1. Open Letter from PRRA to Councillor Steve Morris
2. Letter from Councillor Steve Morris to Chair PRRA
3. Tauranga Water Delivery Plan — Councillor Glen Crowther
Open Letter from PRRA to Councillor Steve Morris
20 August 2025
Attention Councillor Steve Morris
Tauranga City Council
RE Open Letter re Local Waters Done Well. Endorsed by the Committee of PRRA.
Hi Steve,
I am writing to express my personal disappointment on your “about face” on the “Local Waters Done Well” decision on 15 August 2025 after voting the previous week to delay any decision until all the economic data was available.
You were elected to represent the views of your ward and the ratepayers of Tauranga and you campaigned on keeping rates low and having a democratic operating council reflecting the views of the ratepayers.
There is no mandate from the ratepayers of Tauranga to create a CCO for Local Waters Done Well. The Tauranga City Council Online Survey did not show a majority favoured the scheme you voted for.
There has been no verified data to show any real savings for the ratepayer. All the public has seen is a one page glossy brochure from Tauranga City Council. Moving the water debt to the new entity will allow the Tauranga City Council to borrow more. The Mayor has confirmed this in public meetings and he is in favour of the additional borrowing.
Both of these actions will increase the rates bill of every ratepayer. Further increased water rates and increased general rates. Something you appeared to campaign against. I also do not recall you asking the views of the Papamoa Community on Local Waters Done Well. There was an opportunity to canvas the PRRA meeting before the 15 August vote.
Blindsiding your voting base is not a good look. Community consultation is an ongoing activity. There was no urgency for a decision on Local Waters Done Well to be made.
I have read your statement saying that the creation of a CCO needed to be made as the Government likes this solution, otherwise there could be problems with the Regional deal Tauranga has with the Government. If the Regional deal is to be used as a stick to corral Tauranga people then the Council needs to grow balls and say no to the Regional deal until the people of Tauranga are respected by the Government.
You have played into the hands of the UTF dominated council and a publicity seeking Mayor.
By tying the vote, you allowed the Mayor to have the casting vote (in effect 2 votes for the Mayor and his team) This is another anomaly of the governance system imposed on Tauranga.
All in all, a sad day for the ratepayers of Tauranga. There was no need for any urgency.
Regards,
Philip Brown
Letter from Councillor Steve Morris to Chair PRRA
Evening Philip,
Philip,
Thank you for your open letter regarding water services decisions. As a former chair, I know the PRRA an important voice in our community.
I want to clarify the sequence of decisions and the reasons for my vote on 15 August.
On 5 August, Council voted 6–4 to pursue a Council-Controlled Organisation (CCO) for water and wastewater, with transition no later than 2028. That decision, which I and Crs Scoular, Rolleston, Crowther, Baker and Curach supported, was subject to due diligence on whether a CCO would deliver real savings for ratepayers.
On 15 August, Council voted to go further by:
Including stormwater,
Naming Western Bay and Thames-Coromandel as partners, and
Bringing the transition date forward to 2027.
This was not, in my view, an “about face” on the CCO decision—Council had already made that call on 5 August. The August 15 vote was about ensuring Tauranga remained in control of its own pathway, while also safeguarding our ability to negotiate a “Regional Deal” with central government—funding arrangements that could deliver billions of dollars for transport, schools, and housing.
On consultation: Council undertook a full public engagement process earlier this year and received over 700 submissions. The results were:
Multi-Council CCO: 41.7%
Tauranga-only CCO: 19.3%
Status quo (in-house delivery): 39.2%
While no option received an outright majority, more than 60% of submitters supported a CCO model over the status quo. I acknowledge that consultation is not a referendum, but these results gave Council a clear indication that many residents saw value in exploring a CCO—subject, of course, to affordability and due diligence.
To your point about costs: a CCO will not proceed unless robust analysis shows it reduces costs for Tauranga families. Independent reports, which you can read here, provide early evidence:
Indicative Business Case - Future for Water Service Delivery
Key findings from that work include:
A CCO results in lower water charges than continuing with the current in-house arrangement.
Community affordability improves slightly under the CCO model.
The positive efficiencies continue to compound beyond 2034, creating even greater savings in water charges over time.
The efficiencies mean more infrastructure can be delivered under a CCO for the same level of capital investment as an in-house arrangement.
The larger the CCO, the greater the cumulative savings over time (i.e., higher peak savings).
A CCO model provides a small to moderate increase in debt capacity. This enables more investment in both waters and non-waters infrastructure, while still delivering efficiency savings.
In short, the independent analysis shows that, if the model is pursued, it could deliver lower charges for residents, more infrastructure investment for communities, and improved financial sustainability for the city. However, this decision is still subject to further a lot of due diligence.
If, after that due diligence the results show no savings for Tauranga ratepayers, we won't proceed. If after all the evidence is gathered, it points to savings for ratepayers now and in the future, why wouldn't we?
I understand and share concerns about rising rates. That is why my guiding principle is clear: whichever option delivers the most affordable and sustainable water services for our people is the one I will support.
Philip, while we may differ on aspects of this decision, I hope you can see that my priority has been to preserve access to significant investment in our region and ensure affordability for ratepayers.
Steve Morris | Pāpāmoa Councillor
Tauranga City Council | 021 0900 1817 |
steve.morris@tauranga.govt.nz | www.tauranga.govt.nz
Tauranga’s Water Delivery Plan - Redux
The Removal of Tauranga’s Waters Assets from Direct Public Control
Aug 24
The average punter probably missed this story due to minimal media coverage, however Tauranga City Council’s recent decisions about the future of our city’s waters (water, wastewater and stormwater) assets have been a big topic in the ‘Tauranga beltway’.
That’s partly because it was the biggest decision our Council will make, removing 40% of Council’s assets (and 40% of upcoming capital expenditure) from direct control of elected representatives and placing them in a new waters company from July 2027.
However, it’s also because it was the first big decision of our Council that went against the Mayor’s vote (on 5th August), and then the first major decision that was relitigated (on 15th August) and changed.
In the 5th August meeting, our Council decided by a 6-4 vote to submit a Water Services Delivery Plan using the in-house approach, which kept delivery inside council and gave elected representatives control of the process. It signaled that we’d head towards a water company, but didn’t specify partner councils - and it excluded stormwater.
In the second meeting 10 days later, Council reversed that decision and determined we would submit a Water Services Delivery Plan for a Multi-Council Waters Organisation with Western BOP and Thames-Coromandel councils from 1 July 2027, including stormwater.
I’ve been asked by many puzzled people to explain that sudden U-turn, as they had repeatedly heard the Mayor and several Tauranga City Councillors state that we had an unofficial ‘policy’ of not relitigating decisions. Yet here was the first contentious decision that went against those elected members and we were instantly relitigating it…
August 5th Decision
When we left our meeting on 5th August, I noticed some shocked faces in the Council Chamber. It was obvious that delaying until next year our final decision about whether to put Tauranga’s waters assets into a waters company (a CCO or Council Controlled Organisation) had surprised staff. Yet it had always been stated that we were not making our final decision on the Water Services Delivery Plan until mid-July (then deferred to 5th August).
Our 5th August decision reflected concerns held by a majority of councillors about the process and questions about whether locking in a CCO now was the best approach. Whether it was ‘the right decision’ or not was subjective. A majority of democratically-elected councillors had exercised our judgment according to good governance practice and made the best decision we could based on all the information we’d be given and what we could access elsewhere.
Our decision factored in:
- the public’s views,
- the staff views and recommendations,
- the views of colleagues,
- the views of our iwi and hapu,
- the views and desires of our fellow Bay of Plenty councils, including Western BOP District Council (WBOPDC), and also Thames-Coromandel Council (TCDC),
- whether stormwater was best in or out of any waters company that we eventually set up,
- some conflicting information about potential efficiencies from a CCO,
- the government’s preference for collaboration and large water companies
- the government’s advice that optimal efficiency comes from water entities with over 50,000 connections (which Tauranga City Council already has),
- the implications of not doing what the Minister preferred, including being told we’d endanger our “Sub-Regional Deal”
Unhappy Minister, Happy Public & Partners
The initial feedback after our 5 August Council meeting was exactly as expected. We were told by our Mayor that the Minister had conveyed his concern that our ‘Regional’ Deal with central government might not proceed if we couldn’t work with WBOPDC on a waters collaboration. They wanted us to reverse our democratic decision and put our waters assets into a joint waters company with Western Bay (and other councils if we wished).
After that, I have received nothing but positive feedback – in fact, more positive feedback about our 5th August Waters decision than everything else we’ve done since taking office last year put together. That included some very positive feedback from key players across our region, in local government and outside.
That was important, as one of our goals was to shift TCC’s approach to a more “humble regional leadership” style. Our decision aligned Tauranga City Council with our regional partners, as Rotorua, Whakatane and Opotiki Councils had all passed very similar resolutions to our 5th August one. That would help to open the door to working more collaboratively, rather than TCC and WBOPDC rushing ahead and setting up its own waters company before those other councils.
That said, our decision left one ‘problem’. Or as I saw it, an opportunity.
Neighbouring Western BOP District Council, on the same day as our meeting (5th August), had a split 6-all vote about whether to produce a Water Services Delivery Plan using the in-house approach (as TCC had approved and all other BOP councils had previously decided), or whether to commit to a waters CCO with Tauranga and Thames-Coromandel Councils. The WBOPDC mayor used his casting vote to opt for a CCO, and his council then decided by 8-4 to include only Tauranga City Council, due to concerns from their iwi and hapu about TCDC’s inclusion.
The different decisions by Tauranga and Western BOP Councils resulted in a dilemma. Should TCC stick to our decision, knowing we’d been clearly told by staff that we could produce an in-house Water Services Delivery Plan and meet all government requirements? Or should we reverse our decision, so we’d align with WBOPDC’s split decision and the government’s preference?
Waters Vote - Redux
It soon became clear that an Extraordinary Council Meeting would be scheduled on 15th August, in order to reverse the decision - although the meeting agenda worded it far more diplomatically:
“To provide elected members with a report on the implications and legal requirements to be met to give effect to the Council decisions of 5 August” and “having considered the information in this report, to either reconfirm the Council resolution of 5 August or provide revised/additional direction”.
As was seen in the final vote on 15th August, our elected Council was evenly split. Half still believed we had made the optimal choice for Tauranga on the 5th; the other half voted to change that decision. Like WBOPDC’s initial decision, the Mayor then used his casting vote to push for the CCO. Unlike Western BOP’s mayor, the Tauranga Mayor used his casting vote to vote against the status quo (in-house).
Although most of our colleagues who wanted to change the decision said little-to-nothing in the 15th August meeting about their rationale, it is clear there were three main factors:
1) The fear of not doing what the Minister/s wanted and losing our ‘Regional’ Deal
2) The desire by some elected members to do whatever they could to secure a waters CCO
3) Some concern for our “little brother” (Western BOP District Council)
Like half of my colleagues, I saw many benefits of sticking with our initial decision. In response to many people asking me for my rationale, it included:
1) We’d been repeatedly told that Tauranga City Council would comply with government requirements if we submitted a standalone in-house Water Services Delivery Plan.
2) Not only that, the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) representative told us on 5th August that TCC is “in a strong position standalone” and we meet the government’s guidance that entities should have over 50,000+ water connections.
3) We had no clear information to show the impacts on the remaining council of putting our waters assets into a waters company. (e.g. Would TCC executive salaries and council overheads also be cut by 40% to reflect the loss of waters? What will the impacts be on transport project planning? etc.)
4) Our 5th August decision stated our intent to form a CCO by no later than July 2028, allowing for a July 2027 start, so it was heading in the direction the government wanted.
5) Importantly, if we changed our decision, staff told us they would not have enough time to submit a Water Services Delivery Plan that excluded stormwater. That means there were only two options: an in-house Water Services Delivery Plan as per 5th August (which staff had consistently indicated they could submit), or a Plan for a CCO with named partner councils that included stormwater assets.
Under that latter scenario, owners of lower valued properties stood to pay a lot more for their stormwater charges and owners of high-value properties would likely pay less – something I strongly oppose.
6) Our 5 August decision aligned with the formal resolutions of all Bay of Plenty councils except WBOPDC, noting that literally half of the Western Bay Councillors were also in favour of the option that the rest of us had chosen. That meant the vast majority of all the region’s elected representatives had voted for the approach we had taken.
7) That decision also ‘reopened the door a crack’ after our Mayor had alienated those other councils by publicly pushing for one unitary Baywide council. Hence if those BOP councils were to decide, or be forced by the government, to form a joint waters company, Tauranga City Council would be far better placed to be constructively involved in those discussions.
8) Furthermore, if we stuck to our decision, it better supported the other (smaller) BOP councils and made it harder for central government to force them into decisions that their communities don’t want, because we had made it explicit on the 5th that we would engage with all BOP councils to look at the best ways of collaborating on managing waters in our region. As the ‘big brother’, we could stick up for our ‘little brothers and sisters’.
9) I don’t believe it’s good governance practice to support a sub-optimal outcome on waters in response to the threat of losing a ‘Regional’ Deal – especially one with projects that the elected Tauranga, Western BOP and Regional Councillors have had no say on yet.
The Concern about Government Retaliation
Those were compelling enough reasons for me (and presumably similar reasons for my four colleagues) not to change our vote. That said, I acknowledge the government has the power to halt our ‘Regional’ Deal, but that was a risk I was prepared to take.
I place high importance on sustainability (ironically, something the government says is a key desired outcome from their waters reform). That means prioritising a longer-term perspective.
The possibility of delaying or even losing a 10-year Subregional Deal was important, but less important to me than ensuring the optimal long-term structure for our water, wastewater and stormwater services – something that will almost certainly last much longer and impact every resident of our city.
Moreover, I do not believe the government would have followed through, other than possibly delaying our Deal, as we were still moving in the direction that the government wanted. Would there really have been Cabinet support for such an anti-democratic decision to scrap our Deal, or would the wise heads in the room (who’d understand the political implications) have urged caution?
What about “Little Brother”?
Having looked very closely at Western BOP Council’s position, I was very happy to reach out to our neighbour (our “little brother” as people emotively described it) as we’d stated in our 5th August resolution. However, I wanted to do so in a way that ensured the best outcomes for Tauranga, as well as the best result for our neighbour.
If central government didn’t like the process we’d voted for on the 5th, then rather than elected members receiving messages and threats second hand, they could publicly explain their position and then we could collectively and publicly respond.
Instead, some people asserted that we “had” to change our resolution to help out WBOPDC. Yet water, wastewater and stormwater services will keep operating in the Western Bay (and elsewhere) until July 2027 and beyond, whatever TCC decided, so the only issue was how to address an artificial time constraint that the government had imposed on councils. Namely, we all need to submit Water Services Delivery Plans by 3rd September.
My Preferred Way Forward
I believe a Crown Facilitator (as requested by the Western BOP Mayor) would have been able to help WBOPDC find a sustainable pathway forward, which would likely have resulted in scrapping that Council’s proposed reductions in waters charges in the early 2030s. Half of our Western BOP colleagues seemed to think along similar lines, as they also voted for an in-house Water Services Delivery Plan.
The Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) stated clearly that “a Crown Facilitator [for WBOPDC] will have no directive powers over Tauranga City Council”, nor other neighbouring councils. However, that person would be able to work with Western BOP councillors and collaborate with TCC to plot the best way forward for the Western Bay.
That seemed like a good approach. There was also another pathway if WBOPDC needed it, as WBOPDC and Thames-Coromandel Council appear to balance each other out when it comes to debt headroom and capital investment. They could have gone together, while we go it alone for now, and everyone would likely have complied with all legislative requirements.
If it ever came to the point that DIA stated that a partnership with Tauranga City Council was the only option for WBOPDC to meet its legal obligations, we could address that in the appropriate way.
That was not the case on 15th August, as:
a) DIA had not even assessed the options for WBOPDC
b) Even if a combined water organization is eventually decreed the only viable option, Tauranga is not WBOPDC’s only potential partner – Rotorua Lakes Council has also expressed an interest in partnering with Western Bay and offers some genuine advantages
TCC’s August 15th Resolution
So that was my thinking. However, our decision was reversed on August 15th, with the following outcome:
* A combined Tauranga-Western BOP waters company to be established by 1 July 2027
* Stormwater included in the CCO
* A high threshold to get approval for any changes made after 3rd September 2025
I’m left pondering three points:
1. Is it appropriate for perhaps the biggest decision in each of our Councils’ histories to be decided by the two mayors’ respective casting votes, rather than trying to find more consensus?
2. How did we end up with stormwater included in a waters company when 6 out of 10 TCC councillors and at least 7 out of 12 WBOPDC councillors did not want it included?
3. Are the people of Tauranga happy that their elected representatives prioritised a ‘Regional’ Deal ahead of our initial waters decision?
Video Recordings of Council Meetings:
TCC’s 15 August Council meeting
WBOPDC’s 15 August Council meeting
Here is the full text of TCC’s 15th August resolution (as sent to us):
RECOMMENDATIONS
That the Council:
(a) Receives the report "Local Waters Done Well - Update Report".
(b) After taking into consideration the information contained in this ‘Local Waters Done Well – Update Report’:
Resolution b i)
(i) Reconfirms the resolution of 5 August 2025 that the Water Service Delivery Plan will be prepared for the duration to deliver through an in-house model.
Move Cr Rolleston
Second Cr Crowther
For: Dep Mayor Jen Scoular, Crs Baker, Crowther, Curach, Rolleston
Against: Mayor Drysdale, Crs Morris, Rozeboom, Shuler and Taylor
LOST on casting vote of mayor
Resolutions a and b ii - v
ii) Notes that the establishment of a multi-council water organisation will be subject to the partner councils being satisfied with the results of the due diligence process, and in particular that Western Bay of Plenty District Council is satisfied that the concerns expressed by iwi within the WBOPDC rohe area have been appropriately considered
iii) Receives the letter from Mayor James Denyer of 6 August 2025, outlining his view that Western Bay of Plenty District Council (WBOPDC) is "not in a position to be able to submit a Water Services Delivery Plan by the 3 September deadline" and his request that Council considers a "multi-council CCO with WBOPDC with a stand-up date of 1 July 2027.
iv) Receives the letter from Mayor Len Salt and members of the Thames-Coromandel District Council (TCDC) Local Waters Done Well (LWDW) working group of 13 August 2025, outlining their view that a TCDC in-house delivery model "is not in the best long-term interest for our community."
v) Notes that on 12 August, Mayor Denyer requested a Crown facilitator be appointed to WBOPDC and that members of the TCDC LWDW working group requested TCDC form part of the facilitator’s remit.
Move Cr Morris
Second Cr Rozeboom
CARRIED
vi) Requests staff prepare a Water Services Delivery Plan (WSDP) on the basis that services will be delivered through status quo arrangements until a. 30 June 2027
CARRIED unanimously (Dep Mayor not present for vote)
vii) And thereafter through a three-waters multi-council CCO with
a. Western Bay of Plenty District Council
For: Mayor Drysdale, Crs Baker, Cruach, Morris, Rozeboom, Shuler and Taylor
Against: Crs Crowther, Rolleston
CARRIED
AND
b. Thames-Coromandel District Council subject to confirmation by WBOPDC
For: Mayor Drysdale, Crs Morris, Rozeboom, Shuler and Taylor
Against: Crs Baker, Crowther, Curach, Rolleston
CARRIED
viii) Notes that the WSDP includes stormwater, and that due to a combination of practical constraints and the statutory deadline for submission of the WSDP that a. further work will be done to consider other aspects of stormwater management including assets, ownership, charging and following further information Council may, at a later date, decide to retain stormwater in-house.
For: Mayor Drysdale, Crs Morris, Rozeboom, Shuler and Taylor
Against: Crs Baker, Crowther, Curach, Rolleston
CARRIED
ix) Confirms the due diligence process will include detailed comparative analysis of in-house and CCO options.
x) Requests a project plan on the implementation of these resolutions through until September 2028 for Council approval and that staff report quarterly to Council on engagement, progress against the project plan, what has been completed in the last quarter and what is proposed in the following. Reports will include tracking to budget and highlighting any risks.
xi) Considers holding joint council meetings with partnering councils and meetings with iwi partners on decisions relating to subregional waters in the future.
CARRIED unanimously – cr Scoular not present for the vote
Move Cr Steve Morris
Second Cr Rozeboom
Glen Crowther
Tauranga City Councillor
Email: glen.crowther@tauranga.govt.nz
Phone: 027 3297959