08/06/2026
I rarely respond to rumours, social media commentary, or political point-scoring.
I'd much rather be focused on the financial pressures across our district, identifying further savings and efficiencies, and leading our community through the major reforms ahead. However, some recent online commentary has moved beyond legitimate criticism and into claims that are simply not true. Because those claims go directly to my integrity, they need to be corrected.
Following the latest independent district-wide revaluation, many commercial and industrial property owners are now seeing much larger proposed rates increases than most households.
Put simply, property values have shifted and that has changed who pays what share of the proposed 5.9% average rates increase (or the alternative 9.1% increase). Residential land values have generally fallen, so many residential ratepayers are likely to see increases below the proposed average. Commercial and industrial land values have generally risen, so many of those properties will pay a higher share.
The graph shows how revaluations can shift rates between sectors. Over recent cycles, residential ratepayers often carried larger increases. This year, the movement has swung sharply towards commercial properties.
Over the past few days, a claim has been made and repeated that I somehow admitted I knew months in advance exactly what commercial and industrial property owners would face and chose not to tell the public because it would be ‘bad PR’. That is categorically not true.
The district revaluation is not carried out by Hastings District Council. Under Government-mandated processes, it must be carried out independently and overseen by the Valuer-General.
Normally, councils receive updated valuation information much earlier in the year, well before Annual Plan consultation opens. That did not happen this time.
QV, the independent company that carries out the revaluation, was unable to meet the original timetable and was granted extensions by the Government’s Valuer-General. Council has no control over that.
There had been a high-level indication, that given the dropping residential values and rising commercial and industrial values, the latter properties could be affected. But that is very different from having certified information showing the scale of the increases, which sectors or properties were affected, and what that would mean for individual ratepayers.
Neither I, nor councillors, nor staff had the certified valuation information showing the scale of the impacts and the properties affected until 4 May, which was well into the Annual Plan consultation period.
Once the certified information was received on 4 May, Council had only 11 days to communicate this before consultation closed on 15 May.
In that time, Council moved quickly to assess the impacts (5-6 May), brief councillors (7 May), make the information public (8 May), proactively inform media, and invite submitters to update or resubmit their feedback (11 May) if the valuation impacts changed their views.
The certified valuation file arrived significantly later than expected and near the end of the Annual Plan consultation period.
None of that was the doing of Council or, as has been implied by some, a ‘cover up’.
I said at a recent meeting hosted by the Hastings and Havelock North Business Associations that I was livid about that process. I still am. I am raising these concerns directly with the Valuer-General and am meeting with a member of his office later this month to express the significance of the impact this late information has had on our community. Communities, whether ours or elsewhere in the country, should not be put in this position again.
For those wanting more detail, including a fuller explanation of the valuation process, consultation timing, and the options available to Council, I've included a link in the comments 👇
