Thank you for reaching out to the Far North District Council.

We have received your message. A member of our customer service team will
issue a reference number for your enquiry within 5 working days.

If your matter is urgent, you can contact our Contact Centre at 0800 920
029, which operates 24 hours a day.

You can also find what you are looking for by visiting our website:
www.fndc.govt.nz

Kind regards
Ask Us Customer Services Team
--------------------------------------------
This is an automated reply
--------------------------------------------

Kia ora

 

Thank you for reaching out to the Far North District Council.

 

Your request has been forwarded to our Legal Services Team to action and
respond. Should you need to follow up on this matter, please use reference
number RFS-4300912.

 

If your matter is urgent, you can contact our Contact Centre at 0800 920
029, which operates 24 hours a day.

 

Nga mihi,
Paula.

Ask Us Customer Services Team

********************************

Kia Ora Requester,

 

Official Information request RFS 4300912

 

Thank you for your official information request to the Far North District
Council (‘FNDC’) received on 15 May 2026 (copy attached). Your request is
being considered under the provisions of the Local Government Official
Information and Meetings Act 1987 (“the LGOIMA”).

 

FNDC notes that there are more than 2600 non-rateable accounts that would
be relevant to your request. Given this, FNDC considers that as the
request currently stands, it would be too large to reasonably process -
and would likely be refused for administrative reasons.

FNDC is of the view that the demands placed on its resources would
unreasonably interfere with its ability to carry out day – to day
operations. So, in the request’s current state, it would most probably be
refused in reliance upon section 17(f) of the LGOIMA. This provides:

Section 17 Refusal of requests

“A request […] may be refused only for 1 or more of the following reasons,
namely: […]

(f) that the information requested cannot be made available without
substantial collation or research: […]“.

  

FNDC has also looked at whether extending the timeframe and or imposing a
charge would allow it to process the request; however, it has concluded
that neither or both of these measures would alleviate the unreasonable
impact on its operations

 

Under the LGOIMA, and in line with Ombudsman guidance, you are invited to
reformulate your request.

 

Please also note, an amended request is treated as a new request for the
purpose of calculating the maximum statutory timeframe for response
(section 13(7) of the LGOIMA).

 

Nga mihi

 

   
LGOIMA Team   
Legal Services ‑ Corporate Services
[1][email address]
Te Kaunihera o Te Hiku o te Ika  |  Far
North District Council
---------------------------------------------

Pokapū Kōrero 24-hāora  |  24-hour Contact
Centre 0800 920 029
[2][IMG] [3][IMG][4]  [5][IMG][6] 
[7][IMG][8]  [9][IMG]

 

[10]Signature 365 Pixel

 

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. https://www.fndc.govt.nz/home
3. https://www.facebook.com/FarNorthDistric...
4. FNDC Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/FarNorthDistric...
5. https://nz.linkedin.com/company/far-nort...
6. FNDC LinkedIn
https://nz.linkedin.com/company/far-nort...
7. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRbGkKa...
8. FNDC YouTube channel
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRbGkKa...
9. https://www.instagram.com/farnorth_dc/

 

To the Requester

Email only to: [1][FOI #34712 email]

 

 

 

Kia Ora Requester,

 

Official Information request RFS 4300912

 

I refer to your official information request to the Far North District
Council (‘FNDC’) received on 15 May 2026, FNDC’s invitation of 26 May 2025
to refine your request and your email of 4 June 2026 declining this
request. (copies attached). Your request has been considered under the
provisions of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act
1987 (“the LGOIMA”).

 

It appears that the information request is based on incorrect assumptions.
FNDC addresses these in its response to the points raised in your email
letter of 4 June 2026 below:

 

Items 2 and 3 — no collation burden

The general rate-in-the-dollar (item 2) and the targeted rates and fixed
charges (item 3) for each year are figures the Council has already set and
published in its annual rates resolutions and funding impact statements.
Providing them involves no collation or research — it is a matter of
transcribing a small number of published figures across five years.
Section 17(f) cannot apply to this information, and I expressly asked for
partial release of anything readily available. Please release items 2 and
3 now, irrespective of the Council's position on item 1.

·           In FNDC’s rates resolutions and funding impact statements,
FNDC does not differentiate between land held in General Title and that
held as Māori Freehold Land (‘MFL’).

 

Item 1 — the section 17(f) claim is not made out The “more than 2,600
non-rateable accounts” figure does not reflect what I have asked for. I
have requested a single aggregate land-value figure for a defined subset —
the rating units that became non-rateable on or after 1 July 2021 by
reason of the Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Act 2021
(with a Māori-freehold-land cut if available, and a broader figure as a
fallback). The great majority of the Council's non-rateable accounts are
non-rateable for reasons unrelated to that Act — for example Crown land,
reserves, places of worship and schools — so the relevant population is
materially smaller than 2,600.

·           With the write off that occurred in 2021($10,197,528), this
was carried out as a bulk write off on the non-rateable MFL accounts as
of that date.  For FNDC to provide the information required, staff would
need to manually check every single MFL account for this information for
the last approximately 5 years. As previously advised, there are currently
more than 2600 non-rateable accounts.  Each of these would need to be
individually inspected to find out whether the account was for MFL, when
it was made non-rateable, whether it was submitted or part of the 2021
write-off, any changes to its rating etc. Further, as you may be aware,
 there have been multiple changes since 2021 to non-rateable and rateable
MFL properties due to succession, land development, changes to land not
being rated and vice versa.  We have estimated that this would take
approximately 10 minutes per account to assess.

Therefore, to satisfy your request every MFL account would need to be
reviewed. This would take an inordinate amount of (ratepayer) resource and
time for staff to manually compile this information.

 

The Council has, moreover, already identified this population. In its
response to RFS 4297310 it reported “non-rateable write offs” by year,
including approximately $10,197,528 in 2021 — the write-off of arrears on
land made non-rateable by the 2021 Amendment Act. The Council could not
have made those write-offs without identifying the affected rating units.
The land values for those units are held in the Council's rating
information database. Summing a land-value field across a defined subset
is a database report, not “substantial collation or research.”

·           Please refer to the response provided above.

 

I also note an inconsistency in the Council's position. The annual revenue
forgone (item 4 of RFS 4297310) was refused under section 17(g) on the
basis that the Council does not hold it. I have therefore asked only for
the inputs from which that figure can be derived. The Council's reliance
now on section 17(f) — rather than 17(g) — confirms that those inputs are
in fact held; the only question is the effort to extract item 1, and that
effort has not been substantiated. (Your item 4 of RFS 4297310 requested
“Total annual rates revenue forgone from Māori freehold land reclassified
as non-rateable since 1 July 2021 — i.e. the rates that would have been
levied on those rating units had they remained rateable.”)

·           FNDC notes that it can differentiate in our systems rateable
and non-rateable accounts, but that does not tell us the year that the
property became rateable or non-rateable. Such differentiation is not a
legislative requirement and again would be at significant cost to the
ratepayer - as all accounts would need to be manually reviewed.

FNDC therefore considers that both section 17(f) and section 17(g) of the
LGOIMA can apply, but they address slightly different aspects of the
workload. That is, the information cannot be made available without
"substantial collation or research". Also, an agency is not obligated to
manually create new information (such as conducting a historical
reconstruction of the rate rolls) to satisfy an information request. As
the information cannot be extracted directly from FNDC’s current
electronic systems , FNDC also consider it as "information not held".  

 

Fallback already built in

If the Council cannot readily isolate the units reclassified specifically
on or after 1 July 2021, my request already accepts a fallback: the
equivalent figure for all rating units that became non-rateable by reason
of the 2021 Amendment Act. If even that distinction is not held, I would
accept, as a reasonable proxy, the total land value (and count) of all
rating units currently classified as both Māori freehold land and
non-rateable — a single sum of a field already held. Please treat this as
the maximum refinement I am willing to make; it requires no examination of
individual accounts.

·           Please refer to the response provided above.

 

(Notwithstanding the query in relation to item 4 of RFS 4297310 and
whether section 17(f) or 17(g) is the most applicable ground for refusal)
- FNDC have decided that in respect of this request RFS 4300912, as
indicated in its email of 26 May 2026, it must be refused for
administrative reasons. The extensive resources and amount of time
required to investigate all the information covered by the request would
pose a substantial administrative burden on FNDC and unreasonably
interfere with its ability to carry out its day-to-day business. Given
this, FNDC relies upon section 17(f) of the LGOIMA:

Section 17 Refusal of requests

“A request […] may be refused only for 1 or more of the following reasons,
namely: […]

(f) that the information requested cannot be made available without
substantial collation or research: […]“.

  

FNDC also looked at whether extending the timeframe and or imposing a
charge would allow it to process the request; however, it concluded that
given the nature of the request, neither or both of these measures would
alleviate the unreasonable impact on its operations.

You have the right to complain to the Ombudsman if you are dissatisfied
with this decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available
at [2]www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or Freephone 0800 802 602.

Nga mihi

     
LGOIMA Team     
Legal Services ‑ Corporate Services  
[3][email address]  
Te Kaunihera o Te Hiku o te Ika  |  Far North District Council  
---------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Pokapū Kōrero 24-hāora  |  24-hour Contact Centre 0800 920 029
[4][IMG] [5][IMG][6]  [7][IMG][8]  [9][IMG][10]   
[11][IMG]
 

[12]Signature 365 Pixel

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Joshua Riley <[FOI #34712 email]>
Sent: Thursday, 4 June 2026 5:21 pm
To: officialinformation <[email address]>
Subject: Re: RFS 4300912 - Rating valuation and rate-in-the-dollar data
for non-rateable reclassifications

 

CAUTION:  This email originated from outside Far North District Council.

Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognise the sender and
know the content is safe.

 

 

Thank you for your letter of 26 May 2026 regarding RFS 4300912.

 

I do not intend to reformulate this request. I ask that the Council make
its decision on the request as framed. The statutory timeframe continues
to run from the date my request was received (15 May 2026); absent a
formal extension of time, the Council's decision is due on or before 15
June 2026. Your letter of 26 May is an invitation to reformulate, not a
decision, and does not suspend that timeframe.

 

I set out below why the request can and should be granted, in whole or in
substantial part, within that timeframe.

 

Items 2 and 3 — no collation burden

The general rate-in-the-dollar (item 2) and the targeted rates and fixed
charges (item 3) for each year are figures the Council has already set and
published in its annual rates resolutions and funding impact statements.
Providing them involves no collation or research — it is a matter of
transcribing a small number of published figures across five years.
Section 17(f) cannot apply to this information, and I expressly asked for
partial release of anything readily available. Please release items 2 and
3 now, irrespective of the Council's position on item 1.

 

Item 1 — the section 17(f) claim is not made out The “more than 2,600
non-rateable accounts” figure does not reflect what I have asked for. I
have requested a single aggregate land-value figure for a defined subset —
the rating units that became non-rateable on or after 1 July 2021 by
reason of the Local Government (Rating of Whenua Māori) Amendment Act 2021
(with a Māori-freehold-land cut if available, and a broader figure as a
fallback). The great majority of the Council's non-rateable accounts are
non-rateable for reasons unrelated to that Act — for example Crown land,
reserves, places of worship and schools — so the relevant population is
materially smaller than 2,600.

 

The Council has, moreover, already identified this population. In its
response to RFS 4297310 it reported “non-rateable write offs” by year,
including approximately $10,197,528 in 2021 — the write-off of arrears on
land made non-rateable by the 2021 Amendment Act. The Council could not
have made those write-offs without identifying the affected rating units.
The land values for those units are held in the Council's rating
information database. Summing a land-value field across a defined subset
is a database report, not “substantial collation or research.”

 

I also note an inconsistency in the Council's position. The annual revenue
forgone (item 4 of RFS 4297310) was refused under section 17(g) on the
basis that the Council does not hold it. I have therefore asked only for
the inputs from which that figure can be derived. The Council's reliance
now on section 17(f) — rather than 17(g) — confirms that those inputs are
in fact held; the only question is the effort to extract item 1, and that
effort has not been substantiated.

 

Fallback already built in

If the Council cannot readily isolate the units reclassified specifically
on or after 1 July 2021, my request already accepts a fallback: the
equivalent figure for all rating units that became non-rateable by reason
of the 2021 Amendment Act. If even that distinction is not held, I would
accept, as a reasonable proxy, the total land value (and count) of all
rating units currently classified as both Māori freehold land and
non-rateable — a single sum of a field already held. Please treat this as
the maximum refinement I am willing to make; it requires no examination of
individual accounts.

 

If burden is still asserted, please substantiate it If the Council
maintains that item 1 cannot be provided without substantial collation,
please provide — as Ombudsman guidance on section 17(f) contemplates — a
specific account of the work involved, including the steps required and an
estimate of the time, rather than a general assertion that the request is
“too large.” Please also indicate whether a charge or an extension of time
would enable item 1 to be provided; your letter states it would not, but
if that view rests on the “2,600 accounts” characterisation, I ask that it
be reconsidered against the narrower scope set out above. In any event,
items 2 and 3 should be released now.

 

Public interest and reasonable assistance The cost of the Council's
discretionary rating choices on Māori freehold land falls on every other
ratepayer in the district, and the public interest in understanding that
cost — and in distinguishing it from what Parliament required — is
significant. Ombudsman guidance treats the significance of the information
as relevant to whether administrative effort is truly unreasonable under
section 17(f). I also note that this is the second occasion on which a
request in this area has been met with an invitation to reformulate rather
than a substantive decision, and that treating each refinement as a new
request under section 13(7) has the effect of resetting the statutory
clock. I ask that the Council provide reasonable assistance and decide the
request on its merits.

 

Next steps

To be clear, I am not amending or withdrawing this request, and it should
not be treated as a new request. I ask the Council to issue its decision
on the request as framed on or before 15 June 2026, releasing items 2 and
3 in any event. If the Council refuses the request, or does not make a
decision within the statutory timeframe, I will seek a review by the
Ombudsman.

 

Thank you.

 

-----Original Message-----

 

Kia Ora Requester,

 

 

 

Official Information request RFS 4300912

 

 

 

Thank you for your official information request to the Far North District 
Council (‘FNDC’) received on 15 May 2026 (copy attached). Your request is 
being considered under the provisions of the Local Government Official 
Information and Meetings Act 1987 (“the LGOIMA”).

 

 

 

FNDC notes that there are more than 2600 non-rateable accounts that would 
be relevant to your request. Given this, FNDC considers that as the 
request currently stands, it would be too large to reasonably process - 
and would likely be refused for administrative reasons.

 

FNDC is of the view that the demands placed on its resources would 
unreasonably interfere with its ability to carry out day – to day 
operations. So, in the request’s current state, it would most probably be 
refused in reliance upon section 17(f) of the LGOIMA. This provides:

 

Section 17 Refusal of requests

 

“A request […] may be refused only for 1 or more of the following reasons,

namely: […]

 

(f) that the information requested cannot be made available without 
substantial collation or research: […]“.

 

 

 

FNDC has also looked at whether extending the timeframe and or imposing a 
charge would allow it to process the request; however, it has concluded 
that neither or both of these measures would alleviate the unreasonable 
impact on its operations

 

 

 

Under the LGOIMA, and in line with Ombudsman guidance, you are invited to 
reformulate your request.

 

 

 

Please also note, an amended request is treated as a new request for the 
purpose of calculating the maximum statutory timeframe for response 
(section 13(7) of the LGOIMA).

 

 

 

Nga mihi

 

 

 

 

LGOIMA Team

Legal Services ‑ Corporate Services

[1][email address]

Te Kaunihera o Te Hiku o te Ika  |  Far  North District Council

---------------------------------------------

 

Pokapū Kōrero 24-hāora  |  24-hour Contact  Centre 0800 920 029  [2][IMG]
[3][IMG][4]  [5][IMG][6]  [7][IMG][8]  [9][IMG]

 

 

 

 

[10]Signature 365 Pixel

 

 

 

 

 

References

 

Visible links

1. [13]mailto:[email address]

2.
[14]https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

3.
[15]https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

4. FNDC Facebook

       
[16]https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

5.
[17]https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

6. FNDC LinkedIn

       
[18]https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

7.
[19]https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

8. FNDC YouTube channel

       
[20]https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

9.
[21]https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:

[22][FOI #34712 email]

 

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:

[23]https://apc01.safelinks.protection.outlo...

 

If you find this service useful as an Official Information officer, please
ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's OIA or LGOIMA
page.

 

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[FOI #34712 email]
2. http://www.ombudsman.parliament.nz/
3. mailto:[email address]
4. https://www.fndc.govt.nz/home
5. https://www.facebook.com/FarNorthDistric...
6. FNDC Facebook
https://www.facebook.com/FarNorthDistric...
7. https://nz.linkedin.com/company/far-nort...
8. FNDC LinkedIn
https://nz.linkedin.com/company/far-nort...
9. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRbGkKa...
10. FNDC YouTube channel
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRbGkKa...
11. https://www.instagram.com/farnorth_dc/
13. mailto:[email
14. https://www.fndc.govt.nz/home
15. https://www.facebook.com/FarNorthDistric...
16. https://www.facebook.com/FarNorthDistric...
17. https://nz.linkedin.com/company/far-nort...
18. https://nz.linkedin.com/company/far-nort...
19. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRbGkKa...
20. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRbGkKa...
21. https://www.instagram.com/farnorth_dc/
22. mailto:[FOI #34712 email]
23. https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers

hide quoted sections