Last week, the government announced proposed changes intended to make it easier for local councils and developers to finance infrastructure and support housing growth.
Cr Jim O’Malley said the changes, which included limiting council opposition to some developments, were troubling.
"The message there is that they're again wanting to override district plans, so the situation is heavily weighted towards unregulated development.
"As far as I'm concerned, this is, again, another central government telling the local government what to do without even talking to us."
One of the government’s changes would replace development contributions — fees charged to developers to recover a share of the cost of infrastructure for a new development — with a development levy, based on a proportion of infrastructure required.
Cr O’Malley said the government had put little thought into the proposal.
"We do a lot of those where the developer is only doing something like splitting a property in half and putting a second house on.
"[Development levies] won't even cover that," he said.
"So we're going to scrap the [development contribution] system and then we're going to have to put a levy system on for all of those people? Show me what local council came to you and asked for this change."
Cr O’Malley also took issue with the proposal to allow councils to charge targeted rates on new developments.
"Now a ratepayer moving into new development could find themselves [with] an enormous rate bill, which of course they're going to blame the council for and in fact, it was actually just offsetting developer upfront costs."
Speaking at the Local Government New Zealand conference last week, Infrastructure Minister Chris Bishop said New Zealand’s cities needed to grow to make housing more affordable.
"What I’ve heard from you and also housing experts who’ve worked with us on this, is that freeing up urban land is not enough on its own," he told council representatives.
"We also need to ensure the timely provision of infrastructure — you can’t have housing without land, water, transport and other community infrastructure.
"Growth should pay for growth."
Mr Bishop said development contributions had not worked because councils could not recover growth costs, which instead were picked up through rates.
"It’s not surprising that existing ratepayers mobilise against new housing when they’re required to pick up the tab for infrastructure required to support it," he said.
Cr David Benson-Pope said the minister’s comments were "typical" of the disconnect between central and local government.
"They have theories about things that don't actually stand up when you look at the facts."
The Dunedin City Council’s present development contribution process was "pretty transparent", he said.
"I know how much some big developers get to be asked to pay development contributions at the moment — those requirements are not going to get any less, I understand, under what's proposed."
Proposed legislation would go to the House by September for introduction next year.
