Public notice of right to demand poll on electoral system	29 August 2023	Yes
Last date to demand a poll on the electoral system	14 March 2024	Yes
Preliminary community/stakeholder engagement	15 January - 23 February 2024	Yes
Council Workshop – Identify preferred option	19 March 2024	Today
Council resolution on ‘initial proposal’ (preferred representation option) Council Meeting - no later than 31 July 2024	9 May 2024
Public notice of ‘initial proposal’, submissions invited – no later than 14 days after resolution (latest 8 August)	By 23 May 2024
Submission period (minimum 1 month)	5 June – 17 July 2024 (TBC)
If no submissions – give public notice, internal process completed	If non-compliant with +/-10% forward proposal to LGC for determination
If submissions received, within 8 weeks: - analysis of submissions - hold hearings - hold deliberations/review preferred option - Council resolution of final proposal - Public notice of final proposal	13 August 2024 – Hearings (14 and 15 August additional dates, if required) 28 August 2024 – Deliberations 12 September 2024 – Council resolution By 25 September 2024 – Public notice
Objection/appeal period	1 month from public notice
If no objections/appeals – give public notice, internal process completed	If non-compliant with +/-10% forward proposal to LGC for determination
If objections/appeals received – forward to LGC	As soon as practicable, but no later than 20 December 2024
LGC considers process, resolutions, submissions, appeals/objections and makes determination	By 11 April 2025

4.       BOPRC Representation Review Process

The Options Development Team (ODT) was established with staff from Governance, GIS, Community Engagement, and Te Amorangi.

Over the past six months the ODT has identified communities of interest, conducted pre-engagement, developed constituency boundary options and analysed mapping and population statistics for each potential representation option.

Potential options had assessment criteria applied to arrive at the short-listed options, which you will consider today.

5.       Current Representation Arrangement

The below tables set out for each constituency the current arrangements[3].

5.1      Māori Constituencies

Constituency	Mauao	Ōkurei	Kōhi	Total
Members	1	1	1	3
Population	23,500	21,900	21,700	67,100
Populations per Member	23,500	21,900	21,700	Avg: 22,367
Difference from quota	1,133	-467	-667
% difference from quota & (2018 figure)	5.07% (5.12%)	-2.09% (-3.09%)	-2.98% (-2.03%)	N/A
Constituency land area (square kilometres)	2292.4	2607.2	7589	12488.6
Constituency land area per Member	2292.4	2607.2	7589	Avg: 4162.9

With the current representation arrangements, all Māori constituencies are within the +/-10% rule. This is consistent with the position at the point of the last review in 2018.

5.2      General Constituencies

Constituency	Western BOP	Tauranga	Rotorua	Eastern BOP	Total/Avg.
Members	2	5	2	2	11
Population	53,640	145,830	52,410	35,480	286,900
Population/Member	26,820	29,166	26,205	17,740	26,123
Difference from quota	696	3,040	81	-8,384	n/a
% difference from quota & (2018 figure)	2.7% (-2.83%)	11.6% (6.39%)	0.3% (12.31%)	-32.1% (-25.43%)	n/a
Constituency land area km2	2110.8	181.7	2607.2	7589	12488.6
Constituency land area km2/Member	1055.4	36.3	1303.6	3794.5	1135.3

With the current representation arrangements, Tauranga and the Eastern BOP are sitting outside the required +/-10% rule. This differs from the last review in 2018, with the discrepancy in Eastern Bay of Plenty growing, Tauranga now sitting outside the +/- 10% instead of Rotorua, which was outside this rule in 2018 but is now inside.

6.       Pre-Consultation Feedback

The aim of the pre-consultation was to provide information about the BOPRC Representation Review and to gauge satisfaction levels with the current arrangements. While preliminary consultation is not a legislative requirement, the LGC guidelines state “local authorities are strongly encouraged to carry out preliminary consultation”[4].The format was a short online survey via the BOPRC Participate page[5], or people were invited to provide feedback via email or phone.

An invitation was sent to the TAs and Iwi authorities in the Bay of Plenty region via email, and the public were also invited to participate with awareness raised through Social Media posts and community newsletters.

Feedback Questions:

1.  Please select which constituency you are in (required field).

2.  Do you feel that the current constituencies are working well? (Score 1-5). Let us know why (Free text).

3.  Do you have any other feedback? (Free text).

The feedback received was anonymous, a summary, staff comment and links to draft options that may address the feedback are outlined below.

Constituency	Summary/Staff Comment	Link to Option
Tauranga	Suggests a reduction in councillor numbers – however this would not smooth the +/-10% variations	G Option 1 Gi
Tauranga	Supports status quo	G Option 1 ai
Rotorua	Negative/Neutral - No comments	n/a
WBOP	The existence of Māori constituencies is not within the scope of this review	n/a
WBOP	The existence of Māori constituencies is not within the scope of this review	n/a
Mauao	Somewhat/Neutral - No comments	n/a
WBOP	Reference to TCC not BOPRC	n/a
Tauranga	Supports status quo	G Option 1 ai
Tauranga	Neutral - No comments	n/a
Tauranga	Supports status quo	G Option 1 ai
Tauranga	Supports status quo	G Option 1 ai
EBOP	Neutral - No comments	n/a
Ōkurei	Suggests boundary adjustments for Māori constituencies	M Option 3 b
WBOP	Suggests increased rep for Pongakawa area	G Option 2 b
WBOP	Supports status quo	G Option 1 ai
Ōkurei	The existence of Māori constituencies is not within the scope of this review	n/a
EBOP	Supports status quo	G Option 1 ai
EBOP	Neutral - No comments	n/a
EBOP	Suggests splitting EBOP	G Option 2 i
EBOP	Geothermal issues (passed on to the correct team)	n/a
Tauranga	Disproportionate representation in EBOP
Tauranga	The existence of Māori constituencies is not within the scope of this review	n/a
WBOP	Living on boundary of Tauranga/WBOP (Welcome Bay), supports joining TCC, or defined representation for that area	G Option 3 d
WBOP	Supports status quo	G Option 1 ai
WBOP	Supports status quo	G Option 1 ai
Tauranga	Somewhat/Neutral – no comments	n/a
Tauranga	The existence of Māori constituencies is not within the scope of this review	n/a
EBOP	Councillors concentrated around Tauranga, meaning rural/smaller town issues outvoted
Tauranga	Neutral – would like more Cr interaction with community (passed on to correct team)	n/a
Tauranga	Somewhat/Neutral - No comments	n/a
WBOP	The existence of Māori constituencies is not within the scope of this review	n/a
WBOP	Neutral – the demographic of Councillors is not within the scope of this review	n/a
Tauranga	Negative – service delivery is not within the scope of this review (passed on to the correct team)	n/a
WBOP	Neutral	n/a
Tauranga	Population make-up and retention is not within the scope of this review	n/a
Federated Farmers	Supported strong effective representation in EBOP, noting the volume of Council services provided there.	TBC

 

While not legislatively required, this initial engagement was considered in the development of the various options presented in this paper. Once a preferred option is adopted by Council, formal consultation is required by legislation.

7.       Representation Review Key Considerations[6]

7.1      Communities of Interest

The term “communities of interest” is used in the LEA and the Local Government Commission’s Guidelines to describe, in general terms, the sense of community or belonging. The sense of community is reinforced by the geography of the area, the commonality of places to which people go to for their employment, the location of their schools, marae, banks, where they do their shopping and the location of their religious, recreational and major transport facilities etc.

Territorial Authority boundaries and their wards also provide guidance around the location of communities of interest. The LEA requires that constituency boundaries, as far as practicable, coincide with the boundaries of one or more Territorial Authorities (TA) boundaries or their wards[7].

In addition, under the BOPRC (Māori Empowering) Act 2001, Māori constituencies must have regard to tribal affiliations. The BOPRC (Māori Constituency Empowering) Act 2001 prevails over any inconsistencies between itself and the LEA.

7.2      Fair and Effective Representation

The Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA) and the BOPRC (Māori Constituency Empowering) Act require fair[8] and effective[9] representation for individuals and communities. In carrying out a representation review, local authorities need to be guided by these two principles. When determining fair and effective representation the general and Māori constituencies are considered separately.

Appendix two provides a visual representation of how ‘communities of interest’, ‘effective representation’, and ‘fair representation’ intersect.

7.2.1    Fair Representation

Fair representation relates to the number of people represented by each Member and is designed to ensure approximate equality of representation i.e., votes of equal value. Section 19V (2) of the LEA states:

 “A regional council and, where appropriate, the Commission must ensure that the population of each ward or constituency or subdivision, divided by the number of members to be elected by that ward or constituency or subdivision, produces a figure no more than 10% greater or smaller than the population of the district or region or local board area or community divided by the total number of elected members.”

However, section 19V(3)(b) of the LEA allows that:

“If the regional council or the Commission considers that effective representation of communities of interest so requires, constituencies may be defined and membership distributed between them in a way that does not comply with subsection (2)”

7.2.2    Effective Representation

Effective representation is the ability of the constituents to have meaningful contact with their representative in order for their views to be heard.

As far as practicable, the following factors should be taken into consideration when determining effective representation[10]:

·      Accessibility, size and configuration of an area

·      The elected members’ ability to effectively represent and provide reasonably even representation across a region e.g., opportunities for public meetings etc

·      Avoiding arrangements that create barriers to representation or participation, or that split recognised communities of interest or group communities with few common interests.

Effective representation for regional councils must be achieved within the statutory limits of no fewer than 6 and no more than 14 Elected Members.[11]

8.       Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Māori Constituency) Empowering Act 2001

The Bay of Plenty Regional Council established three Māori constituencies under the Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Māori Constituency Empowering) Act 2001. As well as having regard to councillor per population ratio, communities of interest and tribal affiliations, the Act also requires Māori constituencies to have regard to boundaries of existing Māori electoral districts[12].

Unless the number of total elected members is reduced, the current number of Māori Elected Members will remain unchanged at 3, this is in accordance with the formula set out in Section 6 of the BOPRC (Māori Constituency Empowering) Act 2001. However, consideration of boundaries between the three Māori constituencies of Mauao, Ōkurei, and Kōhi, each with one councillor representative, must be considered during each representation review.

 

9.       Local Government Commission 2018 Representation Review Determination

As the representation arrangements approved by Council in 2018 included two constituencies outside the +/- 10% rule (Rotorua at +12.31% and Eastern Bay of Plenty at -25.43%) the decision was referred to the LGC for determination[13]. The LGC upheld Council’s decision, finding that the non-compliance with the +/-10% rule was justified for the following reasons:

·      The arrangements are well established and familiar to residents

·      Four constituencies reflect territorial authority districts which reflected communities of interest

·      The amalgamation of three sub-regional district councils into the Eastern Bay constituency was sensible given the similarities of terrain, settlement patterns and their focus on Whakatāne as the main service town, and the strong commonalities between these three areas

·      The constituency boundaries coincide with the boundaries of the territorial authorities or their wards

·      Current boundaries cannot be realigned in a way that will not alienate communities of interest or create unnatural geographical boundaries.

The Commission also noted:

·      The circumstances of the Rotorua and Eastern Bay of Plenty constituencies in 2018 were very similar to those applying at the time of the previous determination in 2013, where council’s decision was also upheld. This shaped the 2018 determination

·      At the next review further boundary adjustments may be required across more constituencies to accommodate growth, enabling a far more comprehensive review and repositioning of boundaries and representation ratios based on population changes and communities of interest

·      During the 2018 review, Council acknowledged the region’s population was experiencing significant growth and change, and resolved to undertake a further representation review prior to the 2022 elections.

This resolution was rescinded in September 2020 due to pending Tauranga City Council and Western Bay of Plenty District Council boundary changes, significant national policy changes that would affect the Council in the coming years, and the age of available data supplied by the LGC. It was also noted that all constituencies except the Eastern Bay of Plenty were within the +/-10% rule.

 

10.     Data Availability

All data has been provided by Stats NZ[14], however, the 2023 census data was not available in time for this review. Population estimates from 30 June 2023, which uses the 2018 census as its base with adjustments made for births, deaths and migration have been used for this review. All Councils undertaking a review this year are experiencing the same issue with the age of the available data.

The next census is due in 2028, with our next representation review scheduled to commence in 2029/2030. If the data compilation period is similar for the next census, we could assume that we will have current data available for the 2029/2030 review.

There is an option to complete an earlier review in 2026-7, this would be using the 2023 census data as a base with adjustments made for births, deaths and migration. Council can resolve to complete an earlier review when adopting their preferred representation arrangement in September.

 

11.     Next Steps

The companion paper, “Options Discussion – Bay of Plenty Regional Council Representation Review”, outlines information specific to the 2024 Representation Review and outlines options for consideration.

 

 

Appendix 1 -

Legislative requirements for Regional Councils

Topic	Legislation Extract	Reference
Membership (including chairperson)	To be not less than six nor more than 14 councillors.	s19D
Basis of election	The region must be divided into constituencies.  Councillors may not be elected partly by the electors of the region and partly by the electors of constituencies. Councillors must be elected by the electors of each constituency of the region. Each constituency must elect at least one councillor.	s19E
Representation	Arrangements must: •   provide effective representation of communities of interest within the region •   ensure electors receive fair representation having regard to the +/-10% population rule provided in section 19V(2) •   ensure that constituency boundaries coincide with current statistical mesh block areas •   ensure that constituency boundaries, as far as practicable, coincide with the boundaries of one or more territorial authorities or the boundaries of wards Section 19V(3)(b) provides a ground for not complying with the +/-10% rule as set out in section 19V(2).  Constituencies may be defined in such a way that does not comply with the +/-10% rule if this is required to ensure effective representation of communities of interest All exceptions to the +/-10% rule must be approved by the Local Government Commission.  The approval of the Commission is required whether or not appeals or objections are lodged against a regional council's decision.	s19U, s19V, s19X

 

Timeline Requirements

Timeline	Requirement
Between 20 December 2023 and 31 July 2024	The local authority must determine by resolution the initial proposal for representation arrangements, including: • the proposed number of constituencies • the proposed name and boundaries of each constituency • the number of councillors proposed to be elected by the electors of each constituency. As soon as practicable after passing the resolution, the regional council must send a copy to: • Local Government Commission • Surveyor-General • Government Statistician • Remuneration Authority • Territorial authorities in the region.
Within 14 days of the resolution, and no later than 8 August 2024	The local authority must give public notice of its initial proposal contained in the resolution including: • arrangements for public inspection of full proposal • the communities of interest that were considered by the local authority • population to proposed member ratios for constituencies and the reasons for those proposals in terms of the legislation • invite submissions and provide the closing date for submissions.

 

 

Appendix 2 –

Key considerations

 

Accreditation: New Zealand Society of Local Government Managers, Code of Good Practice for the Management of Local Authority Elections and Polls 2019, Part 5.

 

 

 

Informal Workshop Paper
To:	Regional Council
	19 March 2024
From:	Claudia Cameron, Committee Advisor and Steve Groom, Governance Manager
	Karen Aspey, General Manager, People and Leadership

 

1.       Purpose

This paper outlines information specific to the 2024 BOPRC Representation Review, focusing on options that have been assessed and provided for your deliberations.

The companion paper ‘Introduction to the Bay of Plenty Regional Council Representation Review 2024’ provides background information on the representation review process, including the legislative basis for a review, the process we have undertaken, and feedback received in pre-engagement.

2.       Guidance Sought from Councillors

Guidance is sought to identify the preferred options for both the Māori and General constituencies. The purpose of this workshop is not to make a decision, but to provide guidance to staff in refining and developing options to be considered by Council on 9 May 2024, which will then go out for community consultation in June.

Following public consultation, your final proposal may be required to go for determination by the Local Government Commission (LGC). The reasons for supporting or eliminating options will be required^[15], therefore your deliberations at this workshop will form an important record of the development of your proposal.

3.       Format of Workshop

We propose to run the workshop in broadly three phases:

1.   Understanding the process and options: Members view physical maps of all of the options we considered. Questions regarding understanding of the options

2.   Discuss the process of arriving at short-listed options: assessment criteria outlined, are the short-listed options appropriate

3.   Deliberative discussion on short-listed options: Members undertake deliberative discussion, eliminating non-viable options and discussing pros and cons of options that could conceivably be considered for the preferred option.

4.       Bay of Plenty Communities of Interest

The legislation requires that we start by considering Communities of Interest^[16]. Communities of interest were identified and themed to enable mapping:

·      Economic/social hubs – Tauranga, Whakatāne, Rotorua, Ōpōtiki, Kawerau

·      Coastal/catchments/lakes/water bodies - Rangitāiki, Kaituna, Whakatāne Rivers, coastal Mount Maunganui, Tauranga harbour, Rotorua lakes

·      Land use/Economic drivers – Industrial, rural/horticulture/forestry/farming, urban/commuter

·      Climate/Natural hazard risks

·      Council Services – fresh water, rivers and drainage, public transport, emergency management, growth areas.

The General communities of interest which were not able to be mapped as viable constituencies, or which spanned the entire Bay of Plenty region, were discarded.

Māori communities of interest are currently identified as Western iwi, Central iwi, and Eastern iwi.

The existing three Māori constituencies generally relate to the boundaries of the predominant tribal affiliations in the region. Pre-consultation feedback was received regarding boundaries, which contributed to options developed below.

We used these communities of interest to develop 32 options overall, and used an assessment framework to arrive at the short-listed options presented in this paper.

5.       Analysis of Draft Options

Each draft option was looked at in terms of fair representation, effective representation, alignment to TA boundaries or wards and alignment of communities of interest^[17]. For ease of analysis the options were compiled into a table and allocated a 1-3 score for each category.

The scores were totalled, and those options scoring eight or above were looked at in further detail. The full table is attached and the scoring criteria is listed in the top table of the attachment.  A full set of maps can be found on the Representation Review 2024 Participate page and will be available in hard copy at the workshop.

Short-listed options are discussed in more detail below. Maps and data for shortlisted options are attached.

 

5.1      Consideration of Options: Māori Constituencies

The tables below outline each short-listed option. If we depart from status quo, we propose to identify and consult with affected Iwi/Hapū.

5.1.1    M - Option 1 a - Status Quo

Status quo
Representatives: Mauao – 1; Kōhi – 1; Ōkurei - 1
Fair Representation		Pros: ·      All Constituencies are within the +/-10% rule ·      Benefits from incumbency, meanings it is generally well understood by constituents
Effective representation
Alignment with TAs	N/A	Cons: ·      The current arrangement splits the Te Arawa Waka, adjustments could be made to Mauao/Ōkurei in light of this. ·      Splits the headwaters of Rangitāiki river
Communities of Interest
Total score	5

5.1.2    M - Option 2 a – unite Rangitāiki River

The Headwaters of the Rangitāiki River moved to Kōhi, with status quo for Mauao
Representatives: Mauao – 1; Kōhi – 1; Ōkurei - 1
Fair Representation		Pros: ·      Moving the headwaters of the Rangitāiki river to Kōhi would respect the whakapapa of the awa, and keep the river in its entirety within the same constituency
Effective representation
Alignment with TAs	N/A	Cons: ·      The land area of Kōhi would increase from 7589km2 to 8585.3 km2
COI
Total score	5

5.1.3    M - Option 3 b – more closely align Te Arawa waka

Maketū/Kaituna (SA2 blocks[18]) moved from Mauao to Ōkurei, with status quo for Kōhi
Representatives: Mauao – 1; Kōhi – 1; Ōkurei - 1
Fair Representation		Pros: ·      Responds to feedback received that the status quo splits Iwi/hapū of Te Arawa waka. This change would be in line with the enabling legislation, which places a priority on constituencies based on tribal affiliation.
Effective representation
Alignment with TAs	N/A	Cons: ·      Further reduces the size of Mauao, however, increase in Ōkurei is not unmanageable. ·      Splits the headwaters of Rangitāiki river ·      Some Te Arawa split remains, but this may be acceptable.
Communities of Interest
Total score	6

5.1.4    M - Option 3 c – unite Rangitāiki and more closely align Te Arawa waka

Combination of Options 2 a and 3 b - Maketū/Kaituna (SA2 blocks) moved from Mauao to Ōkurei and the Headwaters of the Rangitāiki River moved to Kōhi
Representatives: Mauao – 1; Kōhi – 1; Ōkurei - 1
Fair Representation		Pros: ·      Responds to feedback received that the status quo splits Iwi/hapū of Te Arawa waka. ·      Moving the headwaters of the Rangitāiki river to Kōhi would respect the whakapapa of the awa.
Effective representation
Alignment with TAs	N/A	Cons: ·      Increases size of Kōhi and Ōkurei and further reduces the geographical size of Mauao. ·      Some Te Arawa split remains, but this may be acceptable.
Communities of Interest
Total score	6

 

5.2      Consideration of Options: General Constituencies

The options below are representative of ‘themes’. Within each theme there are variations that can be made to address specific priorities, and there are a variety of ways that you could combine elements of different themes in one option.

5.2.1    G – Option 1 a i – Status Quo

Status quo
Representatives: Tauranga – 5, WBOP – 2, EBOP – 2, Rotorua - 2
Fair Representation		Pros: ·      Easily understandable by the community ·      No significant dissatisfaction with existing arrangements ·      Approved by the LGC through previous determinations ·      Aligns broadly to communities of interest
Effective representation
Alignment with TAs		Cons: ·      Central BOP split/lacking direct link to members by location ·      Murapara/Galatea align more closely with Rotorua ·      Headwaters of Rangitāiki River split from the body of the river, and Rotorua constituency split ·      EBOP very large with hjgh level of Council services ·      Tauranga slightly under represented
Communities of Interest
Total score	8

5.2.2    G – Option 2 e – Focus on Fair Representation

Maketū/Te Puke Ward moved to Eastern BOP constituency, Pāpāmoa Ward moved to Western BOP constituency and status quo for Rotorua
Representatives: Tauranga – 5, WBOP – 2, EBOP – 2, Rotorua - 2
Fair Representation		Pros: ·      One of the few ways to maintain existing constituencies and achieve fair representation across all ·      Pāpāmoa and Ōmokoroa have some shared interests as coastal ‘commuter communities’ experiencing rapid growth
Effective representation
Alignment with TAs		Cons: ·      Splits Western BOP; Te Puke and Eastern Bay combines communities of interest with few commonalities ·      Pāpāmoa has strong links to Tauranga ·      Risk of both EBOP Members are elected from the Te Puke area. Makes EBOP even larger geographically.
Communities of Interest
Total score	8

5.2.3    G – Option 2 i – Focus on Effective Representation

EBOP split into 2 constituencies one of which is Uruwera Ward/ Kawerau District/ Headwaters of Rangitāiki (Taupō Ward) combined
Representatives: Tauranga – 5, WBOP – 2, Eastern Central BOP – 1, Southern BOP – 1, Rotorua - 2
Fair Representation		Pros: ·      Constituencies more closely aligned to communities of interest in the EBOP, coastal communities and inland communities being split into separate constituencies ·      Resolves the non-contiguity issues in Rotorua
Effective representation
Alignment with TAs		Cons: ·      Southern Bay of Plenty would be massively over-represented ·      One elected member would cover a very long area of coastline in Eastern Coastal BOP constituency.
Communities of Interest
Total score	9

5.2.4    G – Option 2 g ii – Balancing Western Bay/Tauranga

Pāpāmoa Ward moved to Western BOP Constituency, with status quo for Rotorua and Eastern BOP, one representative shifted from Tauranga to WBOP
Representatives: Tauranga – 4, WBOP – 3, EBOP – 2, Rotorua - 2
Fair Representation		Pros: ·      There is an argument to be made that Pāpāmoa and Ōmokoroa have some shared interests in terms of being coastal ‘commuter communities’ experiencing rapid growth
Effective representation
Alignment with TAs		Cons: ·      Under-representation in Tauranga (although Council will still be over one-third Tauranga representatives).  ·      WBOP slightly over represented. Could be justifiable due to the growth in Pāpāmoa and Ōmokoroa over time
Communities of Interest
Total score	7

5.2.5    G – Option 2 j – Making Eastern BOP more manageable

Murapara and Galatea (SA2 blocks) combined with Rotorua, with status quo for Tauranga and Western Bay
Representatives: Tauranga – 5, WBOP – 2, EBOP – 2, Rotorua - 2
Fair Representation		Pros: ·      Reduces geographic size of Eastern BOP, allowing for more effective representation ·      Resolves the non-contiguity in Rotorua and brings Murupara into the Rotorua constituency
Effective representation
Alignment with TAs		Cons: ·      Makes the over-representation in Eastern BOP slightly worse by reducing the population base in this constituency
Communities of Interest
Total score	8

5.2.6    G – Option 3 g – Uniting WBOP and Tauranga

Three constituencies by combining Tauranga and Western Bay with status quo for Rotorua and Eastern BOP
Representatives: Tauranga and surrounds – 7, EBOP – 2, Rotorua - 2
Fair Representation		Pros: ·      Tauranga no longer outside the +/- 10% threshold ·      Commonality of interests across communities in Western BOP and Tauranga in relation to networked services, people living in one and working in the other
Effective representation
Alignment with TAs		Cons: ·      May cause an unfair weighting of representatives around the council table, with over 50% of Members representing one constituency area ·      Risk that all elected members are Tauranga-based ·      Despite strong links between Tauranga and Western BOP, some communities may feel un-represented if the focus becomes more urban.
Communities of Interest
Total score	8

 

6.       Engagement with the Community

Once you have adopted your preferred option, you are legislatively required to consult on it. We will seek to do this in a way that has broad reach but low costs.

At the Council meeting on 9 May, we will also seek your direction on how you would like to engage with the community. This will likely include options for:

1.            

·      Letters/direct emails to territorial authorities, iwi and key stakeholders.

·      Email update/notifications to Participate project followers.

·      Online newsletters – Participate, Komiti Māori and Regional Council Kōrero.

·      Webinars – online sessions to discuss options and how to make a submission.

·      Friend of the submitter: Staff members to people making submissions.

·      Community drop-in sessions at BOPRC offices in each constituency

We will also identify communities for additional targeted engagement, including:

2.            

·      Letter/flyer drops to targeted residents, businesses, and groups.

·      Community pop-ups These events could be held in local areas with high foot traffic, such as local shopping areas, markets, or community events.

·      Community meetings: These meetings will be scheduled as required or at the request of residents or community groups.

 

7.       Next Steps

Following this workshop we will refine and develop any options you identified that you would like to consider for your preferred initial option. This will include verifying numbers and boundaries, specific consultation or information gathering you have requested, and further developing rationale for the option(s).

We will seek to have you adopt your preferred initial option at the Council meeting on 9 May 2024. 

Attachments

Attachment 1 - 2024 Representation Review Draft Options Comparison Table ⇩

Attachment 2 - 2024 Representation Review Shortlisted Options - Maps and Population Statistics