If (re)elected, would you support these planned increases?
No. Big rate rises are not sustainable, especially for those on fixed incomes. Council must take a line-by-line approach to spending, focus on essentials, and look for efficiencies before asking ratepayers to pay more. I would aim to keep average increases as low as possible while still maintaining core services.

The increase is unacceptable. Salaries are one of council’s largest costs, and we must ensure staffing levels and pay rates are justified. I would request the CEO review positions, look to consolidate staff and only add resource where there’s a clear, measurable benefit to ratepayers. Councillors in turn keep a watching brief of staffing costs.

I’m not convinced the current $3.1 million a year is delivering value. Without clear evidence of return on investment, I cannot support that level of spending. There isn’t good evidence of this kind of investment into economic development in New Zealand giving a return on investment. I would much rather the Kapiti Coast invested in business development - helping existing businesses thrive and encouraging existing ones to locate here. This is far more measurable than pie in the sky economic development spending.

My primary focus however would be on removing barriers to business and development, encouraging jobs and affordable homes through a more open, enabling council that reduces consenting red tape and makes it easier and faster to develop and build.

I support investing in valued community facilities like galleries, However I would want to investigate other possible ways of funding other than just from Ratepayers . I do however I believe that Local Government has a role to fund and maximise these kinds of facilities. They improve the experience of living on the Coast.

I support reducing debt, but it can’t be done solely on the backs of ratepayers through constant increases. We need to manage capital spending carefully, prioritise essential projects, and avoid overcommitting to “nice to have” initiatives.

I’d prioritise projects that directly benefit residents experience of living here, along with core infrastructure projects that renew existing critical infrastructure like bridges, roads, footpaths and climate resilience that protect core infrastructure and people’s homes.
$799 million over 10 years is a huge commitment, so every project must be justified, staged appropriately and delivered competently so it delivers real value.

KCDC should look to the advice produced by the Infrastructure Commission which focuses on maintenance and renewal of existing assets to gain real value from them.
There should be caution applied to constructing new assets that create ongoing cost burdens for ratepayers. I would seek an independent assessment from an external party on the scope and level of the capital programme. Such an assessment should be scoped, tasked and answer to elected members, not council officers.

I support the principle of capping rate increases, provided councils retain the flexibility to deal separately with investment in infrastructure and capital renewals, and for genuine emergencies. A cap forces discipline and ensures councils live within their means.

Engagement can be better. Too often consultation is box-ticking. I’d push for earlier and more genuine conversations with residents, especially before budgets and priorities are set.

I have heard that Communication was poor and many residents felt blindsided. I’d ensure affected communities are fully briefed and have a fair say before major changes are adopted. We all have to live with a level of risk, the council faces a balancing act of determining what that risk looks like at any given time.

a) I would minimise “public excluded” sessions to only those matters where
confidentiality or genuine commercial sensitivity is required.
b) Yes – I’d push for prompt release of decisions once confidentiality no longer applies.

I’d introduce regular, plain-language financial updates to the community, so people can see where their money goes. I’d also make consultation feedback more visible, showing residents how their input influenced decisions.

I believe decision-making power should sit with elected representatives who are directly accountable to the public. Non-elected members can and should have an advisory role, but not voting rights.

Yes – this should have gone to a referendum. Major changes to council representation should be decided by the community.

1. Keep rates affordable through disciplined, line-by-line spending reviews.
2. Invest in core community facilities and infrastructure that enhance daily life and that further develops Kapiti as an economic and lifestyle destination.

3. Open the door to business and development to create jobs and more affordable housing.

I bring decades of local business experience and a 15-year track record in local government in Porirua. This included 3 years as Deputy Mayor. I’ve got wider governance experience as the currant Chair of the Pataka Foundation and as a Director (10years) on the Board of the Real Estate Institute of New Zealand . I know how to scrutinise budgets, make practical decisions, and deliver results. My focus is always on value for money, strong communities, and protecting what makes those communities unique.