Local government is changing nationally through a programme called Simplifying Local Government.

Last month, as part of that, the Government opened the Head Start pathway: a fast, optional route for councils ready to propose their own reforms now rather than wait.

On this page we will explain the options available to us and how they fit with the Head Start pathway.

We want to stress that no decision has been made to merge, and no final structure has been settled. This is an early conversation to help us decide whether to put forward a proposal by the Government's 9 August deadline.

Your feedback will help shape that decision. These are early, high-level options to get a steer. They'll be expanded as more information and financial modelling become available.

The short version

The Government has opened a short, optional window called Head Start for councils that want to propose joining together. Council have until 9 August to submit their proposals.	We want your views on five options before we decide whether to join the Head Start process
Taking part is not a decision to merge. It keeps our options open and gives us a say.	Gore can't act alone. A Head Start proposal needs at least one other council, and it's preferable if they create a unitary authority - that is, a council that does the job of regional councils as well.
If councils don't put forward their own ideas, the Government can still require change after the 2028 local elections, through a compulsory "backstop".	This is a first step, not the final word. If we submit a proposal and the Government accepts it, much more detail would follow.

We are in a unique position in that there’s also an independent investigation by the Local Government Commission into how local government in Southland is organised. It began at the request of the Southland District Council and is ongoing.

What's this about?

The Government is reshaping local government nationally through a programme called Simplifying Local Government. Last month, as part of that, it opened the Head Start pathway: a fast, optional route for councils ready to propose their own reforms now rather than wait.

One of the Government's main criteria for proposals is that they see the amalgamation of at least two territorial authorities (councils) or unitary authorities into a new unitary authority.

What is a unitary authority?

A unitary authority is a single council that does two jobs at once - the local district/city job (roads, water, rubbish, parks, consents) and the regional job currently done by Environment Southland (rivers, flood protection, water and air quality, biosecurity).

What Head Start requires

Any proposal must:

• come from two or more councils (so Gore needs a partner), and
• create a new unitary authority.

Proposals are judged on five things: whether they're

• deliverable,
• support the new planning system,
• simplify local governance,
• deliver economies of scale, and
• maintain local voice.

You can learn more about the Government's Simplifying Local Government proposal on the Department of Internal Affairs' website - here's the link

The five options we want your views on

Option one - No Head Start

Stay involved in the Local Government Commission's separate review of Southland, and don't submit a Head Start proposal.

Head Start fit: This is the "don't take part in Head Start" choice. It is not a “nothing changes" option. The Commission's review continues, and change could still come later.

Possible pros

• No need to commit to a structure before the independent Commission finishes its detailed work.
• Keeps Gore inside a process that is legally required to continue.

Possible cons

• Gives up the chance to lead a faster, council-shaped proposal.
• If no proposal succeeds, change could still be imposed through the post-2028 backstop, with less local control.

Combine into a single Southland unitary authority, with a purpose-built model designed to keep strong local rural representation.

Head Start fit: Creates a unitary authority, so it could form a Head Start proposal (with a partner council). Invercargill City Council has signalled support for this model.

Possible pros

• Simplest single structure, potentially the strongest efficiencies and economies of scale.
• One organisation for both regional and local functions, therefore clearer regional decision-making.

Possible cons

• Greatest loss of a separate local identity.
• Highest risk that a smaller district like Gore is outvoted unless representation is deliberately protected.

Two unitary authorities — one based in Invercargill and one combining Southland and Gore district councils. Each does both regional and local functions in their area, coordinating on cross-boundary matters.

Head Start fit: Creates unitary authorities, though one is a single-council entity.

Possible pros

• Keeps a distinct Southland–Gore council separate from the city, which may better protect a provincial and rural voice.
• Splits the region along town/country lines.

Possible cons

• Splits today's regional functions across two councils, needing careful coordination (e.g. shared catchments).
• Two new organisations to establish, rather than one.

Gore joins with the Southland, Clutha, Waitaki, and Central Otago districts to form a single rural unitary council. It would also run and rate for regional services across the wider area, including Invercargill, Dunedin and Queenstown. This builds on the existing Southern Waters partnership.

Head Start fit: Creates a unitary authority, so it fits the core rule. However, it crosses regional boundaries, so deliverability and agreement are the big questions.

Possible pros

• Groups rural districts that already work together (through Southern Waters) and share interests.
• Keeps a rural-focused organisation rather than being absorbed into a city-led council.

Possible cons

• Crosses regional boundaries, which is complex, untested, and harder to get agreement on.
• Running and rating regional services across such a large area (including cities) is complicated and unproven.

An open option for any other idea residents want to put forward about how local government should be structured.

Head Start fit: To become a Head Start proposal, any idea here would still need to create a unitary authority with at least one partner council.

Possible pros

• Lets the community raise a model that hasn’t been considered.
• Keeps the conversation genuinely open.

Possible cons

• Vaguer, so harder to assess and model.
• May not be deliverable within the tight Head Start timeframe.

What could it mean for you?

Your rates. We don't know yet. Larger organisations can find savings, but setting up a new council also has transition costs. Detailed financial analysis would come later in the Government's design phase (October 2026 to March 2027), but only if we submit a proposal and the Government accepts it.

Your local voice. This is the concern we hear most - that a smaller district like Gore could be drowned out or absorbed by a larger council. It's a fair concern. Local representation is the thing we’ll fight hardest for. Protecting a guaranteed local say is central to whatever option we explore.

Your services. Roads, water, rubbish and the rest would still be delivered. What changes is which organisation runs them and how decisions get made. Services don't disappear in a reorganisation - the structure around them changes.

Council staff. No decisions about people have been, or can be, made at this stage.

How this fits with the wider Southland review

Two separate processes are running side by side, which we acknowledge has caused some confusion.

1. The Local Government Commission's review. The independent Commission has been investigating how Southland's councils are organised, at the request of the Southland District Council.

Phase 1 (outcomes released 25 May 2026) found enough reason to look deeper. Phase 2 is now underway, and all four Southland councils will workshop a longlist of options on Wednesday 17 June in Invercargill. This process is legally required to continue.

2. The Government's Head Start pathway. A faster, council-led route that also lets Gore consider options the Commission's Southland-only review can't, such as the cross-border Otago option.

A successful Head Start proposal could give councils and communities clarity sooner than the Commission's process.

To ensure rural Southland's interests are represented in early discussions, Cr Paul McPhail and Cr Mel Cupit will be part of a joint working group with Invercargill City Council and any other willing councils.

What happens next and how to have your say

We expect to decide whether to lodge a proposal in early August, ahead of the Government's 9 August deadline, taking your feedback into account.

This is a first step, not the final word. Because the Government's timeframe is tight, this early conversation is deliberately fast and high-level.

If we submit a proposal and the Government accepts it, much more detail would follow. This will include the Government's detailed design phase from October 2026 to March 2027, which covers in-depth work such as financial modelling, governance and local representation arrangements.

Remember

• This is an early, high-level step, not a decision to merge.
• Taking part keeps the District's options open.
• It's a first step, not the final word.

Have your say

The easiest way to let us know what you think is to complete the feedback form below.

You can also download the feedback form (a hard copy version is at the top right of this page) or pick one up from our main office, or the Gore or Mataura libraries. You can send your hard copy feedback to us by:

• Emailing it to: governance@goredc.govt.nz
• Delivering it to the main office, or Gore or Mataura libraries

Feedback is open until 5:00pm Monday 13 July 2026.