The Whanganui District Council is under fire from local ratepayer advocates for spending a staggering $61,800 (excluding GST) on a new logo and rebrand.
The controversial design was unveiled in January after council research claimed most residents couldn’t recall the council’s existing crest logo. But despite spending tens of thousands of dollars, there is still no clear total cost estimate for rolling the rebrand out across council assets, and ratepayers are left in the dark on the real financial impact.
The Whanganui Residents and Ratepayers Association said the more they dig into this logo project, the more gaps appear in both transparency and planning.
“So at this point, the full cost to ratepayers is still unknown. That in itself should give people pause,” Whanganui Residents and Ratepayers Association chairwoman Rachael Woodhead said.
Woodhead said the council indicated that expenses for updating its branding would be covered by the appropriate departments using their existing budgets.
The ratepayers’ association was commenting on the council’s response to a request submitted under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act.
Woodhead questioned the council’s claim that the project would generate savings, noting that the council anticipated cutting an additional $120,000 from its communications and marketing budget over the next three years by seeking efficiencies “in everything we do.”
Woodhead noted that the figure was not specifically linked to the rebrand, making the total cost to ratepayers uncertain.
The association has also expressed worries about the redesign process, particularly regarding procurement and community consultation.
The ratepayers’ group is requesting additional details from the council, including the complete estimated rollout cost, comprehensive survey results from Whanganui ratepayers and residents, and clearer information on how the procurement process was conducted.
“This isn’t really about a logo. It’s about process, priorities and transparency around how ratepayer money is being used.”
“Ratepayers should be able to see clearly how decisions like this are made and what they will ultimately cost.”