District councillors must adopt their 2026-27 annual plan at an extraordinary meeting on Thursday, and in doing so will set rates for the year — at a whopping 16.9% higher than last year.
They will also consider advice they asked officials for on how the council could help ratepayers experiencing difficulties paying their rates.
Support services director Paul Hope’s advice to councillors said it was ‘‘accepted and understood’’ that the combination of external factors and the new rates would put increased financial strain on some parts of the community.
However, it was also clear the council had limited scope to provide assistance.
The most common way it helped people at present was to make sure they were aware of the government-funded rates rebates scheme under which eligible ratepayers could receive up to $830 a year from the government to offset their rates bill.
This year there were 1235 successful applications to the Waitaki District Council for rates rebates.
Possible new options could include deferred payment arrangements with reduced penalties and support from third parties such as Stronger Waitaki, Mr Hope said.
The role of third parties would, however, need further review.
‘‘It is considered they could play a significant role in assisting ratepayers. Who may be able to assist, and how they are engaged with, are matters that would need to be addressed if a decision is made to advance this proposal.’’
While the number of people likely to seek help through any new payment options developed was unknown, it was not expected to be significant.
The options would not reduce the council’s rates revenue, although penalty income could be affected.
Eligibility criteria would have to be decided and councillors were asked to delegate development of the programme to the chief executive in consultation with elected members.
No consultation with the wider public was required as it was a matter of delegated authority.
The most significant risk identified was the potential administrative burden adding payment options might create if clear criteria and guidance were not developed for staff, though the time cost for staff was unable to be quantified at this stage.
If the recommendation to develop a broader programme of assistance was accepted, the next step would be establishing who appropriate community partners might be and the role they could play; who would be eligible for the help and what the parameters would be before promoting it to the community.
The new rates are to be set after controversy following an initial consultation on proposed average rates increases of 19% to 45%.
The council opted for an average 22% rates increase but that was revoked on June 23 after a community revolt and staff were told to find ways to reduce it further, councillors ultimately landing at a 16.9% increase.
Staff noted that while it appeared significant, the rates rise would not provide the extra buffer required for the fuel cost crisis or other unforeseen cost increases (as proposed in the 27% option), nor would it enable the council to fund its Three Waters depreciation (as proposed in the 45% option), which would mean borrowing would need to increase significantly.
Staff also noted there was a risk a small portion of the community would not be able to afford the rates.
‘‘There is also a risk that some members of the community may choose not to pay their rates in opposition to the rate increase.’’
Processes were in place to respond to those risks.
