Amalgamation

I’m in favor of amalgamation of Upper Hutt and Hutt City. It reduces the cost of city administration and of service duplication. However, proportional representation of councilors should be ensured and senior leadership roles shared equitably. Southern Wairarapa should not be a part of any amalgamation in the greater Wellington area.

Neil Sinclair

I would certainly welcome some informed discussion on amalgamation. For instance, What services does the council provide apart from libraries, roading, open spaces?. Most of the physical work is contracted out, with services like the landfill and dog control undertaken in by Hutt City, and paid for by Upper Hutt ratepayers. Once the responsibility for water and drainage is removed, a large portion of my current rates bill will be paid to someone else. Can Upper Hutt justify the size of the Council overhead for the greatly reduced list of responsibilities. Surely, the interests of Upper Hutt could be protected with local boards (much the same as Petone and Eastbourne currently have) with a local service centre located in the main library.

Editor note: Was unsure whether to put this under Status Quo or Amalgation as really it’s neutral.

Greg Winnie

Please continue with looking at the possibility of amalgamation. I was involved with the amalgamation process in Christchurch while working in the library system. Amalgamation gave the citizens of Christchurch and surrounding area a first class library system. Streamlining the number of council offices & processes all benefited the ratepayers. When I moved here 9 years ago it was puzzling to understand why the councils were all trying to stand alone without the support of a larger team.

Lesley Larkin

Amalgamation is the way forward to save cost, to cut down red tape, to increase productivity and efficiency.

Berndt Olesen

In favor of amalgamation

Alpa Modi

Status Quo

There will be a public petition available to sign to oppose amalgamation of any design and to request the UHCC not to engage in discussion with other regions Mayors until they have a clear mandate in the form of a referendum to do so. Seek it out or call contact me tshoman@kinect .co.nz

Teresa Homan

Stick with status quo. Upper Hutt is a distinct community with it’s own demographic and consequence culture.
Hutt City is prone to flooding and many infrastructure costs for rate payers.

Gayle McGarry

I oppose amalgamation, because being the smallest fish in a very big pond, we in Upper Hutt will have no chance of getting our views heard. We will be over ridden , and lose our voice in every aspect. Big brother (WCC), will simply out vote us, backed up by PCC and LHCC and our unique identity will be lost completely. We must fight against amalgamation and our council should be actively promoting our position, rather than just going along with the flow. The historic proberb “He Who Hestitates Is Lost” could well have been written for us. Pussy footing, and waiting to see what happens next, is not the way to go. Come on UHCC, we elected you to fight in our corner, not to just throw the towel in.

Elaine Chaney

Auckland amalgamated and it cost the ratepayers heaps. NO SAVINGS. The nearest we get to savings is that “Oh it would have been so much more expensive if we didn’t amalgamate”.. Says who? No one independent that is for certain. The Regional Council, the nearest thing we have for amalgamation at the moment, wanted to spend 500 million dollars on a ferry terminal! It would not have benefitted Upper Hutt at all.. But we would have had to help pay for it. They have spent millions planting the riverbank awaiting the next big flood to wipe all the work away. Not that anyone asked for it in the first place. I guess they were getting to understand that locals were realising the the so-called regional council was doing nothing for Upper Hutt.. So if they wasted millions on plantings we should be grateful. Amalgamation will mean Upper Hutt will be worse off and more expensively served. If you think the swimming pool was a money pit, wait till amalgamation.

Brett Weaver

Stay with Status Quo – don’t want to end up being the poor relation to Lower Hutt. Doesn’t stop both councils working together but gives UH residents a continued voice and our own council budget. Means my rates are going to UH and not to more wealthy LH residents.
thanks

Nadine Fathers

Keep the status quo, keep Upper Hutt independent.

• Wellington City carries higher debt-per-capita due to major infrastructure projects (like water and earthquake strengthening).
• Despite promises of “trimming the fat,” staff numbers in merged entities often remain constant or increase. In Auckland, staff expenditure actually rose by $90 million annually shortly after the merger.
• Infrastructure (pipes, roads) can benefit from scale, labor-intensive services (libraries, parks, community events) often become more expensive due to the administrative burden of managing a massive bureaucracy.
• In a “Super Council,” a single councillor might represent 30,000+ people, compared to the much smaller ratios in current councils. This makes it harder for residents to have direct access to their decision-makers.

Dan Culver

Status quo. If we amalgamate we will end up paying more because we will have to pay for other cities bad infrastructure. Our rates will go out of control.

Neville Godfrey

I believe Upper Hutt City is a viable corporation that is large enough to stand for itself.

However the population of Upper Hutt is small compared to Lower Hutt (which includes territories from Stokes Valley south to Eastbourne, Petone and Wainuiomata).

If “The Greater Hutt Valley” was run on a coldly democratic basis, any special interests of Upper Hutt (such as preservation of farmlands or forests) could be out-voted by the larger territorial authority to the south (which has its own concerns such as tsunami preparations).

I think it’s better that Upper Hutt City remains an independent participant in the Greater Wellington Regional Council without losing the distinct characteristics which make Upper Hutt the city that it is.

Nigel Mander

Status quo. It’s not broken, so don’t “fix” it. Amalgamation benefits Wellington and Lower Hutt; but not us.

Richard Catterall

Totally opposed. Amalgamation just means more money going into Wellington city for their pet projects.

Bruce Gillanders

Status quo please. We will end up the poor cousins if we amalgamate. Everything will be provided for in the Hutt as there are more people and we won’t get a look in.

Kathryn Howard

Wellington Regional Council has gouged Upper Hutt with no useful benefits for years. Amalgamation would continue this. Remember WRC wanted to spend $500 million on a ferry terminal. How much use would that have been for Upper Hutt businesses? Amalgamation will bring these sorts of nasty plans to the surface again. Benefit Wellington City and paid for by Upper Hutt ratepayers.

A lot of us commute into Wellington to work: Wellingtons attitude to us can be shown by the fact that the walk from the train station to the city centre has not been improved in 50 years. Amalgamation just means more dribbling politicians sucking money from under represented dormitory suburbs.

Brett Weaver

Hi My name is Maurice Desmond Berrington and I live in Aniseed Grove Timberlea Upper Hutt Wellington nz and I don’t want to see upper Hutt together with lower Hutt I think upper Hutt should stay a separate city from lower Hutt because it will ruin our council services and stuff cheers from Maurice

Maurice Berrington

Status quo please. Propotional votes based on voter regional numbers will take the focus off our smaller region perhaps losing our proportional bite out of the pie

Kevin Braddock

I am totally opposed to amalgamation. UH will be the poor relation and we will be paying for Wellington City’s debts which are huge!

Raewyn Heath

Status Quo – agreeing with what other people have already noted 🙂

Vicky Finlayson

StatusQuo

Paul Hardie

No amalgamation

Gill Brown

Status Quo Please

Paul Hardie

A big NO to amalgamation

Elaine Chaney

Totally opposed, we make a mess as it is, do not need others to help make a bigger mess.

Bruce Gillanders