The Infrastructure Funding and Financing Amendment Bill

This Bill aims to fix and expand the original Act which lets Special Purpose Vehicles (SPV) raise funds (via a longterm levy on ratepayers) to pay for infrastructure that supports urban growth.

The goal is that ‘growth pays for growth’ by accelerating infrastructure delivery for housing/urban development, making it cheaper and faster while ensuring beneficiaries (like new property owners) mostly cover the costs over time.

Councils’ role under this Bill is as the collection agent for levies to avoid the SPV having to set up its own billing system - while keeping the funding/financing and debt off the council’s books.

This differs from the usual where councils pay for infrastructure ahead of growth taking place, and then charge development levies to cover costs, which increases the debt on Councils books and often bills for ratepayers.

The Council supports the intent of the Bill and is supportive of unlocking growth.

However, we have concerns about how the bill doesn’t allow for certainty of infrastructure costs over time, believe only new properties should be subject to levies, and want to have parity with how infrastructure endorsements are made, among others.

We also believe Bill needs to be clear that levies are not subject to rates capping.

Rates capping / Simplifying Local Government Resources:

Waimakariri District Council's View:

4.1.The Council thanks the Environment Select Committee for the opportunity to provide a submission on the Bill.  The Council supports the intent of the Bill to streamline levy proposals and processes to increase the uptake of infrastructure funding and financing arrangements.  We are supportive of unlocking growth in our district and therefore supportive of proposals which help achieve this.

4.2.The Council is concerned that the Bill shifts the burden of infrastructure funding onto ratepayers, which may not be obvious to future property owners and does not provide certainty of infrastructure costs over time.

4.3.If growth is to pay for growth, the Council recommends that only those new properties which are causing the additional need for infrastructure should be levied.

4.4.The Council does not support limiting the ability of a responsible infrastructure authority to withhold an infrastructure endorsement if statutory requirements are met.

4.5.The Council welcomes the ability to specify that levy collection costs are included in the levy order as eligible costs as a condition of endorsing a levy proposal.

4.6.Processing costs for maintaining information in rating databases, levy assessment, invoicing, collection and credit control activities need to be recovered, as otherwise they become an unfunded mandate.

4.7.For developer, NZTA, or Kiwirail-led proposals, Councils should be able to recover costs for Council advice and participation.

4.8.The Council supports the broadening of eligibility to Water Services organisations, Kiwirail and NZTA as these are major infrastructure providers.

4.9.Clarity is required on the criteria for Crown funding.

4.10.The Bill needs to be clear in the overview or background section that these levies are not subject to rates capping.

4.11.The Council recommends that further disclosure in LTPs of financial impacts on ratepayers over the whole IFF project and levy period is required, including  how much off balance sheet debt exists.

4.12.The Council recommends that levies should rank second to rates.

Next steps

Submissions closed on this topic on February 20 and the Bill is expected back before parliament in the coming year.

Last reviewed date: 11 Feb 2026