Old wounds from the time Tauranga was run by government commissioners have reopened during a discussion on future funding for the city’s civic precinct.
Tauranga City Council met on Tuesday to decide how the Te Manawataki o Te Papa civic precinct project would continue to be funded.
The $306 million precinct in the city centre Te Manawataki o Te Papa – the “heartbeat of Te Papa” – will take up a city block and include a new library, community hub, civic whare and museum, all facing a green space.
The project was started when the city was run by government commissioners.
Its future funding has been a continued issue for the council. After it was elected, it moved away from funding the project through the commissioners’ proposed Infrastructure Funding and Financing levy.
Along with borrowing, options discussed for continued funding included using money raised from potential asset sales, redirecting existing funding streams – such as parking revenue or airport surpluses – and looking for philanthropic funding.
The council discussion began with a suggestion the council could redirect existing funds.
Mayor Mahé Drysdale seemed to quickly tire of that direction and said it lacked transparency.
“This is how I see it – we’ve continually talked about keeping it simple, by saying ‘oh we are making money over here and we’re going to shift it over here and pay off debt over here’ but the ultimate result is someone ends up paying,” he said.
Several councillors also wondered if this would create perverse results, such as raising parking fees just to pay for the civic precinct, or binding up a future council which might want to make parking free.
In a split vote, the council decided that the most transparent way to proceed was to prioritise use of any profit from potential asset sales to offset new debt and rates-funded interest associated with Te Manawataki o Te Papa, and to seek more philanthropic support for the project.
Councillor Glen Crowther said the decision signalled to local philanthropists that they need to step up.

Councillor Glen Crowther urged local philanthropists to contribute, emphasising minimal ratepayer involvement. Photo / David Hall
“The wealthy people in this city were the people calling for this project more than anyone,” he said.
Crowther said ratepayers should contribute as little as possible to the project and the council should go to those wealthy people who said they would back it.
“Some of those people were saying, publicly, that the ratepayers would only have to foot half the bill, so if that’s the case they need to stump up with some money and put their money where their mouths were for year after year after year and support us to get money through their connections,” he said.
Past decision-making around Te Manawataki o Te Papa was one of several decisions made while the city was being governed by commissioners, which the Office of the Auditor-General was asked to look into.
The office declined to investigate it, a decision which still obviously upset some around the table.
Councillor Steve Morris said he felt the commissioners tried to bind future council decisions by the way they went about projects.
“I’ve learnt two things about transparency and accountability in New Zealand through observing the commission’s decisions at the end of their term, [one] is that you can give a narrative that is untethered from the truth to Audit New Zealand, and two, Audit New Zealand doesn’t care,” Morris said.
The council’s decision fed into the development of its draft 2026/27 Annual Plan, which will be consulted on in the new year.



18 comments
Untethered
Posted on 18-12-2025 08:29 | By Kancho
Yes a great phrase " untethered from the truth" and true. I agree that the commission massively increased debt and large rate increases we still struggle with. The commission also has set us up with future debt and tied the hands of anyone following . The poor deals made in carpark building, marina, Cameron road blow out etc. The nice to haves and CBD . Of course the real instigator was the Labour Government setting all this in motion so thank you Auntie Mahuta. Council debt is maxed out so any idea that rates will ever drop are dead. As the previous governments hands are all over this of course the Audit NZ department didn't and won't want anything to do with it . So tell your grandchildren to put more into their piggy banks to pay for their rates bills and the pile of debts
Maybe....
Posted on 18-12-2025 08:49 | By fair game
Maybe the Councillor's who got such a massive pay increase this year, nearly 16%, could donate 12% of their income to start the ball rolling. After all, most people only get an annual increase equivalent to the CPI which is currently about 3%.
A bit of community goodwill would certainly be appreciated by us, the ratepayers who pay the Councillors . Oh to have the luxury of a 16% pay rise!!
It is Time to Undo Previous Agreements.
Posted on 18-12-2025 10:49 | By Floyd
It is not impossible to undo previous agreements that seem to bind the ratepayers to substantial debt and considerable cost. Publicly naming and shaming the benefactors of this process should help. Can a museum and or library be converted to a court house? Can libraries, museums, and art galleries be largely staffed by volunteers? Classic Flyers should provide some clues to what can be achieved.
Drag Tolley back here
Posted on 18-12-2025 11:51 | By gincat
"The ratepayer contribution to the precinct would be capped at $151.5m."
Tolley should be dragged back and "Please explain"
We should never…
Posted on 18-12-2025 12:12 | By Shadow1
…lose sight of the fact that the Minister of Local Government at the time was asked to do something about the elected council, who weren’t easily forced to go along with the Mayor’s fanciful projects.
She went in, boots and all, and sacked the lot of them.
The Commission, which was obviously directed to spend money, did their best to spend it all.
The wholly undemocratic disaster will live on in Tauranga’s history forever.
So who should pay? Well, after we have received Central Government’s honest apology, they should pay up. And they should pay back the full amount ratepayers have already spent on these disastrous decisions.
Shadow1.
There is no money
Posted on 18-12-2025 12:50 | By Llywyllyn
The current debt is enormous, heading towards $4 billion!! There is no money in the kitty, so it's time to put a stop to all these non-essential projects until there is money to fund them.
The Master
Posted on 18-12-2025 12:57 | By Ian Stevenson
The TCC plan (staff?) was that somehow the cost would be $295-303m and that 50% would be funded from non-ratepayer debt. Regardless, little "non-debt" funding has been "created" as yet by TCC staff to bridge the gap.
The "dastardly" scheming came to light yet again when the dodgy as Marine Precinct deal was shunted through (by this council) where the scam hatched was to sell it cheap as chips and divert the proceeds to this bigger mess. Still miles short of course.
The bottom line here is: - TCC raced ahead and started spending without sorting the "how to pay for it" question, that was required first. That's what the Commissioners included in the approval. That is what TCC staff have ignore as usual, as always.
Folks, this will add $250+m to TCC ratepayer debt, interest every year, massive annual losses... MORE-DEBT = MORE-RATES!!!!
The Master
Posted on 18-12-2025 13:00 | By Ian Stevenson
All works onsite should be halted until the money is found to: -
1 Pay for it
2 Cover the annual losses
The first lot to be lined up here are those who said "its wonderful" its lovely..."... lets see if its still a good idea when they have to put there hand in their own pocket instead of everyone else's.
The second lot to be lined up are the 40% who voted for it in the referendum, they obviously thought it was a good idea, so pay for it then.
Extravagant Spending
Posted on 18-12-2025 13:30 | By Fernhill22
The cost for the Civic precinct has been an extremely extravagant waste of ratepayer's money on something that the majority of TGA residents never wanted or required. If you go downtown, the visual design of the building looks like a dog's breakfast & an absolute eyesore. It really is underwhelming for the amount of money that has been spent on the design & delivery of a building that isn't going to look any better over time. There's no wow factor, no inspiration & to add further insult to injury it's not going to bring any economic benefit for the $306m outlay. This whole project should have been canned when the new council came in, but they persevered and now they're wondering how we are going to pay for it. There needs to be some accountability from TCC & heads rolling for this sh*t show.
User pays
Posted on 18-12-2025 13:32 | By Come on TCC!
Like any privately owned business in New Zealand it should stand on its own two feet. These nice to haves that no one wanted should be self funding and if shown not to be a viable business through projection studies of your market audience they should end up on the scrap heap before turning the sod!
These commissioners and councilors need to get off their magic carpet ride and see what reality is like for the real working class out here!
Like Luxon said "Mow the grass and empty the rubbish" do the stuff that needs to be done before doing the "Nice to haves"
Do better for the people!
I agree
Posted on 18-12-2025 13:41 | By Peaches
With Floyd, it's never too late to make a change and turn it into a Courthouse, now that is something that's needed and will be used, where as a museum is a onetime visit. it's time to start thinking outside the box on saving rate payers money and put a stop to the overspending.
Tolley?
Posted on 18-12-2025 13:52 | By jed
Tolley was not a good manager of Tauranga's rates take.
Interestingly, Crowther says it is the wealthy who want this. These are the people whom rates inflation doesn't impact so much, and they ar more likely to benefit ( landlords and developers).
There is so much wastage in this city. If we want to save money, quit with the beautification projects. Cameron road must have cost a fortune, but it is really not much improved that pre-improvements.
Same with Links ave, 10 million spend? 20 million? And, they've made the road worse.
The dogs breakfast road layout around Mount New World and Maunganui road in general? How much spent? 50 million? Who knows. But, not required at all in a scenario where council has choice of a 20% rates increase or not.
@Floyd
Posted on 18-12-2025 15:16 | By morepork
I heartily agree with your post and it implements what I have been saying here for years: We need large projects to be prioritized or even cancelled, by public referendum. Certainly a Courthouse has to be higher priority than a museum. It doesn't mean we are anti-museum; it simply means we need to live within our means, and defer projects for the future which we can't afford at the moment.
We need public referenda because we have seen that the Council can't be trusted to do what most people want, instead, implementing their own agendas, often decided behind closed doors, and without the transparency we have a right to expect when we are financing whatever they decide to do.
As a Ratepayer, I don't just feel ignored by this council, I feel despised by it.
Really Good.
Posted on 18-12-2025 15:41 | By Yadick
Some really good comments here indeed.
I especially agree with Floyd, . . . It is not impossible to undo previous agreements. . .
We are not locked into this. It is not and cannot be impossible to stop. Sure we might lose a bit and it might cost a bit but in big scheme of things we'll save hundreds of millions. We voted against it so, who should pay, nobody as it was voted out. Perhaps Labor, Mahuta and their Commorons should foot the bill to end it.
Fernhill22 sums it up beautifully in their final sentence, . . . There needs to be some accountability from TCC & heads rolling for this sh*t show.
Whose running the show
Posted on 18-12-2025 17:13 | By Fernhill22
Maybe we have finally seen an insight into things at TCC with Glen Crowther's comments-
“The wealthy people in this city were the people calling for this project more than anyone,”
So, the question is, who is really calling the shots in Tauranga? Are these the same philanthropists who have benefitted from these big capital outlays?
As Steve Morris mentions, there is no transparency or accountability.
And looking at the artists impression of the civic precinct is this going to be like the one shown to us for the transformation of the Phoenix carpark which now resembles a skatepark. Maybe they need to remove the grass, the people & replace with concrete & tumbleweeds.
I am glad,
Posted on 19-12-2025 21:57 | By The Caveman
That after 70 years of family "investment" in Tauranga, the family has finally sold the lot!
God help the residents and business owners in the next 20/30 years - oh and the planned Govmt cap on rates increases will do nothing to cut the current council debt!
So many on point comments here
Posted on 20-12-2025 08:43 | By nerak
and again I note there are better people outside of council. As always, council is hell bent on running this once lovely city into the ground, and their agonised ratepayers with it. I never imagined a time when I would have to borrow from meagre life savings to pay a rates bill as I now do regularly, while I see millions go into things the majority of ratepayers made it clear they don't want. I haven't been downtown for years, I've seen pigsty's look better and have a better atmosphere. But TCC keep pouring OUR money into their bottomless pit, for what? Their own glory? Get off your bums, you greedy mindless lot, and out to mix amongst the people who pay you, and try to understand the damage you are creating amongst your fellow citizens, but oh, you don't give a damn, do you?
A quote
Posted on 20-12-2025 08:49 | By nerak
The old saying is "Cut your coat according to your cloth," meaning you should live within your means, budget wisely, and tailor your plans and spending to the resources (money, time, ability) you actually have, rather than overspending or overreaching for what you wish you had. It's about aligning actions with affordability to avoid trouble or debt, like a tailor using only the available fabric to make a garment.
But of course, TCC are above reason.
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.