Skip to main content Skip to navigation within this section

View objections

Objections to the proposed electorates and boundaries are listed below.

Submissions may have been edited to remove contact information or other personal details, or to remove objectionable material. Submissions which only address issues the Representation Commission cannot consider have not been published.

Between 8 and 21 May you can have your say on issues raised in these objections.

How to have your say

Select filters to view submissions

Displaying 211 - 240 of 636
Number Name Submission Change type View
N13175 Mrs Nisha Patel Objection Boundary

Mrs Nisha Patel

Objection

Mt Albert
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mrs Nisha Patel

Planning and investment when committing to childrens' education is very extensive and a life long commitment from parents. We object to moving the boundary for Epsom when a very large proportion of us have moved here and paid a very hefty price to do so, to be in double grammar zone.

Suggested solution

Don't mend things that are not broken. If you do make changes to the boundary will you compensate us for the changes in the property valuation when it drops drastically? This move will create more problems than solutions.
N13176 Mrs Carolyn Lawgun Objection Boundary

Mrs Carolyn Lawgun

Objection

Mt Albert
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mrs Carolyn Lawgun

Moving houses in Epsom Girls Grammar zone into Mt Albert. No links to Mt Albert, shopping, local activities all done in Mt Eden. All political events involved in would be in Mt Eden or Epsom.

Suggested solution

Keep houses in Epsom Girls Grammar zone in Epsom.
N13177 Mrs Robyn Cochrane Objection Boundary

Mrs Robyn Cochrane

Objection

Mt Albert
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mrs Robyn Cochrane

I don't align with Mt Albert, I find this arbitrary shifting of boundaries without alot of local knowledge very concerning. This is a process that should be fully explained to residents, and this time frame has been extraordinarily short!
This will affect school zones and family with some children already at EGGS expect to get all daughters to the same school. I voted for David Seymour consistently and find it unpalatable that this right should be taken from me.

Suggested solution

I suggest that the boundary change that is being put forward for Eden Terrace is diverted to Mt Albert electorate instead.
N13178 Alamelu Badrinarayanan Objection Boundary

Alamelu Badrinarayanan

Objection

Mt Albert
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Alamelu Badrinarayanan

Re: Electorates Affected: Mt Roskill / Mt Albert

1. Introduction
As a local of Mt Roskill and an employee of a local school in Mt Roskill, I am writing to express my deep concern regarding the proposed boundary changes that would shift Wesley from the Mt Roskill electorate into Mt Albert. I strongly urge the Commission to retain part of Wesley within the Mt Roskill electorate, to preserve and reflect the strong community of interest that has existed here for generations.

2. Wesley’s Historic and Ongoing Connection to Mt Roskill
Wesley has been an integral part of the Mt Roskill electorate since its inception in the 1940s. It is a suburb with a long and proud history, strongly identified as part of the broader Mt Roskill community — culturally, socially, and economically.

The community’s deep roots in Mt Roskill were publicly affirmed through the significant community campaign to retain the name “Wesley” in 2017–2018, which was widely covered by media and formally supported by the Puketāpapa Local Board. These events are evidence of strong place-based identity and shared heritage that connect Wesley to Mt Roskill.

3. Community of Interest
Wesley, while a small suburb, possesses a distinctive and cohesive community of interest. Its multicultural and multi-faith identity is closely aligned with that of the wider Mt Roskill area.
As an employee at a local school, I see first-hand how our students, families, and staff are interconnected with institutions, infrastructure, and cultural life that define Mt Roskill. Wesley Primary and Wesley Intermediate are feeder schools to Mt Roskill Grammar School — a well-established educational pathway that connects families across generations.

The community is further bound by shared amenities, transport routes, and places of worship. Key roads like Stoddard Road, Denbigh Avenue, Carr Road, May Road, and Dominion Road physically and socially link Wesley to the heart of Mt Roskill. Many families walk or cycle to shops, schools, churches, and mosques located within these corridors. Improved walking and cycling infrastructure along the Te Auaunga catchment has strengthened these connections even further.

4. Community Infrastructure and Social Life
Wesley residents regularly engage with key community facilities within Mt Roskill — including the Wesley Community Centre, Roskill Youth Zone, and the Mt Roskill War Memorial Park. These venues host local vegetable markets, youth programmes, cultural festivals like CultureFest, and family celebrations, making them essential components of our social fabric.

All of these institutions play an essential role in maintaining community cohesion and supporting wellbeing — particularly in a suburb like Wesley, which is predominantly state housing, lower socio-economic, and rich in cultural diversity.

5. Governance and Representation
Wesley is part of the Puketāpapa Local Board area, which aligns closely with the Mt Roskill electorate. This includes suburbs such as Royal Oak, Hillsborough, Waikōwhai, Lynfield, and parts of New Windsor — all of which share community and governance ties. Fragmenting Wesley into a different electorate disrupts these established relationships and undermines local representation that is responsive to the community's specific needs and aspirations.

Suggested solution

6. Conclusion and Recommendation
Removing Wesley from Mt Roskill would not only sever historical and functional ties but also dilute the integrity of its community voice. From an educational and community perspective, it is vital that a part of Wesley remains within the Mt Roskill electorate, where its social, cultural, and economic links are most strongly embedded.

I respectfully ask the Commission to amend the draft boundaries to retain part of the suburb of Wesley within the Mt Roskill electorate, in accordance with the established and enduring community of interest.

Finally, I’d like to thank the Representation Commission for the work in putting the boundary changes together.
Supporting Documentation:
• Media Coverage:
o New Zealand Herald, “Wesley in Auckland looks set for official tick to keep its name after developer backs off”, 5 December 2018
o Stuff, “Mt Roskill community of Wesley fighting to keep its name”, 7 April 2017
• Auckland Council Heritage Blog
• Puketāpapa Local Board Notices of Motion:
o 7 August 2017 – Support for officially assigning name to Wesley
o 1 June 2018 – Continued advocacy for recognition of the Wesley name
N13179 NZ Labour Party Objection Boundary

NZ Labour Party

Objection

Mt Albert
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

NZ Labour Party

We received local representations expressing concern about the proposed move of portions of Wesley from Mt Roskill to Mt Albert. As the Commission knows, Wesley has formed part of the Mt Roskill electorate for nearly all of its existence. One of the statutory criteria is the existing electorate boundaries, and we submit that this criteria should steer the Commission to prefer maps that keep previously co-represented communities together wherever possible. The current draft splits some Wesley residents who have a strong connection with Mt Roskill from its neighbouring suburbs to the south and east in a way that we believe may harm their representation and is avoidable.

Many people in the suburb of Wesley has strong communities of interest with nearby suburbs that remain in Mt Roskill, including:
a. The portion of Wesley south of Oakley Creek/Te Auaunga sits alongside other Mt Roskill communities in the Puketāpapa Local Board area. This area has continuously been associated with the Puketāpapa Local Board since its inception in 2010, and prior to that the Mt Roskill Community Board. Notably the area includes important civic facilities overseen by the Local Board such as the Wesley Community Centre, Roskill Youth Zone, the Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall, and the historic Lovelock track. These are facilities that are connected to, and well used by the broader Mt Roskill Community – for example the large annual Mt Roskill Anzac Service at the Mt Roskill War Memorial Hall and the twice weekly Wesley Markets which attracts people from across Mt Roskill.
b. The enrolment zone for Wesley Intermediate School, which is located very near the draft electorate boundary, takes in areas of Wesley and also other areas south of the motorway within the Mt Roskill draft boundary.
c. The connection between Wesley and the broader Mt Roskill community goes back to early periods of Auckland’s urban growth. The community is named for the Wesleyan Church, which had large land-holdings across Mt Roskill and ran the Wesleyan Native Institute in Three Kings. These communities are therefore connected by a common history and pattern of development.
d. From the 1940s onwards Wesley was developed as a substantial state housing suburb. Around 75% of the current housing stock is owned by Housing New Zealand and there are associated high needs within the community. Much of the social support for people living in Wesley is in the Mt Roskill area including foodbanks, budgeting services, the Three Kings MSD off ice, and local electorate and List MP off ices.
e. More broadly, the character and connections of Wesley are intimately connected to the broader Mt Roskill community. One of Mt Roskill’s distinguishing features is that it is one of the most culturally and ethnically diverse communities in New Zealand and a part of this identity is the mix of communities in Wesley. It has been common for television news stories focussed on Mt Roskill to go to the shopping area at the intersection of Richardson
Rd and Stoddard Rd for footage because its diverse mix of people and street life is understood to represent the multicultural character of Mt Roskill.
f. The community has a substantial Pasifika population as well as large communities of migrants and former refugees. Over time these communities have built strong links with institutions across Mt Roskill including churches and mosques. Key community facilities that provide important support to these communities include the Three Kings library and CAB, the Three Kings MSD, the Fickling Convention Centre which is often used for large community meetings, and most importantly the Mt Roskill campus which includes Mt Roskill Grammar School. The main local industrial/employment zone in this area is the Carr Road corridor which many people in Wesley travel to for work and accessing important services and shops. The main local public transport service is the 24 bus which runs on a north/south basis through Blockhouse Bay, Roskill South, and Wesley and then into the central city.

We submit that returning the south-eastern portion of Wesley to Mt Roskill will improve the representation of those residents. But we’re aware that Wesley is a large suburb and shifting most or all of it would take both Mt Roskill and Mt Albert a long way outside the tolerance around the population quota, necessitating a long and difficult chain of knock-on changes. We don’t propose that.

Suggested solution

Instead, we propose only to move a portion of Wesley to the south of Oakley Creek/Te Auaunga. This would keep the majority of the area including key local schools and community facilities connected with the broader Mt Roskill community. Oakley Creek/Te Auaunga is a well understood and legible local boundary that is surrounded on both sides by a long contiguous string of parks. We propose that this area, illustrated on the map below, move from Mt Albert to Mt Roskill.

In making this proposal, we are aware that sometimes the Commission prefers natural features to form electorate boundaries, and at other times it prefers major roads. If the Commission would prefer to use major roads in this instance, there is an alternative proposal that achieves substantially the same outcome but uses Mt Albert Road, Sandringham Road, Stoddard Road, and Maioro Street as the boundary instead of using Oakley Creek. While the arguments for each version of this boundary are broadly similar, there are some distinctions. For example our original creek-based proposal used more of the existing electorate boundary than this alternative proposal does, but the alternative road-based proposal keeps more of the area associated with Ōwairaka in Mt Albert. We’ve illustrated this alternative on the map below.

This change (and also the alternative we offered above) keeps Mt Roskill within tolerance, and takes Mt Albert only moderately outside the tolerance, requiring one knock-on alteration to the draft boundaries. We submit that the most appropriate area for that shift is the strip of Arch Hill north of the motorway and south of Great North Road, illustrated in the map below. If returned from Auckland Central to Mt Albert, where the area has been represented up to now, it would bring Mt Albert back within tolerance without sending Auckland Central outside the tolerance.

Arch Hill has been represented through the Mt Albert electorate up to now, and this change would return it to its current electorate. While we acknowledge the urban motorway is one appropriate potential boundary, we submit that the major arterial route of Great North Road is also a helpful boundary line. Further, most of the area north of the motorway but south of Great North Road is in the enrollment zone for Kowhai Intermediate School. The school itself is located in the Mt Albert draft boundaries and its zone also takes in a significant proportion of the Mt Albert electorate.

We submit that returning a portion of Wesley to Mt Roskill, and returning a portion of Arch Hill to Mt Albert, has the additional benefit of reducing the number of Auckland residents who are shifting electorates as a result of the boundary review. This provides those residents remaining with their current electorate better continuity of representation.
N14001 James Lyon Objection Boundary

James Lyon

Objection

Auckland Central
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

James Lyon

I object because he current electoral system will be damaged by manipulating the electorates. Changing electorate is devious and not a fare democratic behaviour and does not create a consistent voting system. This stinks of political corruption.

Suggested solution

Leave the Elcotates alone.
N14002 Mr Roneel Singh Objection Boundary

Mr Roneel Singh

Objection

Auckland Central
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr Roneel Singh

i am objecting to the proposed changes to the Epsom boundtry as it will impact my daughter and her entry into Epsom Girls , she has been looking forward to attending the school and we beleive its better suited to her needs than the much larger Mount Alber grammar, we are conerned that the bigger school will impact her learning as well being serparated from Friends she has grown up with
N14003 Noah Atchison-Darby Objection Boundary

Noah Atchison-Darby

Objection

Auckland Central
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Noah Atchison-Darby

I object to the proposal to move Arch Hill into the Auckland Central electorate. During 2024, I lived on [street name] in Arch Hill and developed strong ties with the Kingsland and wider Mount Albert community. Kingsland was my natural hub — much closer and more connected than Ponsonby, Karangahape Road, or other parts of Auckland Central.

For clarity, I define Arch Hill as the area bounded by Great North Road to the north, Newton Road to the east, the Northwestern Motorway to the south, and an approximate western boundary south of the intersection of Coleridge Street and Great North Road.

While some may argue that the Northwestern Motorway forms a boundary between Arch Hill and Kingsland, in reality, the Bond Street bridge provides a strong and direct connection between the two areas. Daily activities — including shopping, cafes, parks, and community events — link Arch Hill residents more naturally to Kingsland and Mount Albert than to the Auckland Central suburbs.

Now living in Kingsland itself, it is even clearer to me that Arch Hill shares its community identity, local amenities, and daily life patterns with Kingsland and the wider Mount Albert area — not Auckland Central. Moving Arch Hill would disrupt these natural community ties and misrepresent the lived experience of residents.

Suggested solution

Arch Hill, as defined above, should remain within the Mount Albert electorate to maintain community cohesion, respect natural patterns of daily life, and ensure consistent and effective representation.
N14004 Corin Fenwick-Rose Objection Boundary

Corin Fenwick-Rose

Objection

Auckland Central
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Corin Fenwick-Rose

The boundary changes involve moving a small area around the Grafton/Domain area from Auckland Central to Epsom. This area has very little housing and its population is made up almost entirely of university students living in University of Auckland student accommodation buildings (approx 2000 students in Grafton and around the Stanley Street/Parnell area). This violates a community of interest, as students fit best with Auckland Central voters on almost every metric. They do not fit well with Espom voters and it would be hard to find other groups anywhere in the country that are more diametrically opposed than students and Epsom voters. Moving these students into Epsom is quite possibly the worst way that any community of interest could be violated. I feel reluctant to say this, but moving City Centre (student) voters out of Auckland Central while suburban voters in Grey Lynn/Westmere are moved in feels almost like the Gerrymandering technique known as cracking.

If there were to be an electorate that were to break the rules around electorate boundaries (i.e. discontinuous or varying by more than 5% from the population quota), it would most make sense in this area of Auckland, as the population demographics can change drastically when moving only a short distance. The City Centre is very high density and its population is the youngest and most ethnically diverse in the country. However, the City Centre is almost completely surrounded by a ring/belt of very low density suburbs with a population that is significantly older and also the wealthiest in the country (some of these areas are in Auckland Central currently and could be moved out of the electorate instead of students being moved out). It would be hard to find two more diametrically opposed groups living in such close proximity, so the exact location of the boundary matters a lot. The exact boundary of electorates in most cases does not matter very much (particularly with MMP reducing the importance of electorates), or atleast not as much as in this instance. Therefore, having electorate boundaries in this area that reflect the drastically different population groups should be prioritised over any other general electorate boundaries elsewhere in the country.

Suggested solution

Due to the drastically different population groups, the boundaries in this area matter more than anywhere else in possibly the entire country. As a result, having electorates that reflect these two drastically different population groups should be prioritised over any other general electorate decisions (i.e. draw the boundaries around this area first and then work from there for the rest of the country). If population needs to be moved out of Auckland Central, start with Ponsonby/Herne Bay, then Freeman's Bay/St Mary's Bay, and then the Gulf Islands. If population needs to be added, the demographics of Eden Terrace and some of Kingsland/Mt Eden would make more sense in Auckland Central than the aforementioned suburbs or Grey Lynn/Westmere (as is currently proposed). Under no circumstances should areas with lots of students (Carlaw Park near the lower domain, and the section of Grafton that is currently in Auckland Central) be moved out of Auckland Central.
N14005 Ms Annie Meates Objection Boundary

Ms Annie Meates

Objection

Auckland Central
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Ms Annie Meates

"I strongly urge the Representation Commission to retain the Arch Hill neighbourhood within the Mount Albert electorate.

Arch Hill shares a strong community identity and socio-economic alignment with the Kingsland area, which has long been part of the Mount Albert electorate.

The proposed reclassification of Arch Hill into the Auckland Central Electorate would disrupt these community ties and overlook the distinct character and needs of Arch Hill residents. Maintaining Arch Hill within the Mount Albert Electorate will ensure consistent representation that reflects the community’s shared interests and history."

Suggested solution

Arch Hill remains within the Mount Albert electorate.
N15001 Benjamin Chung Objection Boundary

Benjamin Chung

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Benjamin Chung

Do not remove areas of mt eden from the epsom electorate. These areas are very similar and are a part of the same community.

Suggested solution

Retain areas of mt eden that the proposed boundarys would remove from epsom
N15002 David Ee Objection Boundary

David Ee

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

David Ee

I respectfully submit this objection regarding the current electorate boundary classification. Therefore, it is vital to note that my residential address, where I reside with my family, is situated within the Orākei suburb rather than the Epsom suburb.

In light of this, it is inaccurate for my address to be included in the Epsom electorate, representing residents of the Epsom suburb and its immediate vicinity.

Suggested solution

I firmly believe that the best solution to amend this issue is for my residential address and others within the neighbourhood to be considered for inclusion within the Tamaki General Electorate boundary. 

Furthermore, should this not be feasible, it would be beneficial for the boundaries stretching from the Newmarket district area to the Orākei area, cutting off prior to the Meadowbank district area, to be incorporated within the Auckland Central Electorate boundary instead.
N15003 Mr Christophe Soliveau Objection Boundary

Mr Christophe Soliveau

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr Christophe Soliveau

Looking at the new boundaries of my local electorate, I cannot see the “logic” behind the “removal” of one part of our electorate to the south west I to the Mount Albert Electorate.
It’s does make sense from a geographical point of view

Suggested solution

I would suggest to extant the Epsom Electorate boundaries on that side to include the few more blocks west to Dominion road. So everyone from the current southern boundary of the Epson Electorate and East of Dominion road will be in the same electorate. That aligns much better with the way people are currently interacting with their communities. As it also aligns with “suburbs” boundaries.
Refer to attached image. All the area in red should be attacked to the Epson Electorate boundaries.
And if needed, due to numbers etc … to accommodate this, then the “proposed added part on the south east of the electorate boundaries shouldn’t be included in the Epson electorate. Refer to attachment 2
N15004 Mr Nigel Cartmell Objection Boundary

Mr Nigel Cartmell

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr Nigel Cartmell

I oppose the proposal to move/shrink the South-West boundary [3% moved from Epsom to Mt Albert].

Suggested solution

The South-Western boundary for Epsom should remain as it currently stands.
or, a clearer delineated boundary for that portion of Epsom would be to extend South-Western Epsom boundary to Dominion Road and Balmoral Road to include Potters Park corner.
N15005 Judith Speight Objection Boundary

Judith Speight

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Judith Speight

B

Suggested solution

Do not move election boundaries without full consultation with impacted residents.
In contrast to some of his colleagues, our current MP is highly invested, responsive and accountable to our close community and surrounding neighborhood - nga mihi
N15006 Shengyun Nie Objection Boundary

Shengyun Nie

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Shengyun Nie

We choose to live here because of the school zone We will suffer loss if you change the boundary.
This is not the right way to solve the problem.

Suggested solution

Please do not change the boundary
N15007 Connor Sharp Objection Boundary

Connor Sharp

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Connor Sharp

My objection is for the movement of Newton, Grafton, the Domain, and Eden Terrace into the Epsom electorate from Auckland Central.

This is based on communities of interest, as these areas consist more of apartments and higher density buildings, more closely connected with the City Centre.

Additionally, Newton, especially 'Uptown', is directly linked to the City Centre through Auckland Council strategy and plans, notably the City Centre Masterplan.

These areas should not be moved from the Auckland Central electorate to Epsom.
N15008 Tin Chiu Objection Boundary

Tin Chiu

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Tin Chiu

Change of boundary between Balmoral Road and Herbert Road for Epsom electorate.
We align with Mt Eden/Epsom as our area and electorate.

Suggested solution

Eden terrace should stay as Auckland Central
N15009 Mr David Archer Objection Boundary

Mr David Archer

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr David Archer

I object to any boundary changes to the electorate of Epsom, except that it may be expanded, an electorate in which I am a resident, and have been for years, and there should be no changes to weaken the position of the current encumbent, you, the Electoral Commission has to be un-biased and not driven to create a different electorate that is based on any one political influence.
N15010 Mr Grant Stuart Objection Boundary

Mr Grant Stuart

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr Grant Stuart

In the Epsom electorate, I am objecting to:
(1) the shift from Epsom to Mt Albert in the South of Mt Eden - population of 2,300 (3% of quota), and:
(2) the shift to Epsom from Maungakiekie in Greenlane - population of 2,200 (3% of quota).
The shifts are unnecessary, resulting in a net population movement of only 100 in Epsom. Together, they have a negligible effect on the Epsom population and the variation from quota of -3.7%.
People in South of Mt Eden identify mainly with Mt Eden and Newmarket in the Epsom electorate for shopping, amenities, and community activities, not Mt Albert. The area is easy walking distance to the lively hub of Mt Eden village.
The Epsom electorate places a strong emphasis on education. The Epsom Girls Grammar School enrolment zone has traditionally aligned strongly with the Epsom electorate boundary. This change would split the enrolment zone between two electorates, undermining the strong community of interest.
The Greenlane area borders the Maungakiekie/One Tree Hill Domain, giving it obvious topographical and community amenity interest with the Maungakiekie electorate.

Suggested solution

If the proposed South of Mt Eden and Greenlane boundary adjustments were overturned, the net population increase would be only 100 in the Epsom electorate. There would however be contra effects in the neighbouring electorates of Mt Albert and Maungakiekie.
The Mt Albert electorate would lose 2,300 in South of Mt Eden, exacerbating its variation from quota of -2,839 (-4.1%). Its northern neighbour, Auckland Central, has a positive variation from quota of +724 (+1.0%), due in part to gaining a population of 15,300 from Mt Albert. There is potential to finesse the proposed boundary between these two electorates to return enough of the 15,300 population gain in Auckland Central back to Mt Albert to offset the 2,300 loss whilst keeping both electorates within the 5% threshold. At first glance, realigning the part of the proposed boundary that runs along the Northwestern motorway with the Great North Road instead would help rebalance.
The Maungakiekie electorate would gain 2,200, which would turn its negative variation from quota of -1,386 (-2.0%) into a positive variation of 814 (1.0%), remaining well within the 5% threshold. No compensating boundary realignments would be required in this electorate.
N15011 Dr Mary Hedges Objection Boundary

Dr Mary Hedges

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Dr Mary Hedges

I object to the pocket of Greenlane moving from Maungakiekie electorate to Epsom.
This objection is based on the social loci of this area. CUrrently this corner of Greenlane shops within Maungakiekie Electorate, travels through it and even has direct access to the Maunga from which the elctorate gets its name, clealry supporting its connection to Maungakiekie.

Suggested solution

My solution is to leave this section in hte Maungakiekie electorate. This area is also on a growth trajectory with the development of the housing on the Ellerslie Racecourse precinct that will soon be home to 350 residences (Fletcher development) and a retirement village. THat development is all focussed on access (within walking distance) to Ellerslie Village and train station. Likewise, there will be an additional 330 residences delivered by Simplicity.
•

Furthermore Greenlane West is a natural boundary line given the nature of the arterial road (no parking on either side, several lanes, leading to the motorway in both directions). The Greenlane Train Station also attracts a large number of commuters from Maungakiekie, given anyone north of Greenlane Road would take a bus or use the Remuera Train Station.
In terms of social hub this area is also home to leasehold land owned by Cornwall Park Trust, as is Campbell Road which remains in Maungakiekie. It makes sense to keep the connection of this community to ensure effective representation for leaseholders and the Trust. Residents tend to shop in Ellerslie Village or Onehunga/Royal Oak, they don’t travel to Remuera Village, Newmarket or Parnell. THis is evidenced by the frequecy with which I meet people I know at these shops where I also shop. Residents would also be much more likely to walk around One Tree Hill/Maungakiekie than they would any of the maunga in Epsom Electorate (it’s a major draw card in the area’s real estate advertising).
Lastly, this section of Greenlane is zoned for the same schools as areas deeper into the Maungakiekie electorate such as St Mary’s, Michael’s Park and One Tree Hill College. It therefore makes sense to keep this community of interest together.
N15012 Greenlane Gastropub Objection Boundary

Greenlane Gastropub

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Greenlane Gastropub

This section of Greenlane has always been in the Maungakiekie electorate.

Residents shop in Ellerslie Village or Onehunga/Royal Oak, they don’t travel to Remuera Village, Newmarket or Parnell. Residents would also be much more likely to walk around One Tree Hill/Maungakiekie than they would any of the maunga in Epsom Electorate (it’s a major draw card in the area’s real estate advertising).

Greenlane West is a natural boundary line given the nature of the arterial road (no parking on either side, several lanes, leading to the motorway in both directions).

This Greenlane section is mixed commercial and residential (especially around Great South Road) so it makes sense to keep the connection with similar communities further down Great South Road, which firmly identify as Maungakiekie. This would ensure the MP can be an effective representative for the business community.
N15013 Shani Hatitio Objection Boundary

Shani Hatitio

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Shani Hatitio

This section of Greenlane has always been in the Maungakiekie electorate.
Maungakiekie Avenue (electorate’s namesake) is no longer in the electorate. Cornwall Park/Maungakiekie (One Tree Hill) is in the electorate by name only, as all streets surrounding the maunga are now in Epsom.

This area is also home to leasehold land owned by Cornwall Park Trust, as is Campbell Road which remains in Maungakiekie. It makes sense to keep the connection of this community to ensure effective representation for leaseholders and the Trust.

Residents shop in Ellerslie Village or Onehunga/Royal Oak, they don’t travel to Remuera Village, Newmarket or Parnell. Residents would also be much more likely to walk around One Tree Hill/Maungakiekie than they would any of the maunga in Epsom Electorate (it’s a major draw card in the area’s real estate advertising).

This section of Greenlane is zoned for St Mary’s, Michael Park and One Tree Hill College. Likewise, the Grammar Zone is a clear community of interest.

Ellerslie Racecourse will soon be home to 350 residences (Fletcher development) and a retirement village. It will be within walking distance to Ellerslie Village and train station. Likewise, there will be an additional 330 residences delivered by Simplicity.

Greenlane West is a natural boundary line given the nature of the arterial road (no parking on either side, several lanes, leading to the motorway in both directions). The Greenlane Train Station also attracts a large number of commuters from Maungakiekie, given anyone north of Greenlane Road would take a bus or use the Remuera Train Station.

The Greenlane section is mixed commercial and residential (especially around Great South Road) so it makes sense to keep the connection with similar communities further down Great South Road, which firmly identify as Maungakiekie. This would ensure the MP can be an effective representative for the business community.

Suggested solution

Should Maungakiekie retain this section of Greenlane, the boundary can shift inwards at Panmure to balance out numbers.
N15014 Debbie Burrows Objection Boundary

Debbie Burrows

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Debbie Burrows

Re: Proposal for Greenlane Electorate Boundaries

I submit that the approximately 2,200 residents of Greenlane, situated around Cornwall Park, should remain within the Maungakiekie electorate for the following reasons:
1. Community and Property Alignment:
This area includes leasehold land owned by the Cornwall Park Trust, consistent with nearby Campbell Road, which remains within the Maungakiekie electorate. Retaining the full extent of this community ensures consistent and effective representation for both leaseholders and the Trust, who share common property interests and arrangements.
2. Community of Interest:
Residents in this part of Greenlane predominantly shop and access services in Ellerslie Village, Onehunga, and Royal Oak — all situated within Maungakiekie — rather than Remuera, Newmarket, or Parnell. Their commercial and social ties align naturally with Maungakiekie.
3. Recreational and Cultural Connection:
Cornwall Park, including Maungakiekie / One Tree Hill, is a defining recreational and cultural asset for this community. It is regularly accessed and enjoyed by residents, more so than any maunga in the neighbouring Epsom electorate. The area's proximity and affinity with Cornwall Park are even emphasised in real estate marketing, reinforcing its central role in the local community identity.
4. Infrastructure and Natural Boundaries:
Residents south of Greenlane Road are primarily served by the Greenlane Train Station, while those north of Greenlane Road typically use Remuera Train Station. Additionally, Greenlane West provides a clear natural boundary, being a major arterial route with multiple lanes, motorway access, and no on-street parking.
5. Cohesive Representation:
It would be illogical for the streets encircling Cornwall Park to be separated from the park itself, given the integral role the park plays in the daily lives and identity of the local community.

For the reasons outlined above, and as an elected Local Board member for the last three terms, I respectfully request that this part of Greenlane remain within the Maungakiekie electorate to preserve strong, effective, and community-based representation.

Suggested solution

Re: Proposed Adjustment to Maungakiekie and Tāmaki Electorate Boundaries

To accommodate the retention of the approximately 2,200 Greenlane residents within the Maungakiekie electorate, I propose that the eastern boundary in Panmure be shifted westward, incorporating a greater portion of Panmure into the Tāmaki electorate.

This adjustment is appropriate and desirable for the following reasons:
1. Community of Interest:
Panmure shares stronger social, economic, and infrastructural ties with Point England and Glen Innes — suburbs that form the core of the Tāmaki area — than with Mt Wellington or Onehunga. These communities are connected by shared issues such as urban regeneration, provision of social and affordable housing, and coordinated infrastructure development through the Tāmaki Regeneration Company (TRC).
2. Shared Services and Infrastructure:
Panmure residents primarily access services and retail facilities in Glen Innes and Point England, and utilise direct public transport links connecting these suburbs. Shopping trends favour Pak’nSave Glen Innes rather than facilities at Sylvia Park or Royal Oak, reinforcing the natural community alignment east of the Tāmaki River.
3. Urban Development Linkages:
Current and planned developments such as Eke Panuku’s ‘Unlock Panmure’ programme will further integrate Panmure with Point England and Glen Innes, improving transport, public spaces, and community infrastructure in ways that benefit and connect all three suburbs.
4. Natural Boundaries:
The Tāmaki River (Te Wai o Taiki) represents a significant natural and cultural boundary. Keeping the entirety of the river and its adjacent communities within the Tāmaki electorate would honour its historical and spiritual importance to Mana Whenua and reflect the natural unity of the communities it links.
5. Logical and Practical Boundaries:
Using natural and infrastructural boundaries such as Pilkington Road and Lagoon Drive would create a clear and sensible electorate border that supports cohesive community representation.
6. Historical Precedent:
Panmure was previously part of the Tāmaki electorate between 1996 and 2005, with boundaries that followed Jellicoe Road and Lagoon Drive. Restoring this historical linkage would reinforce natural community ties.

As an elected Local Board member over the last three terms, I have seen firsthand the importance of ensuring that electorate boundaries reflect the lived realities of our communities. The adjustments proposed would result in electorates that respect cultural connections, natural boundaries, community infrastructure, and long-standing social ties. They would support fairer and more effective representation for both Greenlane and Panmure residents.

I thank the Representation Commission for considering this submission.
N15015 Mr Zachariah Hamilton Objection Boundary

Mr Zachariah Hamilton

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr Zachariah Hamilton

Boundary changes should respect established "communities of interest" and the tradition of competitive representation, rather than consolidating safe seats for minor parties at the expense of voter choice and accountability. Our current electorate is a genuine marginal seat, regularly flipping between Labour and National, which means our vote has a real impact on which party wins the seat. In contrast, Epsom (Seymour's electorate) is a safe ACT seat that has consistently returned the same MP since 2014, making individual votes less likely to influence the outcome. Moving these homes into a safe seat would effectively reduce electoral influence and diminish local democratic competition.
Additionally it makes no sense to add in this arbitrary and confusing border when the current split at Greenlane East/west is easy to understand and explain to the residences of the area.

Suggested solution

Keep that split at greenlane east/west
N15016 Tim Haycock Objection Boundary

Tim Haycock

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Tim Haycock

I object being moved from the Maungakiekie electorate.
We’re are connected to the current Maungakiekie electorate and connect with and shop in the Ellerslie and Onehunga townships. We have no connection to the Epsom electorate and would prefer to vote in the community we are a part of.

Suggested solution

I Propose Maungakiekie keeps the Greenlane section.
N15017 Mr Gautam Jindal Objection Boundary

Mr Gautam Jindal

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr Gautam Jindal

It seems unwise to take out Maungakiekie ave from the Maungakiekie electorate.
This area is also home to leasehold land owned by Cornwall Park Trust, as is Campbell Road which remains in Maungakiekie. It makes sense to keep the connection of this community to ensure effective representation for leaseholders and the Trust.

We have been working with Greg Fleming our MP towards various issues which will have to be started afresh if the boundary changes
N15018 Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand Objection Boundary

Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Green Party of Aotearoa New Zealand

1. Ward and Local Board Boundaries
The Commission’s report states that the proposed boundaries for Auckland Central would be aligned with the Waitematā and Gulf Ward boundary. In March 2025 Auckland Council confirmed new ward boundaries for the October 2025 elections which would include Parnell and Newmarket in the Waitematā and Gulf Ward. This means that the new Ward and Electorate boundaries would not be aligned. We submit that the change in Ward boundaries removes the rationale for the proposed boundary between the Epsom and Auckland Central Electorates.
The new Waitematā and Gulf Ward boundaries will also not be aligned with the Waitematā Local Board boundaries - which will continue to include Eden Terrace. For reasons which we note below, we believe it is important to maintain stable representation for these communities and they should therefore not be moved to the Epsom Electorate.

2. City Rail Link, City Centre Master Plan, and Uptown
When it opens in 2026, the Auckland City Rail Link will include a loop of centrally located stations connecting the City Centre. These stations are either located in, or directly on the current Auckland Central Boundaries. The precincts served by these stations also align closely with the City Centre Master Plan which aims to ensure a connected, accessible and inclusive City Centre. In our view this is a key community of interest, and given the long term nature of the infrastructure and the plans. It is a community that should be maintained within a consistent electorate and should therefore not be moved to the Epsom Electorate.
The proposed boundaries would substantially reduce the overlap between the Auckland Central Electorate and the City Centre Master Plan because it would remove the Eden Terrace/Uptown and Grafton/Health precincts from that electorate if they were to be moved to the Epsom Electorate.

3. Student Accommodation
Auckland Central currently contains two University Campuses, as well as the student accomodation associated with those campuses. The proposed changes would move four student residences out of the electorate:
- Stuart McCutcheon House
- Carlaw Park Student Village
- Grafton Student Flats
- Grafton Hall
Students, and particularly those living in student accommodation, form a key community of interest. Students in these living arrangements are commonly not covered by protections in the Residential Tenancies Act. In the past, there has been a parliamentary inquiry into student accommodation which demonstrates the shared interests of this community, which was supported because of these connections through the Education and Workforce Select Committee by those who would become the outgoing and incoming Auckland Central MPs, respectively.

Splitting these students out from the other student accommodations and universities, which will remain in Auckland Central, would reduce their representation and efficacy of it.

Suggested solution

In relation to Eden Terrace and the City Centre Master Plan, we submit that the Commission should align the Auckland Central/Epsom boundary in Eden Terrace and Newton with the southern boundary of the Waitematā Local board.
In relation to Student accommodation, we submit that the Commission should maintain the existing boundary between Auckland Central and Epsom for the electorate to ensure all current student residences continue to be located in the same electorate.
N15019 Dr Deepika Jindal Objection Boundary

Dr Deepika Jindal

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Dr Deepika Jindal

This section of Greenlane has always been in the Maungakiekie electorate.
Maungakiekie Avenue (electorate’s namesake) is no longer in the electorate. Cornwall Park/Maungakiekie (One Tree Hill) is in the electorate by name only, as all streets surrounding the maunga are now in Epsom.
This area is also home to leasehold land owned by Cornwall Park Trust, as is Campbell Road which remains in Maungakiekie. It makes sense to keep the connection of this community to ensure effective representation for leaseholders and the Trust.
N15020 Summer Haycock Objection Boundary

Summer Haycock

Objection

Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Summer Haycock

Proposed changes to the Maungakiekie electorate would see our section of Greenlane (our home is at [street address]) changed from Maungakiekie into the Epsom electorate. My objection to this move is that it would put us into an electorate that is outside of the community where we live.

Greenlane West is a natural boundary to the current Maungakiekie electorate, given the busy nature of the road. Having lived in Greenlane/One Tree Hill for the past 16 years, our local community is very much in and around Cornwall Park, Onehunga, Royal Oak, and Ellerslie village. It is uncommon for us to use facilities in, or to view Remuera, Parnell, or Newmarket as part of our local community.

I think it is very much in the interests of our neigbourhood to remain within the Maungakiekie electorate, as we have a vested interest in decisions made around our local maunga, our villages, shops, infrastructure and the community that we are naturally a part of. We have been very well served by our local MPs and do not wish to simply be a number-fulfilling exercise for another electorate.
Back to top