D - Western Bay of Plenty District Council

C27Friday 17 August, Monday 20 August andTuesday 21 August 2012Council ChambersBarkes Corner, Tauranga9.00am each dayP E O P L E • P L A N • P R O G R E S S

Notice of Meeting No C27CouncilFriday 17 August, Monday 20 August andTuesday 21 August 2012Council ChambersBarkes Corner9.00amTo hear submissions to and decide on the2012 Representation Review ProposalHis Worship the MayorDeputy MayorCouncillors:R J PatersonP ThomasM A BurgessA GilmerK MarshS MatthewsN MayoG MerrimanM Murray-BengeM PittarD ThwaitesG WebberM WilliamsMediaStaffGlenn SnelgroveChief Executive OfficerWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilTE IIAUIIHEIIA A ROHE IIAIIIIGA KURI A WHAREI Kl OTAMARAKAU Kl TE URUWWW WESTERNBAY GOVT NZ PEOPLE • PLAN • PROGRESS

Role:Council Delegations• To exercise all powers and functions to deal with statutory and procedural matters, tocarry out civic duties and responsibilities, and to exercise all non delegated functions.• To establish Joint Committees and Standing Committees of Council, and appointelected members and/or others to these committees.• To maintain the financial overview of Council affairs.• To make all financial decisions not otherwise delegated or included in Council's LongTerm Plan and/or Annual Plan.To exercise all non-delegated functions being:• The power to make a rate• The power to make a bylaw• The power to borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than inaccordance with the Long Term Plan• The Long Term Plan• The power to adopt a long term plan, annual plan, or annual report• The power to appoint a chief executive• The power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under the LocalGovernment Act 2002 in association with the Long Term Plan or developed for thepurpose of the local governance statement• The power to enter into contracts otherwise than in accordance with the provisions ofSection 4 of the Public Bodies Contracts Act 1959• The power to initiate any proceedings in the High Court that are not injunctiveproceedingsProcedural Matters:• Confirmation of all Standing Committee minutes (excluding the Regulatory HearingsCommittee minutes) and minutes of the Risk and Assurance Sub Committee and theLong Term and Annual Plan Sub Committee.• Receive for information all Community Board minutes• Receive for information all Maori Forum minutes• Receive for information all Tauranga City Council I Western Bay of Plenty DistrictCouncil Joint Governance Committee minutes• Adoption and amendment of Standing Orders• Establishment of and delegations to Standing Committees, Joint Committees, SubCommittees and any other governance body that the Council deems necessary• Delegations to Community Boards• Purchase, sale and disposal of Council property other than in accordance with all ofthe following :o the Long Term Plano the Significance Policyo Council's Asset Management Planso Committee or appropriate delegation• Counci llor and Council appointments to outside organisations• Approval of elected member training/conference attendance• Any other procedural matters as required under the Local Government Act 2002

Agenda for Meeting No. C27C27.1.PresentIn AttendanceApologiesSubmissions to the 2012 Representation Review ProposalAttached is an index and full copy of written submissions received tothe 2012 Representation Review.Pages1-159C27.2.Hearing of Submissions - Friday 17 August and Monday 160-16120 August 2012.Attached is a Hearing Schedule for those submitters requesting theopportunity to be heard by Council.C27.3.Summary of Submissions and Recommendation for Receipt.Attached is an issue summary of submissions received.RecommendationTHAT all written and verbal submissions to the 2012Representation Review Proposal be received and submittersthanked for their comments.162-163C27.4.Deliberations and Decisions - 2012 Representation ReviewProposal- Monday 20 August 2012 at the end of the hearingprocess and Tuesday 21 August 2012 (if required).Issues and options papers and draft responses to comments will becirculated before the meeting convenes for deliberations.

Western BBy of PlentyI1Sorted by: NameFull Name Submitter 10 Page RefANDERSON, BRIAN HUGH 87 136ANONYMOUS, A 20 29ASHE, ERIC WILSON 29 42BAILEY FARMS LTD 31 44BEECH, SHANE WILLIAM 9 17BIDOIS, CARL TON PAUL 84 133BIRLEY, CASSANDRA LYONS 41 58BIRLEY, ALAN 64 97BROWN, GEOFFREY JOHN 43 66BROWN, RUTH ANNE 22 32BROWN, IAN 62 95BRUNING, NORMAN FRANCIS 96 151BURGESS, CHRISTINA MARIE 54 81BUSHELL, RAYMOND 97 152BUTLER, DENNIS RONALD 18 27CAMPBELL, MARGETTE MARIE 14 22CLEMENT, CHRISTINE MARY 99 159COATES, PATRICIA MARGARET 81 127CONNOR, NEISHA ANDREA 95 149CRABB, DESMOND ARNOLD 45 68CRAIG, MURRAY ALEXANDER 25 37DUNLOP, SAM 37 50FANNIN, FREDERICK JOHN 27 40FEARNS, DIANNE 94 147FEDERATED FARMERS - TE PUKE BRANCH 80 123FIPPARD, ROSS LEONARD 88 138FITZWILLIAM, GARRY BERNARD 57 84GLENACRES PROPERTIES LTD 66 99GORDON, LINDA 12 20GOSLING, RAYMOND AUBREY 38 52GOUDIE, ROSS 73 112GRANT, ROBERT WILLIAM 69 105GRAVIT, JOSEPHINE HELEN 71 108HAGGO, CRAIG 26 38HARPUR, MARILYN PATRICIA 17 26HART, TREVOR OWEN 56 83HAYWARD, RAYMOND NEIL 15 23HEPENSTALL, BRIAN JAMES 75 116HICKSON, ANDRE MARTIN 47 70HIN, JOANNE 6 12HODGSON, BENJAMIN ANTHONY SWAINSON 63 96HOPE, SUSAN MARY 13 21Created On 8/1/2012 11 :26:42 AMLocation· /Ozone/CEN/Submitter List

54 M. GUGAT, G. LEUGERING, AND G. SKLYAR2.5. Sensitivity analysis for the optimal control problem. The explicitsolutions that we have obtained allow a detailed study of their sensitivity with respectto data perturbations, which is useful for obtaining some idea about what might holdin the general case of optimal control problems with hyperbolic PDEs. Here we studyonly the continuity of the solutions of C(p) as functions of the parameter p.Lemma 2.3. The number ˆr(p) that minimizes the function h p depends continuouslyon p. In fact, if y 0 and Y 1 are in L q (0,L) for some q ∈ [2, ∞], we havelim p→q− ˆr(p) =ˆr(q) and for p 1 0.Consider the function F :[2,q] × R → R, F (p, r) =h ′ p(r). Then for all p ∈ [2,q],F (p, ˆr(p)) = 0 and ∂ r F (p, ˆr(p)) = h ′′p(ˆr(p)) > 0. Hence the implicit function theoremimplies that the function ˆr is continuously differentiable on [2,q]. Case 3: q = ∞.Let f 1 (r), f 2 (r) denote the control functions defined in Theorem 2.2 that correspondto r ∈ R. Then for all p ∈ [2, ∞) wehaveh p (r) =‖f 1 (r)‖ p p,(0,T ) + ‖f 2(r)‖ p p,(0,T ) andh ∞ (r) = max{‖f 1 (r)‖ ∞,(0,T ) + ‖f 2 (r)‖ ∞,(0,T ) }. Thus for all r, lim p→∞ h p (r) 1/p =h ∞ (r). Moreover, the triangle inequality for the p-norm implies that for all p ∈ [2, ∞),r 1 , r 2 ∈ R, wehave(2.7)|h p (r 1 ) 1/p − h p (r 2 ) 1/p |≤(‖f 1 (r 1 ) − f 1 (r 2 )‖ p p,(0,T ) + ‖f 2(r 1 ) − f 2 (r 2 )‖ p p,(0,T ) )1/p .For all p ∈ [2, ∞] wehaveh p (ˆr(p)) 1/p ≤ h p (ˆr(∞)) 1/p and lim p→∞ h p (ˆr(∞)) 1/p =h ∞ (ˆr(∞)), and hence the set {h p (ˆr(p)) 1/p ,p∈ [2, ∞]} is bounded. With the definitionof h p , this implies that the set {ˆr(p), p ∈ [2, ∞]} is also bounded. Supposethat a sequence (p k ) converging to ∞ with p k ∈ [2, ∞) for all k is given andlim k ˆr(p k )=r ∗ . Using (2.7) it can be shown that h ∞ (r ∗ ) = lim p→∞ h p (r ∗ ) 1/p ≤lim sup p→∞ h p (ˆr(p)) 1/p ≤ h ∞ (ˆr(∞)). Thus h ∞ (r ∗ ) ≤ h ∞ (ˆr(∞)). Since ˆr(∞) istheminimizer of h ∞ this implies that h ∞ (r ∗ )=h ∞ (ˆr(∞)), and since the minimizer of h ∞is determined uniquely, this implies that r ∗ =ˆr(∞), and the assertion follows.Lemma 2.3 and Theorem 2.2 imply the following proposition.Proposition 2.4. Let p ∈ [2, ∞] be given. Assume that y 0 and Y 1 are in L p (0,L).Consider a sequence (q k ) k (q k ≤ p) that converges to q 0 ≤ p. Then for the solutions(f 1,k ,f 2,k ) T of the optimization problems C(q k ) presented in Theorem 2.2, we havelim ‖f 1,k − f 1,0 ‖ p,(0,T ) + ‖f 2,k − f 2,0 ‖ p,(0,T ) =0,k→∞where (f 1,0 ,f 2,0 ) is the solution of C(q 0 ) presented in Theorem 2.2.2.6. Examples. For our examples, let L =1,c = 1, and T =3.25, and hencek =3.2.6.1. Example 1. Let y 0 (x) =x − L/2, y 1 (x) =1. Forp = ∞, the optimal ˆris 5/28 and we have h ∞ (5/28)=1/7. Figure 2.1(a) shows the optimal controls. Thethick lines show f 1 and the dotted line shows f 2 . A plot of the corresponding optimalstate y in the interior of the rectangle [0,L] × [0,T] is shown in Figure 2.1(b). Herethe optimal state is piecewise linear and the optimal velocity is piecewise constanton areas that are bounded by characteristic curves in the interior of the rectangle[0,L] × [0,T].

5lPage2oSubmitters Name:T SUPPORT (cirde onel THREE WARDS? KEEPING MAKETU COMMNUNITY BOARD?1. I SUPPORT IIf the feedback guided the Councillors to change to three wards -~--~~~rd residents wish to see an Eas1Community Board established as the community of interest i tu Rate payers already pay rctowards Te Puke development and Te Puke library. I NOT SUPPORT (circle (THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ONE COMMUNITY BOA ERN WARDAbove information prepared by Sue Matthews, Maketu cillor, Western BOP District Council to gyour views to guide our decision making on this important issueRemember: submissions must be received by Council no later than 4pm, Wednesday 25 July 2012. Email:representationsubmissions@westembay.govt.nz Further information iswww .westembay.govt.nz/Major-Projects/Representation-Review/Submissions will be heard on Friday 17 August. Council will deliberate on the submissions and the final representa1proposal will be notified and go out for further public consultatiAffix StampSubmissions for Representation ReviewWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 12803

e ward and these work closely with Council at very little cost to the ratepayer.6Page 2 of3~SUP PO~/ NOT SUPPORT (c,rcle onel THREE WARDS?ubmitters Name: Wt::f-ID'j f'1t.--f f}i)')GA! Phone::!dress ,3.'> r{~fJ PftR/1 o,q M1 v ~ t-1 A-tVt?T v0 7 .5'3.5~1 b 9fa) r Te t?u12-ehree other points for consideration The othermsiderations that Councillors need to hear - do Maketu Residents wish to continue a Maketu Community Board? Th1>st to the rate payer is $169 pa- Administration costs are $54,000paOT SUPP~(circle one) KEEPING MAKETU COMMNUNITY BOARD?1. I SUPPORT I::> the surrounding communities wish to have a boundary change to enable them to be part of the Maketu Community:>ard? 2. I SUPPOR /@.@PQRT)(circleone) MAKETU COMMUNITY BOARD INCREASING THE BOUNDARIES TO THE MAINDAD AT MAKETU CROSSING AND WILSON ROAD- MAIN HIGHWAY INTERSECTIONthe feedback guided the Councillors to change to three wards- would Maketu Ward residents wish to see an Easter"':>mmunity Board established as the community of interest is Te Puke. Maketu Rate payers already pay ratewards Te Puke development and Te Puke library. 3.~UPPORj)/ NO SUPPOR (circle onE;E ESTABLISHMENT OF ONE COMMUNITY BOARD ACROSS THE EASTERN WARDJove information prepared by Sue Matthews, Maketu Councillor, Western BOP District Council to gahwr views to guide our decision making on this important issue~member: submissions must be received by Council no later than 4pm, Wednesday 25 July 2012. Email:presentationsubmissions@westembay.govt.nz Further information isww. western bay. govt. nz/Major -Projects/Representation-Review/Jbmissions will be heard on Friday 17 August. Council will deliberate on the submissions and the final representatiooposal will be notified and go out for further public consultatior- - ., ... ,, A: .... -, .....r- ..... :#!" r " ~ \)~= t- : . • ·~ ,i' ~ )~ f I .,,..__ lo- i.l•' ~1 3 JUL Z01ZV.rF ~- 1 r ·I' J ~.·.tO;-'~'! . : c "! ~1 ~ ; ( : l I \1 L) IAffix StampSubmissions for Representation ReviewWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 1280311/07/2012

AG\lG6\7Western Bay of Plenty District Council Representation Review 2012As Western Bay of Plenty District Councillors wish to hear your views on the proposed merger of thefive wards into three- Western, Central & Eastern Wards. The three motivating factors are:1. Reduce Costs to Rate PayersThe biggest driver for the Long Term Plan was to reduce costs for the rate payer. The actual savingsthat would be created from reducing the number of Councillors to 8 would be at least $42,202 andstaffing costs have not been included as part of the calculation. So far there have been nocalculations on the cost savings created by reducing the Wards from 5 to 3 - however the amount ofstaffing time, reports and paper that is generated to support the 5 Ward system is substantial.2. Fair Community Representation by Numbers of Wards and CouncillorsSurely it is about quality of the Councillors and not the numbers. The comparison would suggest thepresent numbers are an over representation? Western Bay of Plenty District Council has 45,380residentso Western Bay District Council has 3,781 residents per councillor.o Tauranga City Council has about 10,000 residents per councillor,o Bay of Plenty Regional Council has about 30,000 residents per councillorUnder the proposed changes, Western BOP District Councillors would change from representing3781 to representing 5736 ratepayers. All Councillors are elected to represent the whole of theDistrict - not just their Ward. It is interesting to note - at present some Te Puke Councillors andCommunity Board members live in the Maketu Ward.Ward Population No of Councillors Population per CouncillorWestern 11790 2 5895Central 16400 3 5466Eastern 17210 3 5736TOTAL 45380 8 5673At present Te Puke and Waihi Beach residents are over-represented~~~lijJ:I;ftfl4*'~~:'M~tf&.',whereas in Katikati, residents are under-represented. This is d1Rn'1utfol'~r ~~~~~i""§ti.Consequently Te Puke Ward was due to loose 1 seat- regardless.)>zN3. Aligning the communities of interest ~ 1 7 JUL Z01Z aJThe Local Government Act reads as follows z ~"In identifying a community of Interest the Commission suggests the fol ~ins~~~t~~~NTY /\• Similarities in the demographic, socio economic and/or ethnic c arad~RsOOST COUNCIL ONLY• Similarities in economic activities.• Dependence on shared facilities such as schools, recreation/cultural facilities and retailoutlets.• Physical and topographical features.• The history of the area.• Transport and communication linksTe Puke is Maketu Ward's community of interest. It has been pointed out on several occasions thatthe name Maketu Ward does not reflect Otamarakau, Pukehina, Pongakawa, Paengaroa, Te Ranga ,Rangiuru communities. There are already very effective groups operating in these communities,Pukehina Beach Rate Payers, Paengaroa Community Assn , Te Ranga Community, Maketu ProjectsTeam, plus several environmental enhancement groups across the ward and these work closely withCouncil at very little cost to the ratepayer.lJI'f (If' I ~()T~lH'f'()~l! ,1 • l f I If /f!l'rlcSubmitters Name· A , 1.J H ,

Address ______________________________________________________ ___8Three other points for considerationThe other considerations that Councillors need to hear - do Maketu Residents wish to continue aMaketu Community Board? The cost to the rate payer is $169 pa- Administration costs are$54,000pa ~1 I I OR1 101 UP OR r•IE c l f< cPH 1(, lvJAf< TU C OfvJIVlf'JlJf'-11 1 YBOARD? 'Do the surrounding communities wish to have a boundary change to enable them to be part of theMaketu Community Board?u . /rNQl SIJI ( ~ \ c I('} ~Af

July 5, 2012Max C. and Robin R. Avery, ATHENREEPostal address: P.O. Box 14, Waihi Beach, 3642, NEW ZEALANDTelephone/Ansaphone: 078634388 Cellphone: 0272609068Chief Executive Officer,Western Bay of Plenty District Council,Private Bag,TAURANGA.9Rl. ."' ... r., ~E:" D. ..,. ( t !.. ~ ' f• v .·-!ual'l 1{/1 L~~:,.!1 ... .1 7 JUL 201ZWESTt-::1-i~';J. BOPDISTf-l!C f COUNCIL~----· --.--· -----SUBMISSION RE PROPOSAL TO CHANGE REPRESENTATION ARRANGEMENTSWe are of the opinion that because it has been neither quantified nor proven that there are any benefitsto be gained by ratepayers from reducing the number of councillors on the Western Bay of PlentyDistrict Council from twelve to eight, the proposal will do ratepayers and residents within the district adistinct disservice. Far better to retain the status quo with tweaked ward boundaries.We are quite unable to see any logic within the published comment that "the council believes that thereduction in the number of councilllors from 12 to 8 is a better ratio of councillors to the population".Better for whom ? The eight councillors, because they will get more money? The bureaucrats, becausethey will have fewer councillors to deal with ? Certainly not better for the disenfranchised ratepayersand residents, who lose one third of their elected representatives.Since its beginning as the Tauranga County Council, the organisation now known as the Western Bayof Plenty District Council, stretching from Otamarakau in the east to Waihi Beach in the west, hasrecognised the need for 12 councillors to adequately represent all those living within its elongatedterritory. By what flight of fancy, what quirk of illogicality, can the current council come to theconclusion that an ever-increasing population can better be represented by fewer councillors? The ideais ludicrous.Assuming the statistics in the council's published advertisement are correct, and there were 45,810people living within the district at June, 2011, each of the 12 councillors represented 3817 people,m'any of whom were very thinly spread in the outer reaches of the district. Under the council'sproposal for the 2013 local government elections, each councillor, going on the 2011 figures, will beresponsible for 5726 people- although there will, of course, by then be many more within the district.Inevitably, there must be greater competition among ratepayers and residents in contacting any onecouncillor, and each councillor will have less time to respond to calls for assistance, advice etc. Andthis is supposed to be "a better ratio of councillors to the population"? We do not believe so for oneminute.The arguments advanced by Councillor G. Webber in favour of the proposal are totally irrelevant andnot worthy of serious consideration . It is of absolutely no consequence how many councillors theTauranga City Council and the Bay of Plenty Regional Council have in relation to their respectivedistrict populations. Their geographical circumstances and legislative responsibilities differ so widelyfrom those of the Western Bay of Plenty District Council that comparisons are smoke and mirrors.That the Western Bay of Plenty Di strict Council should ever feel the need to pattern itself on either ofthe other two local authorities would be a real worry.What has worked for Western Bay in the past wi ll work for Western Bay in the future, providedcqunci ll ors apply themselves diligently to the task of making sure its bureaucrats stick to core servicesand ensuring that the ratepayers they represent get the best value for money. Change for the sake ofchange is a waste of time, money and abi lity. Significantly, the council has not defined any benefitswhich might accrue from the proposed representational change.The proposal advanced by the council is by no means the·only possible option . Mayor R . Patersonhas advised us that in spite of the several options for representational change outlined in the council'snewspaper advertisement, 1t is possible to change the boundaries of the existing five wards to reflect,within the allowable ten per cent variation , an equal population for each of the current twelve councillorposit1ons. We suggest that you do JU St that, for we are forced to the conclusiOn that otherwise you areSimply proposmg change for the sak e of change, with senous di sadvantages for the ratepayer.

10- 2 -We feel that we must also remind you of the dangers of being boxed in by bureaucrats. A council oftwelve has a far better chance of standing up to the steady drift toward bureaucratic omnipotency thana council only two thirds that size. That there should be a trend by the bureaucracy to run theorganisation independant of councillor input is almost inevitable, given the increasing volume andcomplexity of local government legislation. Elected councillors cannot be expected to be as legislationsavvyas the staff, and can easily be bamboozled by bureaucrats.The tendency for bureaucracies to grow at a rate beyond any justification of increasing work loads isnotorious, and this is evidenced by council staff expanding from 108 in 2002 to 170 in May, 2012, asreported by Councillor N. Mayo in a newspaper recently. The tail is wagging the dog.Aggravating this exploding expenditure is the council's tendency to undertake activities beyond itsintended scope, instead of concentrating on delivering core services more efficiently. Our I 2councillor:; are desperately needed, and they need to take on ratepayer concerns, reduce bureaucraticoverheads and cut expenditure on the promotion of economic,,social, cultural and environmental wellbeing.In other words, do less of the peripheral stuff. We don't want it and we can't afford it.At least equally as concerning as the council's proposed representational change, andperhaps even more so, is the abysmal manner in which this proposal has been promulgated.There has been absolutely no effort to advise individual ratepayers of the proposed change and toensure that they have the opportunity of making a submission on it, in spite of the fact that they are indanger of losing one of their fundamental democratic rights - effective representation on the authorityto which they are bound, by legislation , to be a part of. Disenfranchisement strikes at the very heart ofdemocracy.'Admittedly, democracy is an inefficient form of government, for it involves a great number of peoplewho have little or no interest in an active participation. The majority are happy to leave a minority totake care of their interests. However, efficiencies of benefit to all can be introduced if those elected torepresent the people are prepared to be pro-active in com111unication with those who elected them. Awealth of un-tapped knowledge and talent lies waiting in the community. The secret of making use ofthis vast resource lies in making it easy for the people to communicate with elected representatives.In this age of electronic communications this has never been easier. Mayor Paterson has told us thatmailing the 20,000 ratepayers within the Western Bay of Plenty District costs in the order of $16,000,which is a large sum, yet still justifiable given the importance of the proposed changes. Obviously,however, the answer is Email. It is a simple matter for the council to establish an Email address database of all electronically-linked ratepayers, and at the touch of a button keep them advised of majorpolicy changes and at the same time seek submissions from them, leaving only the tiny minoritywithout Email facilities to be contacted by post.The positive psychological factor of involving the ratepayers personally and making it easy for them torespond will result in an immediate improvement in council-ratepayer relationships, and furtherempower councillors in their deliberations at the council table. An achievable target with active councilratepayerco-operation would be not only to hold rates at the present level , but to reduce them - aground-breaking exercise in New Zealand local government.As it is, it is unlikely that the council will get many submissions on the proposed representationalchange because so few know about it. You are being arrogant in communicating with your ratepayersthrough a newspaper advertisement. Not all ratepayers read newspapers or indeed, can afford them.A bsentee ratepayers in Waihi Beach, Omokoroa, Maketu and·Pukehina will have had no opportunityof learning about it. In fact, had the council set out to deliberately obfuscate the promulgation of thechange, it could scarcely have done a better job.And as usual, we suspect, the council will claim that having received so few submissions, it is obviousthat the ratepayers are happy with the proposal and will therefore go ahead with it. Don't believe it.For years we have advocated the council engage in direct contact with its ratepayers on major issues,yet it has never happened. We are worth $10 a day to you to live in our own home, but not the cost ofa personal letter. We have democracy in default, not democracy Jn action, and that is a sad thing .Si~1cerely,. ~--£ ______.~ ( Max C. and Robin R. Av..-y/ Q .

115Received: Friday, 6 July 2012, 12:25 p.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:Nick WebbHearing Requested: YesPreferred Hearing Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsThe communities within the current boundaries are different in their make up Socialy,geographicaly, financialy, having their own concerns and focuses which would not bevoiced or adressed if they were represented diferently. Maketu in particular needs theability to address its own concerns.maketu, pukehina, pongakawa and paengaroa are set to grow dynamicaly posing new asyet unforeseen issues.Community Boards give a better link to the coucil with a small degree of autonomy whichwould be lost if rate payer associations where the choice, maketu's community ispredominately Tenated or non owner domicile based changing the interested from thecommunity to groups and absentee concerns.This in my area of concern would see the region and it inhabitent suffer.Nick Webb>Submissions:Submitter Contact InformationNick WebbP 0 Box 111Te Puke3153Phone: 0275298189AHPhone: 075332076Email: nick.webb@xtra.co.nzReference Data:Ozone ContactiD: 114938Cen Submission : REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012* REP12 * 5Website Submission Id : 998Processed Date: Friday, 6 July 2012, 3: 15p.m .

1266Received: Thursday, 12 July 2012, 2:21p.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:Joanne HinHearing Requested: NoPreferred Hearing Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I SUPPORT the proposed Representation ArrangmentsYes, less Councillors, with a cost saving to ratepayers can only be good coupled withbetter representation. >Submissions:Submitter Contact InformationJoanne Hin365 Tuapiro RoadRD1Katikati3177Phone: 07 5796683Email: thepoint@eol.co .nzReference Data:Ozone ContactiD: 107576Cen Submission: REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012* REP12 * 6Website Submission Id: 1001Processed Date: Thursday, 12 July 2012, 3 : 16 p.m.

q\ t.-,13. ~ .--------------------=-"----.-,_~ ,~-\( Western Bay of Plenty District Council Representation Review 2012As Western Bay of Plenty District Councillors wish to hear your views on the proposed merger of thefive wards into three - Western, Central & Eastern Wards. The three motivating factors are:1. Fair Community Representation by Numbers of Wards and CouncillorsSurely it is about quality of the Councillors and not the numbers. The comparison wouldsuggest the present numbers are an over representation? Wesrem Bay of Plenty .. Di~tfi

Three other points for consideration14The other considerations that Councillors need to hear - do Maketu Residents wish to continue aMaketu Community Board? The cost to the rate payer is $169 pa- Administration costs are$54,000pa §. tY1. I SUPPORT A~ SUPPORT (circle one) KEEPING MAKETU COMMNUNITYBOARD?Do the surrounding communities wish to have a boundary change to enable them to be part of theMaketu Community Board?2. I SUPPORT /

Western Bay of Plenty15Submissions close on Wednesday 25 July 2012 at 4.00pm.How to send your feedback:gGo to our website www.westernbay.govt.nz and complete the online submission form.Return this form to any council library and service centre in Waihi Beach, Katikati, Omokoroa, andTe Puke or post to:Initial Representation Proposal SubmissionWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 12803TAURANGA 3143\ ! · .• ·, ;"' .' ~~ it·''" !...... ·1 , ....... ,\Email your feedback to: ,_,re=-:-======.!..!...!.!:==:.=..;:..=.==~:..::...1-=:....::..r-'--',;; ... :~ .. -·:.2.: '-? ·! .• ::_::_-~.' ~~-~·:-Once you've made your submission, we will let you know we've received it. The information andviews you express in your submission form become part of a public consultation process and willbe made available to the Mayor and Councillors. All submissions received are also made availableas part of a public document. These can be viewed at our Library and Service Centre offices atWaihi Beach, Te Puke, Katkati, Omokoroa, head office, Barkes Corner and Maketu InformationCentre.(Please tick 0 the following boxes that apply)I would like to speak to the Mayor and Councillors about my submission. The day forhearings is Friday 17 August 2012B YesMy Contact Details Are:D No*NAME: (whoismakingthissubmission?) k ~~·- ~-'*'-t:_..,..::pEJd.~ER...,- Q(~)~ONTACT PERSON (if the name above is an organisation) ---~--=-____:~:::=..::'3tS.!Co..· ....... ___ _c________________________ PostCode: --~~'-~-·-_u __*Daytime Phone:(!Ji \ S 1~ 3 r .s ~Mobile Number: ________ _*Email Address: _ ___:-< ~c.l.a=-=e:.!."'~'..~:~=-+'~""0«..

Western Bay of Plenty16~~ - X ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------f'lease tear off and return to the address below or hand in to any Library and Service Centre

17q9Received: Tuesday, 17 July 2012, 9:02p.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:Shane BeechHearing Requested: NoPreferred Hearing Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsREASONS*Unfair distribution of rate payers for voting Te Puke I Maketu ward* The Te Puke ward is very different from the Maketu ward in regards to its people,culture and history*No real salary saving by reducing the number of councillors*More responsibly I load on a lower number of councillors (meetings I events)*It is important to relate to and communicate with the councillors in our elected wardregardsShane BeechP.S I also do not support any abolishment of any community boards especially theMaketu Community Board>Submissions:Submitter Contact InformationShane Beechc/o post officeMaketu3189Phone: 5332165AHPhone: 5332165Email: bhp@xtra.co.nzReference Data:Ozone ContactiD : 35747Cen Submission: REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012*REP12*9Website Submission Id : 1003Processed Date: Tuesday, 17 July 2012, 1 :OS p.m .

Catherine McKerrasFrom:Sent:To:Subject:18poihipic@clear.net.nz on behalf of poihipic Saturday, 14 July 2012 6:57 PMrepresentationsubmissionsCarol Poihipi Submission/0Importance:HighI do not support the Representation Arrangements.Although the Maketu Ward may pay a larger proportion of the rates than TePuke, TePuke has a higherpopulation, therefore we would not have a voice when it comes to voting. With only three Councillors forthe new ward, we would be outvoted in nominating/voting for a person from our own area .There is no salary saving as the pool just gets divided between less people.Admittedly there would be savings on paper,postage and travel, however I dont see three people havingthe time to travel,attend all of the meetings and still be available to constituants.As Councillor Mathews has pointed out in her Councillors report to the Maketu Community Board of 17thJuly 2012 the water, wastewater etc would be combined across the new ward,giving Maketu a decreaseand TePuke a rise in rates for these, however, what about the reverse situation. Memorial Hall, newPlaygroundcosts etc etc.I do not want the council to do away with our Community Board either, thats for US to decide.I am very happy with being able to contact my Councillor when 'issues' arise and know that our voice isthen raised in Council. I believe Maketu is an extremely important part of the Western Bay area, especiallywith its history and our Maori people. We deserve the very best representation and I dont believe we willget it with the changes you are proposing. I will also fight it to the bitter end on behalf of our community.I will be out of the country until Mon 20th Aug so can not speak to my submission .Thank you.Carol Poihipi40 Park RdMaketuCaroiP

Catherine McKerras19IIFrom:Sent:To:Subject:Sheryl Seymour Monday, 16 July 2012 9:49AMrepresentationsubmissionsWaihi Beach CouncilorI would like to make a submission to keep at least one councilor at Waihi Beach .Regards,Sheryl Seymour20 Snell CrescentWaihi BeachPhone 07 863 1108 or 021184 9402The content of this message may contain the private views and opinions of the sender and does notconstitute a formal view and/or opinion of the company unless specifically stated.The contents of this email and any attachments may contain confidential and/or proprietary information, andis intended only for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any dissemination, distributionor copying of this communication is strictly prohibited.If you have received this email in error please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete thismessage and any attachments from your system.Please refer to http://www.newmont.com/en/disclaimer for other language versions of this disclaimer.

Catherine McKerrasFrom:Sent:To:Subject:20Linda Gordon Monday, 16 July 2012 10:25 AMrepresentationsubmissionsWaihi Beach Councilor Representation12Importance:HighTO WHOM IT MAY CONCERNWaihi Beach Councilor RepresentationI would like to make a submission concerning the Waihi Beach representation on Western Bay ofPlenty District Council.I very strenuously state that I prefer an arrangement of councilors whereby one representativecouncilor must be elected from Waihi Beach and I fully support the retention of this localrepresentation.Thank you.Linda Gordon18 Hereford PlaceWaihi Beach07 863 1148~==============================================The content of this message may contain the private views and opinions of the sender and does notconstitute a formal view and/or opinion of the company unless specifically stated.The contents of this email and any attachments may contain confidential and/or proprietary information, andis intended only for the person/entity to whom it was originally addressed. Any dissemination, distributionor copying ofthis communication is strictly prohibited.If you have received this email in error please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete thismessage and any attachments from your system.Please refer to http://www.newmont.com/en/disclaimer for other language versions of this disclaimer.

Catherine McKerras2113From:Sent:To:Subject:Robert & Susan Hope Monday, 16 July 2012 11:42 AMrepresentationsubmissionsWaihi Beach CouncillorAttn Catherine McKerras,I wish to make a submission regarding the proposed change to reduce the number of Western BOPcouncillors representing local wards from 12 to 8.As a Waihi Beach resident, I strongly oppose any move to combine the Waihi Beach, Katikati andMatakana wards as each has its own unique physical and social environment.Local knowledge, a strong community commitment, availability, and an ability to identify with thecommunity are essential for the best possible representation at a local body level.If these wards are combined there will be some communities that may benefit and others that will inevitablybe disadvantaged.As Waihi Beach has only one councillor at present, I submit that the status quo be retained.RegardsSusan Hope

22Catherine McKerrasFrom:Sent:To:Subject:Miree Rudd Monday, 16 July 2012 6:24PMrepresentationsubmissionsWaihi Beach Local RepresentationPlease record our objection to the proposal to disestablish the dedicated councillor for Waihi Beach. We do notbelieve that sharing a councillor with Katikati and Matakana will provide sufficient local input.lan and Margette Campbell6 Queen StWaihi Beach

Rt:vt:.t v 23 t:uZ 0 JUL Z01ZWESTERN BOP0213 -7 SHz.R. D ~(. t '. Q _ DISTRICT COUNCIL·-re. f:.. i< e .tV .0.,... ~ B':(j 1 f.'£J1 D C .f Kv c

24Submission FormFrom: Te Puke Community BoardWestern Bay Of Plenty District Council/6To:Initial Representation proposal SubmissionContact Person:Postal Address:Western Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 12803TAURANGA 3143From:Contact Person:The Te Puke Community BoardKaryl GunnChairpersonPostal Address:PO Box 355Te Puke 3188Telephone Number: 07 572 3370 07 573 7967(home)(work)Email Address:gift-rapt@clear.net.nzSignature:Karyl Gunn on behalf of theTe Puke Community BoardDate:20 July 2012Our submission is:The Te Puke Community Board SUPPORT:• The Proposal to change to Three Wards as this fits within the 10% scenario as the FiveWard no longer fits the calculation• 12 councillors with the proposed Three Wards, as this fits within the calculations of the1 0% rule and represent approximately the same number of residentsThe Te Puke community Board DOES NOT SUPPORT:Reduction of 12 Councillors down to 8 (STATUS QUO)The Te Puke Community Board wish to support all Councillors taking a DISTRICT WIDE view!

25Catherine McKerrasFrom:Sent:To:Cc:Subject:Aileen AltyMonday, 23 July 2012 3:05 PMLiz DaviesCatherine McKerrasFW: TPCB Representation Review SubmissionHi there, can you make sure this is included with the Te Puke Community Board Submission.Is it easier for me to send you an amended copy.Please advise.Cheers.AileenAileen AltyDemocracy Support OfficerWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 12803, Tauranga Mail CentreTauranga 3143Direct Dial 07 579 6735, Facsimile 07 577 9820www. westernbay.govt.nzJl Please consider the environment before printing this emailFrom: Gift-rapt [mailto:gift-rapt@clear.net.nzlSent: Monday, 23 July 2012 2:54 PMTo: Aileen AltySubject: Re: TPCB Representation Review SubmissionHi Aileen,I was filing the TPCB Representative Submission and I noticed when I Cut and Paste I accidently did notinclude the following:Retain the five community boards with four elected community board members and two Councillors asappointed by CouncilIs it too late to have this entered onto the TPCB Submission?RegardsKarylFrom: Aileen AltySent: Friday, July 20, 2012 8:33 AMTo: Karyl GunnSubject: RE : TPCB Representation Review SubmissionThank you Karyl,I w ill put this in today.

Catherine McKerras26/7From:Sent:To:Subject:Marilyn Friday, 20 July 2012 10:01 AMrepresentationsubmissionsrepresentation reviewMy submission is that whatever the outcome of the review, there should be a councillor retained for thecurrent Waihi Beach area, ie the current ward area including Athenree, Island View and Bowentown. Weare an entirely different population with different outlooks, needs and requirements to the people ofKatikati. I live in Athenree and have significant contact with people from Katikati through clubinvolvement etc and repeatedly see this to be the case.If the number of councillors are to be reduced as per the options being looked at, I believe it would bemuch more appropriate to have one elected to represent Waihi Beach and one for Katikati.Marilyn Harpur52 Athenree RoadRDl Katikati 31771

27Catherine McKerrasFrom:Sent:To:Subject:Dennis Butler Friday, 20 July 2012 12:16 PMrepresentationsubmissionsWaihi Beach Council RepTo the WBOPDCDear Sir I MadamWe wish to state that in no way, shape or form do we wish to have our local Waihi Beach Council member droppedfrom representing us on the District Council.It is surely bad enough to put up with being in the 'Law unto themselves WBOP' instead of the HOC , but then to takeaway our only voice from the area is truly rubbing salt into the wound.The old saying of' Be careful not to bite the hand that feeds you' is well worth while taking notice of. Our rates areexorbitant for what we receive and how we get treated in this area.As you may see from our strongly worded email we are not at all happy that you might even be thinking of taking thisbackward step. One can only be left with the thought that you have an ulterior motive for further down the track.We are not happy Rate Payers in this area at the best of times - don't make it the worst of times.Yours faithfullyDennis and Adrienne Butler11 Mayor View TeeWaihi Beach

Catherine McKerras2819From:Sent:To:Subject:Syd Rowe ZL 1LWR Friday, 20 July 2012 12:40 PMrepresentationsubmissionsRepresentation SubmissionAs a Maketu Ward Ratepayer my submission is that the status quo remain as is.My reason for this is if we lose the Maketu Ward there will be no representation out here at all as the TePuke members will want to spend our Ratepayers money in Te Puke on their projects and to heck witheveryone else.Yours faithfullyS. J. Rowe1

1\ ~~(' l ( c ' )Western Bay of Plenty29X ~---· ----~ ............. ----·-~··· ~---··-·· .... -· . -~---·---------· ---·· --------.-· -· ·-· ---· ... ··--·- ·----····Please tear nff and retum to thr" address below ot hand in to anv I ibrary and Setvke C'FntreSubtnis~10tl:RECEIVEDD I support the proposed Representation Arrangements;[i2( I do not support the proposed representation arrangements;For the following reasons :2 0 JUL 2012W. B. 0. P. D. C.TE PUKEUc:c.:-J..../.--c·.'\~,c;~\ 4\.-e-._:s\L~.~·. l,2h\ - ~ ' \ 7C.-

Western Bay of Plenty30Submissions close on Wednesday 25 July 2012 at 4.00pm.How to send your feedback:Go to our website www.westernbay.govt.nz and complete the online submission form .Return this form to any council library and service centre in Waihi Beach, Katikati, Omokoroa, an dTe Puke or post to :Initial Representation Proposal SubmissionWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 12803TAURANGA 3143Email your feedback to: representationsubm issions@westernbav.govt. nzOnce you've made your submission, we will let you know we've received it. The information andviews you express in your submission form become part of a public consultation process and willbe made available to the Mayor and Councillors. All submissions received are also made availableas part of a public document. These can be viewed at our Library and Service Centre offices atWaihi Beach, Te Puke, Katkati, Omokoroa, head office, Barkes Corner and Maketu InformationCentre.(Please tick 0 the following boxes that apply)I would like to speak to the Mayor and Councillors about my submission. The day forhearings is Friday 17 August 2012D Yes D NoMy Contact Details Are:*NAME: (who is making this submission?} ________________ _-*CONTACT PERSON (if the name above is an organisation) _ _________ _* Postal Address: _________________________ __________________________ PostCode: _____ _*Daytime Phone: ____________ Mobile Number: ________ _*Email Address: __________________________ _*Signature: ___________________________ ___*So that you can be contacted regarding your submission if required.Initial Representation ProposalSubm1ss1on r orm 2012A600319 Page 6 of 6

31RECEIVED2 3 JUL Z01ZWESTERN BOPDISTRICT COUNCIL

32Z2'': '"--'JJ.< !j)uQ .j_ 7 L.J ~UL f-( l)-Q__..·LLLk'. . Ii-1-t-hE'v-~,(J.. w\ K..J:tW:"311/

34Western Bay of Plenty District Council Representation Review 2012As Western Bay of Plenty District Councillors wish to hear your views on the proposed merger of thefive wards into three - Western, Central & Eastern Wards. The three motivating factors are:1. Reduce Costs to Rate PayersThe biggest driver for the Long Term Plan was to reduce costs for the rate payer. The actual savingsthat would be created from reducing the number of Councillors to 8 would be at least $42,202 andstaffing costs have not been included as part of the calculation. So far there have been nocalculations on the cost savings created by reducing the Wards from 5 to 3 - however the amount ofstaffing time, reports and paper that is generated to support the 5 Ward system is substantial.2. Fair Community Representation by Numbers of Wards and CouncillorsSurely it is about quality of the Councillors and not the numbers. The comparison would suggest thepresent numbers are an over representation? Western Bay of Plenty District Council has 45,380residentso Western Bay District Council has 3,781 residents per councillor.o Tauranga City Council has about 10,000 residents per councillor,o Bay of Plenty Regional Council has about 30,000 residents per councillorUnder the proposed changes, Western BOP District Councillors would change from representing3781 to representing 5736 ratepayers. All Councillors are elected to represent the whole of theDistrict - not just their Ward. It is interesting to note - at present some Te Puke Councillors andCommunity Board members live in the Maketu Ward.Ward Po ulation No of Councillors PoWestern 11790 2Central 16400 3Eastern 17210TOTAL 45380 8,..,,)3. Aligning the communities of interest W 2 ] JUL 2012¥ii5The Local Government Act reads as follows D! ESTERN"In identifying a community of Interest the Commission suggests the fa · f.&l€£~r~Y,..J!Op• Similarities in the demographic, socioeconomic and/or ethnic characteristics. ot.JNC!L• Similarities in economic activities.• Dependence on shared facilities such as schools, recreation/cultural facilities and retailoutlets.• Physical and topographical features.• The history of the area .• Transport and communication linksTe Puke is Maketu Ward's community of interest. It has been poi11ted out on several occasions thatthe name Maketu Ward does not reflect Otamarakau, Pukehina, Pongakawa, Paengaroa, Te Ranga ,Rangiuru communities. There are already very effective groups operating in these communities,Pukehina Beach Rate Payers, Paengaroa Community Assn, Te Ranga Community, Maketu ProjectsTeam, plus several environmental enhancement groups across the ward and these work closely withCouncil at very little cost to the ratepayer.I SUPPORT (0}T S~PPO~,Xc1rcle one) THr·H r WAHDS?Submitters Name tJtl-n fu z,{ wla. .• '\.J. Phone ,fj j .) .) j j/J;; No-r cv,]./){h ~ r Gd://'It,

Address PuU~ f3~35Three other points for considerationThe other considerations that Councillors need to hear - do Maketu Residents wish to continue aMaketu Community Board? The cost to the rate payer is $169 pa- Administration costs are$54,000pa1. I SUPPORT I NOT SUPPORT (mcle one) KEEPING MAKETU COMMNUNITYBOARD?Do the surrounding communities wish to have a boundary change to enable them to be part of theMaketu Community Board?2. I SUPPORT I NOT SUPPORT (ci rcle one) MAKETU COMMUNITY BOARDINCREASING THE BOUNDARIES TO THE MAIN ROAD AT MAKETU CKOSSING ANDWILSON ROAD- MAIN HIGHWAY INTERSECTIONleA. .If the feedback guided the Councillors to change to three wards -would Maketu Ward residents wishto see an Eastern Community Board established as the community of interest is Te Puke.Maketu Rate payers already pay rates towards Te Puke development and Te Puke library.3. I SUPPORT I NOT SUPPORT (circle one) THE ESTABLISHMENT OF ONECOMMUNITY BOARD ACROSS THE EASTERN WARDAbove information prepared by Sue Matthews, Maketu Councillor, Western BOPDistrict Council to gain your views to guide our decisionsRemember: submissions must be received by Council no later than 4pm, Wednesday 25 July 2012.Email: representationsubmissions@westernbay.govt.nzFurther information is www. westernbay.govt. nz/Major-Projects/Representation-Review/Submissions will be heard on Friday 17 August. Council will deliberate on the submissions and thefinal representation proposal will be notified and go out for further public consultation.Affix StampSubmissions for Representation ReviewWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 12803TAURANGA 3143

36Catherine McKerrasFrom:Sent:To:Subject:Trudy Saturday, 21 July 2012 10:04 AMrepresentationsubmissionsWAIHI BEACH COUNSELLORI would like to see local representation on the council for Waihi Beach. One representative councillor pleaseto be elected from Waihi Beach. Cheers Trudy van Stee, (the beach).

37Catherine McKerrasFrom:Sent:To:Subject:Murray Craig Tuesday, 24 July 2012 3:40PMrepresentationsubmissionsWaihi Beach RepresentationSubmission on the Representation Proposal by Murray CraigTo Western BOP District CouncilContact DetailsMurray Craig21 Dillon StreetWaihi BeachPh . 863 4944email macraig@xtra.co.nzSubmission to retain 12 Councillors including one elected from Waihi Beach.The proposal to reduce councilors from 12 to 8 currently before Council could result in Waihi Beach losing its singlecouncil representative. There are many reasons why a special community of interest such as Waihi Beach must berepresented:- Separate coastal community of interest comprising local residents and holiday houses.-Geographical separation from Tauranga-Two Councillors from an expansive ward can not possibly cover the needs of the area.- The Katikati electorate with dominent numbers at election and will select from within.-Rates from Waihi Beach are currently 14% of council income. Rating without representation is notdemocratic.The only reason that has been given for this reduction from 12 to 8 councillors is apparently numerical, wherebyeach councilor represents roughly the same number of people. Note that while total population is the basis for thenumber of councillors the selection is by resident electors.I acknowledge that in a 12 councillor senario Waihi Beach is below the numerical requirement of 3435 people. Asimple transfer of mesh blocks from Katikati containing the necessary population can produce the balance required.This type of transfer has been applied before when other wards have fallen outside the required number of people.It is important that Waihi Beach retains a representative around the council table to keep local issues in focus . I notethat the Waihi Beach Community Board is seen by the Local Government Commission as a special community ofinterest, but where it realy matters in the decision making, council believe we can be represented by 2 councillorscovering an expansive area stretching from Coromandel to Matakana Island.Th is proposal to limit cou ncillors to 8 has no merit and should be discarded.The present arrangement of 12 councillors can be accommodated by mesh block adjustmentMurray CraigI wish to speak to my submission.

~- Western Bay of Plenty38x ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------ - ----. ---"f'l.L --Piease tt~ar off and return to the addrt>ss below or hand in to any Uhnu y and ServiCe ~ 'f:}Submission:D I do not support the proposed representation arrangements; /(~ c r..Ul! o lFor the following reasons:.) 3 J..tf::j ,)c>l JInformation supplied to me indicates that at least two councillors including the mayor were notpresent when a vote was taken and that these two would not have voted in favour of the motion.I would think that for an issue as serious as this all councillors should be present ______ _The Pongakawa area (and Maketu generally) is a growth area and also provides a good deal of therates take for WBOPDC but receive little by way of direct benefit. No sewerage, rubbish pick upetc. Also interesting to note that the Pongakawa School provides the only heated competition poolin Te puke (this will remain the case even after the smaller one non-competition pool is opened atPaengaroa. In addition the school will shortly provide Te Puke's only action centre.Cost savings by removing representation will be minimal but the impact will be huge. As Iunderstand it the saving may well be as little as 75 cents per ratepayer! _________ _As principal of Pongakawa School I do not support this proposed change and would urge councilto look again at this with a view to maintaining the status quo at least. __________ _Submissions close on Wednesday 25 July 2012 at 4.00pm.Initial Representation ProposalSubmisston Form 2012A600319 Page 5 of 6

Western Bay of Plenty39PEOPlE • PLAN • PROGRESSSubmissions close on Wednesday 25 July 2012 at 4.00pm.How to send your feedback:Go to our website www.westernbay.govt.nz and complete the online submission form .Return this form to any council library and service centre in Waihi Beach, Katikati, Omokoroa, andTe Puke or post to:Initial Representation Proposal SubmissionWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 12803TAURANGA 3143Email your feedback to: representationsubmissions@westernbay.govt.nzOnce you've made your submission, we will let you know we've received it. The information andviews you express in your submission form become part of a public consultation process and willbe made available to the Mayor and Councillors. All submissions received are also made availableas part of a public document. These can be viewed at our Library and Service Centre offices atWaihi Beach, Te Puke, Katkati, Omokoroa, head office, Barkes Corner and Maketu InformationCentre.(Please tick 0 the following boxes that apply)I would like to speak to the Mayor and Councillors about my submission. The day forhearings is Friday 17 August 2012My Contact Details Are:D No*NAME: (who is making this submission?) Craig Haggo, Principal Pongakawa School_'*CONTACT PERSON (if the name above is an organisation} _______ _ _ _ _*Postal Address: RD6 Old Coach Road Te Puke ------------ - ------------------------PostCode: 3186 ___ _*Daytime Phone: 5333731 ________ Mobile Number: 0272868115*Email Address: principal@pongakawa.school.nz ______________ _*Signature: ___________________________ ___*So that you can be contacted regarding your submission if required.Initial Representation ProposalSubmission Form 2012A600319 Page 6 of 6

401727Received: Friday, 20 July 2012, 11:41 a.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:F J FanninHearing Requested: NoPreferred Hearing Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsPlease do not take away any current representation. The Maketu Ward has manydifferent issues to the Te Puke Ward and to combine these two would be to the detrimentof the Maketu Ward. Consider the lack of representation since the area was placed intothe Rotorua electorate.(Is this a cost saving exercise?) >Submissions:Submitter Contact InformationF J Fannin270 Pongakawa Station RoadRD6Te Puke3186Phone: 075333066Email: jeafre@xtra.co .nzReference Data:Ozone ContactiD: 18488Cen Submission: REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012*REP12*27Website Submission Id: 1004Processed Date: Friday, 20 July 2012, 11:45 a.m.

4128Received: Friday, 20 July 2012, 6:19 p.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:whenever neededJohn and Margaret ScrimgeourHearing Requested: YesPreferred Hearing Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsWe, John and Margaret Scrimgeour, disagree with the Council's representation reviewfindings and their recommendation to reduce representation to 3 wards and 8 councillors.We believe that the current 5 wards and 12 councillors better divides the region intocommunities of interest.If Council feels that they must reduce to 3 wards it is imperative that 11 or 12 councillorsare retained to ensure that their representation responsibilities are met. >Submissions:Submitter Contact Informationwhenever neededJohn and Margaret Scrimgeour953B Maniatutu RoadRD6Te Puke3186Phone: (07) 533 3681AHPhone: (07) 533 3681Email: jscrim@xtra.co.nzReference Data:Ozone ContactiD: 7463Cen Submission: REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012* REP12 * 28Website Submission Id: 1005Processed Date : Friday, 20 July 2012, 11 :46 a.m.

4229Received: Sunday, 22 July 2012, 6:46p.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:Eric AsheHearing Requested: NoPreferred Hearing Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsLocal identities will be working for Maketu Community. >Submissions:Submitter Contact InformationEric AsheEmail: jacks-eric@xtra.co.nzReference Data:Ozone ContactiD: 63836Cen Submission: REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012*REP12*29Website Submission Id: 1007Processed Date: Sunday, 22 July 2012, 11:47 a.m .

433030Received: Sunday/ 22 July 2012 17:56p.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:rodney waterhouseHearing Requested: NoPreferred Hearing Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsI do not support the reduction of the Maketu ward representation.The Maketu ward is rural and wide spread consists of several unique communities, thesecommunities are best served by two Counci/liors. >Submissions:Submitter Contact Informationrodney waterhouse2 kaituna rd maketu3189Email: butch. waterhouse@gmail.comReference Data:Ozone ContactiD: 8428Cen Submission: REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012*REP12*30Website Submission Id: 1009Processed Date: Sunday/ 22 July 2012 1 11:49 a.m.

443)31Received: Sunday, 22 July 2012, 10:15 p.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:Steve BaileyBailey Farms LtdHearing Requested: YesPreferred Hearing Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsThe current number of 12 elected councillors ought be retained as reducing the numbersreduces the skill base of councillors experience can have on particular policy or issues.That elected members do come from a variety of walks of fife yet. That there is equalopportunity for those in the current rural wards to have elected members that have makedecisions closer to the needs of his or her constituents needs 1(without having to thinkwell my town constituents think this and my country constituents think something quitedifferent.It is important to note that under the current ward boundarys and councillors views onthat having to have them compromise their focal if went to a 3 ward system there is asplit of focal level requirementsThat if for whatever reason if councillors away sick or unable to attend meetings there isenough efectend to make an effective elected vote.DO NOT Fix what aint brokeDespite that remuneration provided to councillors for their hard effort being not enoughto be a fulltime position,And that reducing councillors may result in more of theremuneration to be shared amongst. I feel this does not outweigh the need to ensure abroad representation and it does demonstrate councillors intergrity that much of theirrole does rely on their goodwill, duty to serve their community. (ps i am not opposed tocouncillors being aptly remunerated)Understand the rural vs urban needs. Especially as the urban population has acollectively pays more than then town rate payer contribute ..Rural needs largely involve roading and getting their produce to their factorys processorsor the port. The urban needs largely involve servicing the focal business and in fact weoften see rates income used to develop across services that are nice but not a need. Ineconomic times of hardship we need to have prudent governance that grows wealth - weneed to mvest not spend.in particular when elections occur and new members elected on this enables ngrepresentation and ward system have provided a representatiOn that does g1ve focalize

453232Received: Sunday, 22 July 2012, 10:24 p.m .Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:Alan RookHearing Requested: NoPreferred He a ring Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsI wish to support the submission of Max and Robin Avery, Athenree.I do not support the proposed represention arrangements for the reasons given in thetheir submission. To achieve effective representation, Waihi Beach and Athenree requiretheir own councillor. We feel that we pay a disproportionate share of the rates, and weneed our own councillor to represent our views on council. The former Katikati councillorsSam Dunlop and Mike Williams' performance regarding the Waihi Beach seawall and theirtreatment of the appellants is fresh in the minds of many at Waihi Beach and Athenree.In my opinion their decision making over that issue was a disgrace, and demonstratedhow out of touch they were with the views of the majority of Waihi Beach and Athenreeresidents. I would be extremely concerned if they were voted in again under theproposed representation arrangements - and that is a real risk given the disproportionatenumber of voters in Katikati compared to Waihi Beach and Athenree. In contrast ourcurrent councillor is local, in tune with the views of residents and effectively representingthose views. If the mesh block boundaries need to be moved to allow Waihi Beach andAthenree to have their own councillor, then that is the decision that should be made. Theboundary change petition was largely as a result of council not listening to thiscommunity. We need to ensure that we have an effective voice at council and this willnot happen if we lose our councillor. Please retain the status quo. >Submissions:Submitter Contact InformationAlan RookPhone : 07 863 1184AHPhone: 07 863 1184Email: rookys@kinect.co .nzReference Data:Ozone ContactiD: 116554Cen Submission: REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012*REP12*32Website Submission Id: 1015Processed Date: Sunday, 22 July 2012, 11:53 a.m.

465333Received: Sunday, 22 July 2012, 10:25 p.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:Scott RobertsonHearing Requested: NoPreferred Hearing Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsI reject the current proposal of reducing the number of wards to three and the number ofcouncillors to 8 on the basis that1. There has been no meaningful public consultation, only a single outcome proposal.2. No information on how the electorate will be able to communicate with the newstructure or indeed what the role of community boards will be in this new structure orindeed if they will even be retained.3. A reduction in the number councillors concentrates more influence in the hands offewer people making it easier for individuals to control and hence influence outcomes forthe community negatively.4. The proposed merging of distinctly different wards into one, Waihi beach andKatikati for example is completely inappropriate.5. The most obvious solution of changing ward boundaries to retain the five currentwards with proportionate representation hasn't even been suggested.6. Matakana Island which has a right to be an exception to proportional wardrepresentation as an Island community has been completely disregarded.7. The "already made" decision to retain FPP rather than engage the electorate as totheir preferred voting system STV or FPP indicates a disregard for engaging with thecommunity and thus indicating this proposal regarding ward changes is au fait accompli.>Submissions:Submitter Contact InformationScott Robertson263 Walker Road Eastkatikati3178Phone: 5490912Email: robertsons . katikati@xtra .co. nzReference Data:Ozone ContactiD: 121886Cen Submission: REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012*REP12*33Website Submission Id : 1016Processed Date: Sunday, 22 July 2012, 11:54 a.m.

4734Received: Sunday, 22 July 2012, 10:49 p.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:Carole Mason RookHearing Requested: NoPreferred Hearing Date : not specifiedSubmissionThe Council/iors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsI wish to support the submission of Max and Robin Avery, Athenree. I do not support theproposed representation arrangements, for the reasons given in their submission. Hascouncil learned nothing from the boundary change proposal? We believe that processdemonstrated a number of things, firstly that Waihi Beach and Athenree are a distinctcommunity of interest, and secondly that Waihi Beach and Athenree wish to be listenedto by this council. With that in mind, how can we possibly be expected to support aproposal that would involve us losing our councillor? Waihi Beach and Athenree haveissues that are entirely different to Katikati. Under the proposed arrangements, it wouldbe almost impossible for us to vote in a councillor who lives in our community, simplydue to the dispropionate numbers of people living in Katikati compared to Waihi Beachand Athenree. The past performance of the Katikati councillors Mike Williams and SamDunlop over the Waihi Beach seawall demonstrated how out of touch they were with thiscommunity. I would be very concerned if they were to be voted in to represent us. Wehave some very important issues to deal with in our ward, including coastal erosion,stormwater and our very high rates. We do not want to see council's response to thoseissues diluted as a result of ineffective representation. Please retain the status quo. >Submissions:Submitter Contact InformationCarole Mason RookPhone : 078631184AHPhone: 078631184Email : rookys@kinect.co.nzReference Data:Ozone ContactiD: 116555Cen Submission: REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012*REP12*34Website Submission Id: 1017Processed Date: Sunday, 22 July 2012, 11:54 a.m.

483$35Received: Monday, 23 July 2012, 11:32 a.m.Initial Representation Proposal 2012Submitter:Alan NobleHearing Requested: NoPreferred Hearing Date: not specifiedSubmissionThe Councilliors proposed changes in brief are to reduce the existing number of wardsfrom five to three and reduce the number of Councillors from 12 to 8. What do you thinkof this proposal?- Questions < I DO NOT support the proposed Representation ArrangementsNot sufficient options to support, I don't think it complies with the local bodys act it doesnot take into account the community of interest. >Submissions:Submitter Contact InformationAlan Noble2998 Main RoadKatikati3178Phone: 075490232Email: ange@mareefinance.co.nzReference Data:Ozone ContactiD : 63269Cen Submission: REP12 2012Cen Master ID : 2012* REP12*35Website Submission Id: 1022Processed Date : Monday, 23 July 2012, 11:58 a.m.

Catherine McKerras49From:Sent:To:Subject:Syd Rowe ZL 1 LWR Monday, 23 July 2012 3:40PMrepresentationsubmissionsWardsRepresentation Submission from the Paengaroa Community Hall Society Inc.We wish to support the retention of the Status Quo.Yours faithfully,Syd RoweSecretary I Treasurer

5037Submissions close on Wednesday 25 .July 2012 at 4.00pm.How to send your feedback:Go to our website www.westernbay.govt.nz and complete the online submission form.Return this form to any council library and service centre in Waihi Beach, Katikati, Omokoroa, andTe Puke or post to:Initial Representation Proposal SubmissionWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 12803TAURANGA 3143Email your feedback to: representationsubmissions@westernbay.govt.nzr RFCE\VEDZ 3 JUL 2011Once you've made your submission, we will let you know we've received it. The information andviews you express in your submission form become part of a public consultation process and willbe made available to the Mayor and Councillors. All submissions received are also made availableas part of a public document. These can be viewed at our Library and Service Centre offices atWaihi Beach, Te Puke, Katkati, Omokoroa, head office, Barkes Corner and Maketu InformationCentre.(Please tick 0 the following boxes that apply)I would like to speak to the Mayor and Councillors about my submission. The day forhearings is Friday 17 August 2012~ Yes [] NoContac De a1 s Are:*NAME: (who is making this submission?) ___ S_ a._""'-__ J:)__ ~_"'-_\_o---L,p___ _"'CONTACT PERSON (If the name above is an organisation)----------*Postal Address: zsz ~~L Po ,J/ foo.d/.2/)(/.( lfrl!

51For the following reasons:/~ ~ ~~~ · d ~ ~~~kJ. 4Submissions close on Wednesday 25 .July 2012 at 4.0Dpm.Initial Representation PropoSdlS11brnlsslon Forrn 20 12A600319 Page 5 of 6

Western Bay of Plenty52(J '''"I LL Jf/

'yWestern Bay of Plenty11/)f·rl r ,- I.J,1! II53~ ---------- . - ·-----------····--- .Please tear off and return to the address below or hand in to any Library and Service Centresission:~I support the proposed Representation Arrangements;D I do not support the proposed representation arrangements;For the following reasons:Acr(u{Tl~Submissions close on Wednesday 25 July 2012 at 4.00pm.frllllrll Hf'prl'C,PIIt diiOII Pr opw,dlC., IIIJtlll',, 0 II f Of Ill } () I)/\600 Jf I)

Western Bay of Plenty'''''"' 1 r ,,,.1, 1154Submissions close on Wednesday 25 July 2012 at 4.00pm.How to send your feedback:Go to our website www.westernbay.govt.nz and complete the online submission form.Return this form to any council library and service centre in Waihi Beach, Katikati, Omokoroa, andTe Puke or post to:Initial Representation Proposal SubmissionWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 12803TAURANGA 3143Email your feedback to: representationsubmissions@westernbay.govt.nzOnce you've made your submission, we will let you know we've received it. The information andviews you express in your submission form become part of a public consultation process and willbe made available to the Mayor and Councillors. All submissions received are also made availableas part of a public document. These can be viewed at our Library and Service Centre offices atWaihi Beach, Te Puke, Katkati, Omokoroa, head office, Barkes Corner and Maketu InformationCentre.(Please tick 0 the following boxes that apply)I would like to speak to the Mayor and Councillors about my submission. The day forhearings is Friday 17 August 2012D YesMy Contact Details Are:0' No*NAME: (who is making this submission?)_ ..... ~=~..:.J\'-"Sc.c. -L.......=..._~....;;;_·_·_r_-_·~--~-=------'*CONTACT PERSON (if the name above is an organisation)-----------*Postal Address: 6d:-\ \\\a.~ n ~f*vq ("'\ Sb ',() \ -:kl ~C)--~~~:£~4r-~~-------------------------- PostCode: __ ~ __ o _______r r 111 I ell Hl'prl'

... .Western Bay of PlentyFl.llff/1 l I fr,!f/(·J/55'>(c:>ZPill dl ton Proposdlc,,tiJrrii

0 t.)Z I -z}z Z ~,. , Western /lay of Plenty56Submissions close on Wednesday 25 July 2012 at 4.00pm.How to send your feedback:Go to our website www.westernbay.govt.nz and complete the online submission form.Initial Representation Proposal SubmissionWestern Bay of Plenty District CouncilPrivate Bag 12803TAURANGA 3143Email your feedback to: representationsubmissions@westernbay.qovt.nz2 3 JUL 20i2Dt:r~~l~RCNOBQp~---...:~-~ UNCtLOnce you've made your submission, we will let you know we've received it. The information andviews you express in your submission form become part of a public consultation process and willbe made available to the Mayor and Councillors. All submissions received are also made availableas part of a public document. These can be viewed at our Library and Service Centre offices atWaihi Beach, Te Puke, Katkati, Omokoroa, head office, Barkes Corner and Maketu InformationCentre.(Please tick 0 the following boxes that apply)I would like to speak to the Mayor and Councillors about my submission. The day forhearings is Friday 17 August 2012D Yesf'iY Contact Details J..re~*NAME: (who is making this submission? J -~L/2~t..:Jn~>«Uo.L., _d,f-1--!- ~t,J-.I.L.rx..t--1""'...::-t,___ _____ _'*CONTACT PERSON (if the name above is an organisation)---------------------------------PostCode: __*Daytime Phone: __CI_,iL:::..· +1--;V~'-~'\'-17,....I ¥ I- _,.C,"-'~ 6"-?'/! (}0_'-+f----. -=-J ___ Mobile Number: 0 ,)11/f tt·S ,'l 6 60*Email Address: a.n'/ lol /; v ;, ) It c;ffi '()In ) Q.; ( c () /)- '---------*Signature: _f.,. ~l b~,.,L.1SrJ that you can be cof!tar tef,;q;tdinq yow ~ uhmt~s ion tf teqwiedflllliill f~Pjlf P'>f'rll df I()J I flJ llfliJ'>rll'•llllflli',',iOJI f IJIIII l() ll.

L',-·:; Western Bay of Plenty57P/e;u;:e tear off and n::twn to the .-:ufdre€i.'f! belm¥ at hand in to .any Library aru:l Servke rf :.C:•'treSubmission:D ?'support the proposed Representation Arrangements;-[]/ I do not support the proposed representation arrangements;For the following reasons:RECEIVED2 3 JUL 2012W. B. 0. P. D. C.TE PUKESubmissions close on Wednesday 25 July 2012 at 4.00pm.fllilldl I ~P pr PSP illdl!Oil fiiiJ[JO '>Cl i',IIIJIIII',')j(J II fOil II ) () I )A600 i I CJ