Final proposal for representation arrangements for the 2025 local elections
On 10 September 2024, Hutt City Council considered submissions received on the initial proposal regarding representation arrangements for Council to apply to the local elections to be held on 11 October 2025.
Hutt City Council received 370 valid submissions on its proposal.
- 134 submissions supported and 116 submissions opposed that Hutt City Council comprise a Mayor and 13 Councillors.
- 132 submissions were in favour and 139 submissions opposed that Councillors be elected under a mixed system of representation.
- 139 submissions supported and 131 opposed proposed boundaries for 5 General wards.
- 79 submissions were in favour and 268 opposed that Community Boards be disestablished.
Comments shared in objection to various elements of the proposal are summarised as follows:
- 132 submitters said they wanted to retain the Eastbourne Community Board
- 125 submitters said they wanted to retain Community Boards
- 76 submitters said they didn’t support adding a Māori ward
- 61 submitters said that Community Boards should be extended to all wards
- 35 submitters said 13 Councillors and a Mayor are too many
- 26 submitters said they wanted to retain the Wainuiomata Community Board
- 22 submitters said they prefer to retain the status quo
- 21 submitters said they didn’t support some wards having two representatives, saying representation is uneven
- 20 submitters said that Wainuiomata was underrepresented
- 16 submitters said they wanted to retain the Petone Community Board
- 11 submitters said they preferred ward Councillors only
- 10 submitters said they preferred At-Large Councillors only
- 10 submitters said that the Harbour Ward should have 2 Councillors
- 8 submitters said they didn’t want to lose the Eastern Ward
- 7 submitters said 13 Councillors and a Mayor were not enough people to do a big job
- 6 submitters suggested a combined Harbour Ward Community Board
- 4 submitters said there should be more than one Māori Ward
- 1 submitter suggested a part-time Wainuiomata Ward Councillor to support the bigger population
- 1 submitter said that Community Boards should be given more powers
- 1 submitter said there are too many wards
- 1 submitter said Council should be looking at amalgamation with Wellington City Council and Porirua City Council to create a super city.
Final proposal
Having considered all submissions, Council resolved to adopt its initial proposal as Council’s final proposal, subject to the following amendment:
- extending the Harbour Ward to include the area south of Burdan’s Gate to Pencarrow lighthouse.
Council considered these changes appropriate for the following reasons:
Extending the Harbour Ward boundary
- submissions presented a compelling case that the area south of Burdan’s Gate better aligns with the functional dimension of the community of interest in Eastbourne rather than Wainuiomata due to its geographically bound accessibility constraint.
Council rejected other matters raised for the following reasons:
Submission Theme | Number of comments | Proposed response |
Council should retain Eastbourne Community Board | 132 | Council considers the final proposal provides for more fair and effective representation than having some wards with Community Boards. |
Council should retain Community Boards | 125 | Council considers the final proposal provides for more fair and effective representation than having some wards with Community Boards. |
Council should not add a Māori Ward | 76 | This decision sits outside the scope of the representation review. |
Council should extend Community Boards to all Wards | 61 | Council concluded that there was not enough evidence in the submissions to support establishing Community Boards across the city. The elected member arrangements outlined in the final proposal provide for fair and effective representation across these areas. |
Council should have fewer Councillors | 35 | Council agreed with the Panel’s conclusion in section 8a of its report that having 13 Councillors (5 elected at large (i.e. city wide), 7 elected to general wards, and 1 Māori ward) strikes the right balance for fair and effective representation. |
Council should retain Wainuiomata Community Board | 26 | Council considers the final proposal provides for more fair and effective representation than having some Wards with Community Boards. |
Council should maintain the status quo | 22 | Council considers the final proposal provides for more fair and effective representation than current representation arrangements. |
Representation should be one ward councillor per General Ward only | 21 | Under section 19V of the Local Electoral Act 2001, Councillors must each represent approximately the same number of people (within a margin of +/-10%). Because two wards are significantly larger, they need to have two councillors to meet this requirement. |
Council should add another Councillor to the Wainuiomata General Ward | 20 | Under section 19V of the Local Electoral Act 2001, Councillors must each represent approximately the same number of people (within a margin of +/-10%). Adding another Wainuiomata General Ward Councillor would not meet this requirement as it would result in over representation. |
Council should retain Petone Community Board | 16 | Council considers the final proposal provides for more fair and effective representation than having some Wards with Community Boards. |
Council should be made up of ward councillors only | 11 | A mixed system of representation (Ward and At-Large Councillors) provides for more fair and effective representation of the communities of interest in the city. |
Council should be made up of At-Large Councillors only | 10 | A mixed system of representation (Ward and At-Large Councillors) provides for more fair and effective representation of the communities of interest in the city. |
Council should add another Councillor to the Harbour General Ward | 10 | Under section 19V of the Local Electoral Act 2001, Councillors must each represent approximately the same number of people (within a margin of +/-10%). Adding another Harbour General Ward Councillor would not meet this requirement as it would result in over representation. |
Council should retain the Eastern Ward | 8 | Council agreed with the Panel’s conclusion that an expanded Northern Ward and Central Ward better reflects the interconnection of communities of interest across a wider northern area of the city than is evident in the current Eastern Ward. |
Council should have a greater number of councillors | 7 | Council agreed with the Panel’s conclusion in section 8a of its report that having 13 Councillors (5 elected at large, 7 elected to general wards, and 1 Māori ward) strikes the right balance for fair and effective representation. |
Council should create a combined Harbour Ward Community Board | 6 | Council considers the final proposal provides for more fair and effective representation than having a large Community Board in the Harbour Ward. In addition, the +/-10% rule would add a significant number of representatives in the Petone subdivision of the Community Board over Eastbourne representatives. |
Council should establish more than one Māori ward | 4 | The number of Māori ward Councillors that Hutt City can have is set by a formula in the Local Electoral Act 2001. With 13 Councillors, Hutt City cannot have more than one Māori ward Councillor. |
Council should create a part-time Wainuiomata Councillor | 1 | The Local Electoral Act 2001 does not allow for the establishment of a ‘part-time’ Councillor. |
Council should give Community Boards more powers | 1 | Decision-making powers for Community Boards are out of the scope of the final proposal. |
Council should reduce the number of wards | 1 | The final proposal provides for a more fair and effective representation of our geographical communities of interest than reducing the number of wards. |
Council should be considering amalgamation | 1 | Amalgamation is not in the scope of the representation review. |
Therefore, the final proposal is as follows:
Council representation
Hutt City Council is made up of a Mayor and 13 Councillors elected under a mixed system of representation, with:
- 7 Councillors elected from 5 General Wards
- 5 Councillors elected at-large from across the city
- 1 Councillor elected from Mana Kairangi ki Tai Māori Ward
The 5 General wards reflect the following identified communities of interest:
WARD | COMMUNITIES |
Northern General Ward | Stokes Valley, Taitā, Naenae, Avalon |
Central General Ward | Boulcott, Epuni, Fairfield, Waterloo, Hutt Central, Alicetown, Melling, Woburn, Waiwhetu |
Western General Ward | Manor Park, Kelson, Belmont, Tirohanga, Normandale, Maungaraki |
Harbour General Ward | Korokoro, Petone, Moerā, Gracefield, Eastern Bays, Eastbourne, including the area south of Burdan’s Gate |
Wainuiomata General Ward | Arakura, Glendale, Homedale, Pencarrow, Wainuiomata |
The population that Councillors will represent is as follows:
WARD | POPULATION | COUNCILLOR/S | POPULATION PER COUNCILLOR |
Northern General Ward | 27,500 | 2 | 13,750 |
Central General Ward | 27,500 | 2 | 13,750 |
Western General Ward | 13,950 | 1 | 13,950 |
Harbour General Ward | 15,700 | 1 | 15,700 |
Wainuiomata General Ward | 16,600 | 1 | 16,600 |
In accordance with section 19V(2) of the Local Electoral Act 2001, the population that each Councillor represents must be within the range of 14,750 +/-10% (13,275 to 16,225), unless particular community of interest considerations justify otherwise.
Wainuiomata General Ward falls outside the stipulated range (16,600 or 12.54%). Council considers that it is necessary to avoid dividing the Wainuiomata General Ward for the following reason:
- to avoid separating communities of interest or uniting within one ward communities of interest with few commonalities.
Community board representation
There be no community boards in Lower Hutt and the three existing community boards be disestablished.
Appeals and objections
In accordance with Section 19O of the Local Electoral Act 2001, anyone who made a submission to Council’s initial proposal may lodge an appeal against Council’s final decision. An appeal must relate to matters raised in their initial submission.
In accordance with Section 19P of the Local Electoral Act 2001, anyone who objects to the amended final proposal may lodge an objection. The objection must clearly identify the matters being objected to, in the final proposal.
Appeals and objections must be:
- made in writing,
- received no later than 5pm 15 October 2024,
- be sent to either:
- Email: haveyoursay@huttcity.govt.nz, or
- Post/physical address: Hutt City Council Administration Building, 30 Laings Road, Lower Hutt, 5040
Direct enquiries regarding Council’s decision can be made in the following ways:
- Ph: 04 570 6666 | 0800 488 824
- Email: Haveyoursay@huttcity.govt.nz
Johanna Miller
Chief Executive
11 September 2024
The purpose of a representation review is to make sure that the communities in our city are fairly and effectively represented at Council. The representation review looks at the structures we have in place, not the people who are currently elected. Our last representation review was in 2018.
A review needs to look at these factors:
- The total number of councillors we have
- Whether we have wards, and if so, the review must also consider what they are called, how many councillors each ward has, and where their boundaries are
- Whether there are community boards, and if so the review must also consider how they are set up (e.g. what they’re called, where they are, how many members they have, etc.
In May 2023, councillors decided to appoint an independent panel to engage with communities and make recommendations in the form of a proposal to Council based on what communities tell them.
Changes resulting from the representation review will be effective in the 2025 and 2028 local elections.
All written submissions received during consultation can be viewed here.
A full report and analysis can be viewed here.
More information on the project and consultation can be found on our Kōrero Mai page .
The report and recommendations of the independent panel that were approved for consultation by Council on 27 June may be found here.
What is the role of the independent panel?
The five members of the independent panel are responsible for carrying out initial community engagement on the representation review, then they will prepare a report with recommendations to Council based on what they heard.
Learn more about the panel members below. You can view the terms of reference for the panel here.
Mr Paul Swain (Panel Chair)
Mr Swain has extensive local and central government experience having served as a Councillor on the Greater Wellington Regional Council, as a Member of Parliament representing the Hutt Valley, and as a Cabinet Minister. He has chaired Government inquiries, reviews, boards and committees. As a former Chief Crown Negotiator for Treaty of Waitangi Settlements, Mr Swain is acutely aware of the importance of providing Mana Whenua with real opportunities to engage meaningfully in the decision-making process.
Mrs Ana So’otaga
Mrs So’otaga has a background leading local and national public policy, strategy, systems change, and equity-centred programme design and delivery. She is of Tokelau heritage and along with her family and four children has been born and raised in the Hutt Valley. Ana is well-connected to the Hutt Valley health, sports and Pacific community. She has held leadership roles at the Ministry for Pacific Peoples and Te Awa Kairangi Primary Health Organisation and is now the Strategy and Performance lead with Sport New Zealand.
Sir (Tā) John Clarke
Sir John has over 40 years of management experience in a wide range of public sector environments including education, justice, health, housing, human rights, Crown Law, audit, social welfare, environment and heritage. He is a fluent speaker of Te Reo Māori and has a thorough understanding of Māori issues and wide networks within Māori communities. Sir John has played a major part in Māori–Crown relations and has been the principal cultural adviser to all Ministers of Treaty Settlements.
Ms Meenakshi Sankar
Ms Sankar is a highly experienced research and evaluation practitioner, internationally respected for her leadership in analysis and strategic thinking. Over the last 35 years, she has delivered evaluation assignments for a range of government agencies in New Zealand and multilateral agencies including UNESCO HQ and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Large-scale community engagement using participatory principles is central to her research and evaluation practice, and well demonstrated in her work for the Department of Labour, Ministry of Social Development, Ministry of Education, the Education Review Office and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade.
Mr Matt Richardson
Mr Richardson is an accomplished project manager with expertise in delivering large-scale landscape and ecological mitigation projects across New Zealand. He is passionate about Lower Hutt and brings experience in engaging with a diverse mixture of community groups, including iwi representatives, on a range of projects.
As the first step of the representation review, Council considered public feedback on whether to establish any Māori wards for the next election in 2025.
In November 2023, Council voted to establish a Māori Ward and the details of how it will work will be considered as part of the wider representation review, led by the independent panel.
In September 2024, Council reaffirmed their decision to establish a Māori Ward.
Contact us
Email: repreview@huttcity.govt.nz