2026 AGM
LGNZ holds an Annual General Meeting (AGM) each year.
The 2026 AGM was held online on July 31. The AGM was open to member authorities admitted to membership under the LGNZ constitution (Rule C1).
Agenda and business papers
The following business is conducted at the LGNZ AGM:
- Voting for the positions of President and Vice President (in the year following the year in which triennial local government elections are held);
- President's Report and Annual Report;
- Financial statements and annual statement of accounts;
- Reports from zones or sector groups;
- Remits submitted from zones, sector groups or member authorities;
- Date and venue of the next AGM confirmed;
- Any notice or notices of motion to alter, add to, rescind or otherwise amend the Rules of LGNZ; and
- Any other business that the National Council or the AGM resolves to be considered.
Remits
The remits passed at this year's AGM are detailed below, in order of priority ranked by the delegates. LGNZ National Council considers resource allocation based on this ranking.
The successful remits reflect the issues members have identified as priorities. A successful remit marks the beginning of the advocacy process. It provides LGNZ with a member-endorsed mandate to progress an issue working within the policy priorities of the government of the day.
1. Financial support for government reform implementation costs
Proposed by: Whangārei District Council
Supported by: LGNZ Zone 1
Remit: That LGNZ advocate to central government to provide specific targeted financial support to councils to implement the operational and governance changes that are proposed through the legislative reform programme, for example Simplifying Local Government and RMA reforms.
| Voting results | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 100 | |
| No | 0 | |
| Abstain | 0 |
2. Improving LTP audit requirements
Proposed by: Gisborne District Council
Supported by: Central Hawke’s Bay District Council, Hastings District Council, Stratford District Council, Taranaki Regional Council, New Plymouth District Council, Wairoa District Council, Manawatū District Council, South Taranaki District Council, Tararua District Council, Rangitīkei District Council, Hawke’s Bay Regional Council and Horowhenua District Council
Remit: That LGNZ advocate to government for improvements to the efficiency, proportionality, and cost-effectiveness of audit requirements for Long Term Plans and Consultation Documents, including:
- Greater proportionality in audit requirements, ensuring that audit effort is aligned with council size, complexity, risk, and materiality; and
- Reducing duplication across audit stages, particularly where similar information and assumptions are subject to repeated review; and
- Improving standardisation, transparency, and cost control in audit delivery, to reduce rework and improve consistency across the sector, and to constrain excessive or escalating audit fees through greater transparency of audit pricing and benchmarking of costs across the sector.
| Voting results | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 100 | |
| No | 0 | |
| Abstain | 0 |
3. Removal of representation review requirements during the Simplifying local Government reform
Proposed by: Waikato District Council
Supported by: LGNZ Zone 2
Remit: That LGNZ advocate to the Government, on behalf of its members, for compliance relief from the upcoming representation review requirements in light of the significant reforms proposed through the Simplifying Local Government programme and the recent Head Start pathway, which may render any review undertaken before the 2028 elections redundant.
| Voting results | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 93.55 | |
| No | 4.84 | |
| Abstain | 1.61 |
4. Bulk funding of transport activities
Proposed by: Waikato Regional Council
Supported by: LGNZ Zone 2
Remit: That LGNZ calls on government, opposition parties and NZTA to support a move to bulk funding for basic and repeatable transport activities, thereby acknowledging the efficiency and financial gains, and reduction in funding risk, this change would provide to local government, and supports a trial of this proposed bulk-funding approach for the 2027-2030 funding round amongst a group of councils which have demonstrated strong performance in delivering public transport services and/or maintaining transport infrastructure.
| Voting results | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 90.55 | |
| No | 4.88 | |
| Abstain | 4.57 |
5. Priorities for Dog Control Act reform
Proposed by: Rotorua Lakes Council
Supported by: Invercargill City Council, Gisborne District Council, Tauranga City Council, Hamilton City Council and Far North District Council
Remit: That LGNZ advocate to government for the reform of the Dog Control Act 1996 to provide councils with more effective powers and tools to undertake their dog control responsibilities including:
- greater scope for earlier intervention
- stronger consequences for non-compliance
- better ability for councils to set minimum requirements for dog owners - including for desexing and containment
| Voting results | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 93.75 | |
| No | 0 | |
| Abstain | 6.25 |
6. A fairer approach to uneconomic transport infrastructure funding
Proposed by: Stratford District Council
Supported by: South Taranaki District Council, New Plymouth District Council, Rangitīkei District Council, Manawatū District Council and Wairoa District Council
Remit: That LGNZ advocate for a fairer approach towards uneconomic transport infrastructure, where either NZTA commits to co-funding this infrastructure if councils remain legally obligated to own and maintain it, and/or the Government provides clearer guidance and support for councils downgrading or ceasing service to low traffic volume areas.
| Voting results | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 94.25 | |
| No | 4.15 | |
| Abstain | 1.60 |
7. Improved regulation of vape retailers
Proposed by: Wairoa District Council
Supported by: Manawatū District Council, Stratford District Council, South Taranaki District Council, Gisborne District Council, Napier City Council, Hastings District Council and Central Hawke’s Bay District Council
Remit: That LGNZ advocate to central government for legislative change to provide territorial authorities with greater regulatory and enforcement powers over vape retailers, including the ability to control the location, density, operation, advertising, product visibility and compliance standards of vape stores within their districts.
| Voting results | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 87.19 | |
| No | 6.56 | |
| Abstain | 6.25 |
8. Enhanced role for government in supporting subnational diplomacy
Proposed by: Metro Sector
Remit: That LGNZ advocate to government and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade to formalise and increase its role in supporting subnational diplomacy including developing clear policy and capability to support and grow local government's contribution.
| Voting results | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 70.53 | |
| No | 22.88 | |
| Abstain | 6.58 |
9. Devolution of place naming to territorial authorities
Proposed by: Far North District Council
Supported by: Northland Regional Council, Porirua City Council, Kāpiti Coast District Council, Rangitīkei District Council and Whakatāne District Council
Remit: That LGNZ advocate for legislative changes to devolve authority for officiating geographic place names from the Minister for Land Information to local authorities.
| Voting results | Percentage | |
|---|---|---|
| Yes | 54.09 | |
| No | 39.94 | |
| Abstain | 5.97 |
Remits policy
- Remits should be relevant to local government as a whole, not just one zone, sector group, or council.
- Remits should address major policy issues, not just administrative matters.
- Remits need formal support from at least one zone or sector group meeting, or five councils before they can be submitted to assess support and achieve clarity about the proposal.
- Remits that are defeated at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) two years in a row cannot be resubmitted.
- Remits should not deal with issues that can be resolved through means other than the AGM.
- Remits should not address issues that are currently being worked on by LGNZ unless the issue is not currently being addressed.
- Remits must include background information and research that shows why the matter deserves consideration. The background should include the nature of the issue, why it was raised, its relationship to LGNZ's objectives, the level of work done so far, and any feedback received from zone or sector meetings. It should also suggest actions LGNZ could take if the remit is adopted.
If a remit meets these criteria, it is screened by the Remit Screening Committee and, if approved, is considered by the membership at the Annual General Meeting.
Delegates
The representation of each member authority is determined by the authority population levels as per rule G13 of the constitution.
Each authority may nominate:
- Presiding Delegate - the person responsible for voting on behalf of the authority at the AGM;
- Alternate Delegate/s - person/s responsible for voting on behalf of the authority if the Presiding Delegate is absent from the AGM;
- Any other delegates - provided the total number attending the AGM does not exceed the representatives allowed under rule G13; and
- Any observers attending - no speaking or voting rights.
Observers are not part of the official delegation and if attending the AGM will be seated away from the official delegation.
Voting
The voting entitlement of each authority is determined by the authority subscription levels as per rule H1 of the constitution and the manner of voting on any issue may be required by taking of a poll and should this occur the voting entitlements will apply.
No member authority, whose annual subscription is in arrears, is entitled to vote at the AGM.