Here’s the real scoop

4 Sep 2025 • By Mary Anne Gill

Local Choice

Good Local Media promised you the best coverage possible of the election in Waipā and we are delivering.

Local Choice

We challenged every candidate to respond to 10 questions on issues such as borrowing to fund shortfalls, Ahu Ake, Cambridge Connections (also known as the Blue Blob), urban intensification, council expenditure, Māori wards, community boards, Te Ara Wai’s future, Lake Karāpiro and their vision for Waipā.

We asked community board candidates whether councillors should sit on boards, do they support a Māori seat, should CBDs be the main retail hub, what involvement should community board chairs have at council, lack of consultation in Cambridge and Kihikihi, secret meetings, decision making, discretionary grants and the future of boards.

Their answers are going up on our websites as we process them – cambridgenews.nz and teawamutunews.nz.

Click on Elections2025 and the answers to those questions are there.

It’s for Good Local Media readers and like this newspaper, it’s free – you pay nothing and it doesn’t come out of rates.

There are no paywalls – it’s an entirely independent unbiased presentation of the responses of candidates to questions we think are relevant to the district.

Along with the candidate responses is breaking news around the election campaign as it heats up.

Elections in Waipā don’t come cheap – the district council is spending $284,000 on them this year. Ōtorohanga ratepayers are seeing their council pay $51,000 and Waitomo ratepayers $72,000.

Take an interest in these elections – check out what candidates think. Today we give you a snapshot of the responses received by 6pm Monday to some of those questions.

We asked the mayoral candidates and those people standing for council itself the following question:
Waipā is currently running operational deficits over three years, which reduces the annual rates increase by around 4%. To fund this gap, the council is borrowing an average of $8 million per year.

- Were you aware of this funding strategy?
- Do you agree with the approach of borrowing to fund operational shortfalls as prudent rather than raising rates to fully fund current operations? Why or why not?

MAYORAL CANDIDATES

Susan O’Regan

Susan O’Regan – 2025

The assertion in this question that we are borrowing to fund operating deficits for the first three years is not correct. The forecast operating deficits are the result of not fully funding depreciation during those 3 years.

While they are forecast accounting deficits, they are not cash deficits and therefore no borrowing is required to fund the shortfall. As the depreciation funding shortfall is made up in subsequent years we felt the budget was prudent. It is an important principle that we try not to borrow to fund operations.

Mike Pettit -2025

Obviously far from ideal, as borrowing to cover operational deficits is not sustainable. Ratepayers expect prudent financial management. As mayor, I would require line-by-line scrutiny of budgets and/or starting with a zero budget in some areas, to look for operational efficiencies before passing costs to residents.

At the same time, I want Waipā to explore mixed funding models — bringing in government support, business partnerships, philanthropy, grants and setting up trusts where applicable — so we are not so dependent on rates.

Borrowing should be a last resort, used only when fully justified, clearly explained, and backed by strong governance oversight.

Clare St Pierre – 2025

While not ideal, I see it as prudent as a short-term affordability measure to keep rates lower. The shortfall isn’t entirely funded by increased borrowing. Operating reserves were used to reduce the overall rates requirement (and reserves aren’t counted in the balanced budget formula), some depreciation costs of about $1.5 Million per year were unfunded (catch up takes place in later years), and certain operating costs for projects like the District Plan and Ahu Ake – Waipā Community Spatial Plan were loan funded rather than rates funded was deemed acceptable due to the long-term nature of these plans.

Dale-Maree Morgan

Dale-Maree Morgan – 2025

Borrowing can ease short-term pressure, but it’s not a permanent solution.

We need clear priorities, continued cost control, honest conversations with the community about sustainable options before increasing debt or rates.

Naomi Pocock

Naomi Pocock

Generally, borrowing should not be used to cover operational costs, except in terms of transitioning to the use of new assets as part of overall investment costs.

Local governments should lobby central government for fairer funding models on infrastructure development so the cost for investment isn’t borne by rate payers.

Also, councils should be run efficiently, while still providing quality services to local communities.

TE AWAMUTU-KIHIKIHI WARD

Lou Brown

Lou Brown 2025

Rates need to increase yearly to fund the current operational deficit. Unfortunately, rates are only charged to property owners, not the whole population. Central government doesn’t support local government with removing GST and adequately funding new central government policies and requirements.

Rate increases are also driven by servicing development infrastructure costs and the fact that Waipa is considered a Tier 1 council, also a central government policy. Rate increases must be balanced with debt and borrowing should be predominately for long-term infrastructure and development.

Marcus Gower – 2025

Yes, I was aware of this strategy. While I appreciate the goal of easing the immediate rates burden, I don’t believe borrowing for operational shortfalls is a prudent long-term solution. This practice pushes today’s running costs onto tomorrow’s ratepayers, with interest added.

True fiscal responsibility means paying for day-to-day expenses from our current income, much like a household budget. My focus is on delivering core services as efficiently as possible and ensuring we live within our means, balancing affordability today with sustainable financial stewardship for the future of our district.

Lyn Hunt – 2025

I do not agree with the approach of borrowing to pay operational costs.

This approach shows poor financial management by the Council.

The council needs to live within its means, just as householders and businesses do. Savings should be found before borrowing more money.

Ratepayers are already burdened with the high Waipa rates.

Graham Jull – 2025

I am aware of the funding strategy. While borrowing can sometimes be necessary for major infrastructure, I do not support relying on debt to fund ongoing operational shortfalls This places an unfair burden on future generations and reduces financial resilience.

Ratepayers deserve transparency on the true cost of services. Council must re-examine expenditure priorities, use of consultants, in-house decision making and reduction of non-essential spending before borrowing or raising rates. There must be a balance between efficiency gains, better planning and community input.

Dean Taylor

I wasn’t aware of this strategy, but as I read it, the borrowing is a short term measure brought about by the pressure of significant growth, followed by a slow-down of the property market, which has resulted in delays realising income in the form of fees from developers.

I agree with protecting current ratepayers from these costs and spreading the load to include new ratepayers, but it should only ever be viewed as a temporary measure.

Shane Walsh – 2025

I am aware of the strategy and am concerned, as it highlights the dire financial issues facing council. This year’s 15.5 per cent rate increase is the third highest of the 78 councils in New Zealand – add another four per cent and it would have been the highest rate increase in New Zealand.

Borrowing to fund operational shortfalls is not prudent, as the interest costs will become another burden for ratepayers. Council’s focus needs to be on eliminating overspending and the need to borrow.

Bernard Westerbaan – 2025

I am aware of this approach. I believe relying on debt to cover operational costs is stupid, not even for short term. Rates should reflect the true cost of services.

Borrowing has to be reserved for long-life infrastructure where future generations benefit.

Live within your means.

COMMUNITY BOARDS

We asked should councillors sit on the two community boards and whether the boards should continue to exist.

Jill Taylor refused to answer our questions, no responses received from John Kopa.

Liam Bullen

Liam Bullen – 2025

No. Councillors should not sit on community boards as they are not elected for this role. Not having councillors will better enable the community board to independently hold the council accountable, challenge its decisions and be a strong advocate for the community. Community boards are an effective means of engaging with the community. The community boards can act independently and hold the council accountable in its decision-making on behalf of the community. The Te Awamutu-Kihikihi Community Board needs to better represent the community and that’s why I am running.

Ange Holt – 2025

No – The current structure’s inclusion of councillors on boards is largely inefficient. Perceived conflicts of interest frequently undermine their effectiveness, preventing proper advocacy. While their relationships and institutional knowledge offer some benefits, we would be better served by independent boards, free from councillor involvement, optimising accountability and true representation.

Community boards play an important role in the community and are a valuable asset to their council when treated as a respected partner that is making a worthwhile contribution. We are responsible for our towns while councillors focus on the entire district. We provide an independent voice to keep council accountable.

Sharon Stirling – 2025

The poor communication between council and community board is an ongoing cause for concern. Currently the councillors appointed to community board sit as part of the board, but are not contributing usefully to the discussions, nor reporting community board concerns to council. This arrangement is unsatisfactory and must be reviewed.

A very big yes to this. Council itself is far too big and cumbersome to attend adequately to local matters. Council has lost sight of its grass roots and must learn to accept and recognise the advocacy of our community boards.

John Wood – 2025

Councillors sitting on the community boards facilitates the flow of information between the council and the boards. They are often able to provide information to elected community board members because they have access to more in-depth information.

Community boards provide an opportunity for residents to express their opinions and concerns regarding their community in a less formal manner rather than approaching councillors or council staff. The relationship between councillors, council staff and the community board ensures their voice is heard.