One of the many highlights of my last ten years at TwentyTwo has been working with local body organisations across New Zealand help them with their complex property challenges. From this experience I can say with confidence that there are many capable, smart, community-minded professionals inside them. Yet, too often, they’re held back and undermined by a system that is broken.
The recently concluded local government elections have highlighted more than ever that there is something fundamentally dysfunctional about what is expected of councils. The downstream effect is a disengaged electorate.
The apathy and dissatisfaction is voiced through the turnout figures. It would appear that the 2025 election national turnout is one of the lowest on record at ~38%. How can communities stay engaged when councils underperform, are underfunded (forcing rates increase and the negative fallout that follows), constrained by central government, poorly resourced and expected to do more with less? How are towns and cities meant to create community and sense of pride if they can’t invest in facilities because central government has decided all they are good for is pipes and bins?
In the property sector we have seen a staggering increase in cost of construction over the past 8 years, including infrastructure costs. There seems to be precious little recognition that everything is more expensive to build and maintain. When rates have typically increased at between 3% – 6% over recent years, it is little wonder rates have spiked over the past two years as Councils grapple with the cost and demands of deferred infrastructure maintenance and catering for growing, diverse and aging populations. Naturally, the public see this negatively and so begins the spiral – negativity towards councils, negativity within councils, negative performing councils, negativity from central government. The system is broken.
When turnout is low and apathy is high then out goes the calibre of candidates. The brave few that put their names forward are in many cases well-meaning but poorly prepared for the task at hand. Elected Members are asked to manage multi-million-dollar assets, complex property portfolios and complex community issues — responsibilities that would stretch even experienced directors. In my view, the work load expected of Elected Members is unreasonable, unsustainable and unrewarded.
It’s time for reform. Central Government must stop preaching localism when in opposition and start funding and enabling it properly when in power. Establish clear criteria for candidates, strengthen fiscal autonomy, extend terms, decentralise decision-making, insert appropriate appointed members while preserving democratic principles and hold leadership accountable. If that sounds delusional – web search countries that have adopted hybrid systems for local government.
My focus has been on how councils can make their property work harder for communities, how to activate urban areas using property and how to adopt a more commercial mindset. It’s encouraging to see those ideas gaining traction, however the last election made it obvious — the system is broken and change is overdue. I admire all those candidates who were willing to step forward, but equally sympathise for the hospital pass you have received if you were successful.
