01/06/2026
Where I Stand on Rates and Why
I know this is a long post, but I ask that you take the time to read it.
Hopefully it helps put a complex issue into some more simple to understand terms.
There's been a lot of discussion about rates recently, and that's entirely understandable. No one enjoys opening their rates bill and seeing a significant increase. I've seen comments suggesting councillors should simply vote for whatever option receives the most support at a public meeting or through submissions. I understand that view, but that's not actually how representative democracy works.
People elect councillors to listen to the community, read the information, ask questions, challenge assumptions and then make decisions based on the full picture in front of them. If our job was simply to vote for whichever option was most popular, there would be no need for elected members at all. Every decision could be made by a public show of hands. The reality is that governing often means making difficult decisions, particularly when the options in front of us are all uncomfortable.
Of course nobody wants a rates increase. If Council proposed a 0% increase, most people would support it. I'd support cheaper fuel, cheaper power, cheaper groceries and cheaper insurance too. But wanting something and being able to sustainably deliver it are two different things.
One thing I think has been missing from this conversation is understanding where many of these costs are coming from. Most people would agree that when they turn on the tap they expect safe drinking water. Following contamination events elsewhere in New Zealand, central government introduced much stricter drinking water, wastewater and stormwater standards across the country. Whether people agreed with those changes or not, councils don't get a choice. We are legally required to meet those standards. In Waitaki alone, around $129 million of investment is planned in drinking water, wastewater and stormwater infrastructure over the next ten years.
That's not because councillors decided they wanted shiny new projects. It's because pipes, treatment plants and infrastructure need upgrading to meet today's standards and serve future generations. The same thing applies to roads.
Roading costs have increased dramatically through higher fuel prices, freight costs, contractor rates, machinery costs and construction materials. At the same time, local communities are increasingly being asked to contribute a significant share of those costs on top of the NZTA share.
If it costs more to run your farm, your business, your workshop or your household than it did five years ago, it also costs more to run a district.
There is another reality that often gets overlooked. Over the years, central government has placed more responsibilities on councils, but often without providing the funding to go with them.
The work still has to be done.
The standards still have to be met.
The reporting still has to happen.
The infrastructure still has to be upgraded.
But ultimately much of the bill lands with local ratepayers. That's not about blaming Wellington. It's simply acknowledging reality. Many of the cost pressures affecting councils today didn't start around the Council table. They started with decisions made well beyond the Waitaki District.
Then there is inflation itself. The cost of pipes, asphalt, machinery, contractors, insurance, power and borrowing has all increased significantly over recent years. Those costs are real whether Council increases rates or not.
We also need to acknowledge something else.
For many years, councils across New Zealand, including Waitaki, often did not increase rates at a level that fully reflected the long-term cost of maintaining and replacing infrastructure. That may have made life easier at the time, but it didn't make the costs disappear. In many cases it simply shifted the burden to future ratepayers.
If your roof starts leaking you can put a bucket underneath it for a while. The bucket is cheap. But eventually the ceiling gets damaged, the insulation gets wet and the repair bill becomes much larger than if you had fixed the roof properly in the first place. For too long, local government across New Zealand has been putting buckets under some very expensive leaks. We're now reaching the point where many of those roofs need fixing.
The question then becomes why I supported the higher end of the increase.
The answer is quite simple. I didn't support a higher increase because I wanted ratepayers paying more. In my area I would be one of the higher rate payers. I supported it because I believe we need to get ourselves back onto a stable financial footing now, so future increases can be smaller, more predictable and more sustainable.
If we continue underfunding essential infrastructure, deferring maintenance and relying on debt to fill the gap, the bill doesn't disappear. It simply arrives later, usually larger, and with interest attached. The easiest vote would have been to choose the lowest increase and leave the problem for someone else.
I didn't think that was the responsible thing to do.
One question I've heard is why councillors didn't simply tell staff to go away and find the savings.
That's a fair question. The reality is I absolutely expect Council to keep looking for savings. I've been vocal about reducing unnecessary bureaucracy, improving transparency, challenging spending, improving reporting and finding smarter ways of delivering services. I don't believe ratepayers should be funding inefficiency. Ratepayers should expect us to scrutinise every dollar spent and constantly look for better ways of doing things. But we also need to be realistic about the scale of the challenge.
Finding efficiencies is important, and it must continue, but no amount of cutting stationery budgets, reducing travel costs, restructuring a few positions or trimming operational spending was ever going to offset tens of millions of dollars of infrastructure investment, rising compliance costs, inflation and increased regulatory requirements.
Both things can be true at the same time. Council can and should become more efficient. And the underlying financial challenge is still real.
My view is that we should get the finances back onto stable ground, rebuild our ability to maintain and replace essential infrastructure, and then focus relentlessly on efficiency and value for money. That doesn't mean I think Council is perfect. Far from it. There is still work to do. We need to continue looking at organisational efficiency, levels of service, asset management, procurement, reporting, transparency and accountability. Those conversations are happening and they need to continue.
But we also need to be honest with ourselves.
No realistic level of cost-cutting alone was going to bridge the gap between the actual cost of delivering essential services and a 0% rates increase. The choice wasn't between a rates increase and no pain. The choice was between dealing with the problem now or pushing more debt, more deferred maintenance and even larger costs onto future generations.
I also want to be clear on one final point.
It is absolutely okay to question decisions. It is okay to disagree with me. It is okay to challenge Council, ask hard questions, debate the numbers and expect better. That is democracy, and I respect that.
But there is a line.
When debate turns into personal abuse, online bullying, threats, or behaviour aimed at intimidating people, that is not okay. No councillor, staff member, candidate, volunteer or member of the public deserves that.
I hear the frustration from parts of our community. I genuinely do. These are tough times and rates increases put real pressure on households, farms and businesses. I have also had many people quietly tell me they support the position I have taken, not because they want higher rates, but because they understand the necessity of dealing with the issue properly. We can disagree strongly and still treat each other decently. The conversations need to stay grounded, respectful and focused on the facts. I will always front up for the decisions I make. But I will not accept threats, bullying or personal abuse being treated as part of normal public debate.
Reasonable people can disagree on where the final number should sit. That's healthy and it's part of democracy.
My position is straightforward:
Fix the finances properly, then hold the organisation accountable for delivering efficiently. I believe that's the most responsible path for both today's ratepayers and the next generation who will inherit these assets.
I also want to acknowledge something that often gets lost in discussions like this. For some people, this increase will create genuine financial pressure.
I understand that and it is not lost.
The reality is that rates are only one of many costs that have increased over recent years. Families, retirees, farmers and businesses are all dealing with rising insurance costs, higher power bills, increased fuel prices, higher interest costs and the everyday cost of living. As a country, we’re all feeling those pressures. A council is not immune to these pressures either. While I believe the decision we made was the most responsible one for the long-term future of the district, that doesn’t mean I ignore the impact it will have on some households today.
If you are genuinely struggling, please reach out and seek help early. There are options available.
Central government funds rates rebate schemes that many people may qualify for but are not currently claiming.
Citizens Advice Bureau can help connect people with budgeting support and financial advice services.
Work and Income may be able to assist in some situations.
Council also has the ability to discuss payment arrangements for those experiencing hardship rather than allowing debt to build up.
The worst thing people can do is struggle in silence. If you’re finding things difficult, ask the question. There are people and organisations whose job is to help.
As elected members, our responsibility is not only to make decisions for the long-term future of the district, but also to recognise the challenges those decisions can create for some members of our community and point people toward support where it’s available.
The easiest vote would have been the lowest number.
The responsible vote was the one I believed gave Waitaki the best chance of avoiding even bigger problems in the future.
Cheers,
Brent Cowles
Councillor - Waitaki, Ahuriri Ward See less
