Submission on Wellington City Council Annual Plan 2026/27

Introduction

Business Central Wellington welcomes the opportunity to provide feedback on Wellington City Council’s Annual Plan 2026/27.

Our submission is framed through the lens of our Green Light Economy report, released in 2025 ahead of the local government election which sets out a clear, business-led vision for economic growth. A green light economy supports fiscal responsibility while continuing to invest in the conditions that enable productivity, business confidence, low emissions growth, and inclusive prosperity for Wellington.

We acknowledge the Council’s challenging fiscal context, including significant infrastructure cost pressures, affordability concerns for ratepayers, and the transfer of water services to Tiaki Wai. We support the intent to restore trust and confidence through prudent financial management. However, from a business and economic perspective, it is critical that cost containment does not inadvertently slow Wellington’s recovery or undermine long‑term growth enablers.

There is a strong expectation from the business community that expenditure restraint should be focused on non-core spending and operating efficiencies before reductions are made to programmes that directly support economic activity and growth.

This submission reflects feedback and priorities raised by the wider business community.

Summary of Key Positions

Business Central Wellington:

• Supports the Council’s focus on affordability, prioritisation, and financial structure.

• Encourages protection of high‑impact economic enablers that support jobs, investment, and emissions reduction.

• Seeks greater certainty and continuity in areas that influence business confidence, including transport, events, and urban development.

• Recommends a stronger partnership approach with the business community to deliver outcomes more efficiently.

• Supports stronger expenditure restraint and greater prioritisation of core infrastructure and essential services.

• Continues to advocate for a reduction in Wellington’s commercial rates differential.

Economic Development and Business Confidence

Our view

We are concerned about the proposed reduction of $500,000 in Economic Grants, including impacts on Destination Wellington, tourism promotion, major events, and the City Growth Fund.

As outlined in the Green Light Economy Report, these are productivity multipliers rather than discretionary initiatives and activities. They play a direct role in driving Wellington’s economic activity supporting jobs and sustaining demand across the city. Events, destination marketing and targeted growth initiatives generate benefits for hospitality, retail, accommodation, creative industries, and professional services.

Reducing this funding risks weakening momentum at a time when many businesses, particularly in the CBD, are still under pressure. It also signals a reduced commitment to economic activation which can affect business confidence and investment decisions.

Economic development activity is largely funded through contributions from the business community, including commercial rates and targeted rate mechanisms. Reducing economic development funding without a corresponding reduction in those contributions results in a net withdrawal of investment from the businesses funding those activities. This risks weakening confidence that business contributions are being reinvested into initiatives that directly support economic activity, city activation, and business growth.

This is a high-impact area where relatively modest investment delivers strong economic returns across the city.

Recommendations

We recommend that Council:

• Reconsider the scale of reductions to economic development funding.

• Prioritise return on investment and impact measurement, rather than blunt funding cuts.

• Explore co‑investment and partnership models with business and regional stakeholders to sustain economic activation at lower net cost to Council.

Transport Investment and Cycleway Programme

Our view

We acknowledge the proposal to reduce the 2026/27 cycleway programme and defer elements of the Paneke Pōneke network. While prioritisation is necessary, uncertainty and stop‑start delivery risk undermining business confidence.

In the current economic environment, there is an expectation from businesses that Council investment should remain focused on core infrastructure and critical network resilience, including water, transport renewals, freight movement, and maintenance of existing assets. Concerns continue to be raised about investment in lower-priority projects where the economic and network benefits are less clear relative to more pressing infrastructure needs.

Transport investment should be considered as a connected system. Businesses rely on a well-functioning network that includes roads, public transport, active modes, and freight access. Focusing on one component in isolation risks weakening the overall effectiveness of the network.

A coordinated and predictable pipeline of transport investment supports:

• Reliable workforce access to the central city

• Efficient movement of goods and services, including freight

• Reduced congestion and emissions

• Business confidence to invest and grow

Deferral without clear forward commitments creates uncertainty, drives long-term cost escalation, and reduces confidence in the city’s ability to deliver critical infrastructure. 

Council should play a stronger role as an enabler of wider transport investment. Aligning Council’s programme with central government and agency investment, including NZTA, will maximise impact and deliver better outcomes for Wellington.

Recommendations

We recommend that Council:

• Provide clear sequencing, timeframes and decision points across the full transport programme including cycleways, roads and public transport corridors.

• Avoid stop-start delivery and maintain a credible, continuous pipeline of transport investment.

• Actively enable and advocate for NZTA and central government co-investment, using Council funding as a multiplier.

• Prioritise projects that improve CBD access, freight efficiency and workforce connectivity.

• Frame transport investment decisions in terms of productivity, economic resilience and workforce access, alongside environmental outcomes.

Climate Transition: Mitigation and Adaptation

Our view

We support the Council’s continued focus on emissions reduction and mitigation activities that contribute to Wellington’s long-term climate transition objectives.

There is also a need for a stronger balance between mitigation activity and investment in climate adaptation and resilience planning. Recent weather events have reinforced the importance of resilient infrastructure, reliable transport and utility networks, and land use planning and development settings that support investment certainty, productivity, and business continuity.

We support a sharper focus on mitigation activities that deliver measurable emissions reductions. However, we note concern about reduced support for community‑led mitigation and transport education initiatives. For businesses, particularly SMEs, capability, behaviour change, and transition readiness are as important as infrastructure investment.

Recommendations

We recommend that Council:

• Maintain investment in mitigation activities that deliver measurable emissions reductions such as targeted, low‑cost programmes that support business emissions reduction and transition planning.

• Increase focus on adaptation planning and infrastructure resilience across core networks and essential services.

• Prioritise climate resilience within long-term infrastructure and land use planning and urban development.

• Partner with business networks and industry groups to deliver climate outcomes more efficiently.

• Signal a clear and consistent transition pathway to support investment certainty.

Urban Development and Housing Enablement

Our view

We strongly support the proposal to investigate establishing an Urban Development Office model.

Better alignment between planning, transport, infrastructure, and development is critical to:

• Increasing housing supply

• Reducing development costs and delays

• Supporting workforce growth and city vibrancy

  
  

This direction aligns strongly with a Green Light Economy approach.

Recommendations

We recommend that Council:

• Progress the Urban Development Office with urgency.

• Involve the development and business community early in design and implementation.

• Set clear performance measures focused on speed, certainty, and cost reduction.

Fees, Charges, and Cumulative Cost Pressures

Our view

We note a wide range of proposed fee increases and new charges across waste, planning, compliance, parking, facilities, and regulatory services.

While individual fees may be justified, businesses do not experience these in isolation. The cumulative impact is significant as they add to operating costs, reduce margins and influence investment decisions. Sectors with high regulatory interaction including construction, development, hospitality, creative industries and community organisations are particularly exposed.

Council can increase fees and charges without facing direct market constraints, unlike businesses operating in competitive markets. These costs are passed through to businesses that often cannot recover them in the same way. This creates a structural imbalance and shifts cost pressure onto businesses that have limited ability to absorb or pass on those increases.

These increases also compound existing pressures on central city businesses including the commercial rates differential. Without a clear plan to manage this overall burden, there is a risk of further weakening CBD activity and slowing economic recovery.

Recommendations

We recommend that Council:

• Assess and report on the cumulative impact of fees and charges across business sectors, as well as individual charges.

• Introduce stronger cost management including benchmarking fees against comparable councils and demonstrating efficiency gains before increases are applied.

• Phase significant increases over longer periods where possible to reduce immediate pressure on businesses.

• Undertake post‑implementation reviews to ensure fees are not suppressing business activity or investment.

Infrastructure Investment and Fiscal Sustainability

Our view

We support the Council’s focus on prioritising core infrastructure and maintaining financial structure in a constrained environment. Reliable infrastructure underpins business activity, supports growth and enables private sector investment.

From a business perspective, certainty matters as much as the level of investment. A credible pipeline of infrastructure delivery is critical to unlocking development, supporting employment and maintaining confidence in Wellington as a place to invest.

We note a significant portion of the proposed savings is achieved through reduced depreciation funding rather than structural reductions in operating costs. While this approach lowers rates in the short term, it effectively shifts costs into the future and increases the risk of underinvestment in asset maintenance and renewal.

Additionally, there is limited evidence of meaningful reductions in core operating expenditure. This raises concerns about whether the burden of adjustment is being shared equitably, particularly when externally facing programmes that support economic activity are being reduced.

From a business perspective this raises concerns that cost pressures are being deferred rather than addressed.

There is an opportunity to strengthen how infrastructure investment is prioritised to deliver economic value by providing greater clarity on what is essential, what is growth-enabling and what can be deferred.

Recommendations

We recommend that Council:

• Prioritise expenditure restraint through reductions in non-core operating expenditure before reducing programmes and long-term obligations that directly support economic activity and growth.

• Further reduce discretionary expenditure, including consultancy and external advisory spend, before reducing economic activation funding.

• Prioritise core infrastructure renewals and essential services ahead of lower-priority discretionary capital projects.

• Maintain a stable and transparent infrastructure pipeline to support business planning and private investment.

• Progress independent benchmarking of operating costs including staffing and delivery models to identify efficiency opportunities.

• Continue strong advocacy to Central Government for co‑investment in nationally significant infrastructure, using Council investment as a catalyst for wider funding. 

• Use reduced depreciation funding cautiously and provide a plan for how asset renewal obligations will be met over time.

• Avoid deferring projects that directly support housing supply, employment, CBD activity and emissions reduction.

Conclusion

Business Central Wellington supports the Council’s intent to balance affordability with long‑term resilience.

To achieve a true Green Light Economy for Wellington, we encourage Council to protect and prioritise the investments that enable businesses to grow, employ people, reduce emissions, and contribute to a thriving, inclusive city.

Business Central Wellington also emphasises the importance of meaningful and transparent engagement with the business community throughout the planning and decision-making processes. Early engagement and clear communication improve confidence, strengthen decision quality and support more durable long-term outcomes.

We look forward to ongoing partnership with Wellington City Council as the Annual Plan is finalised and as work begins on the next Long‑Term Plan.