‘Wellingtonians entitled to know’: Details of $600k library website review revealed

Thursday, 25 June 2026

A review of the almost $600,000 spent on the website for the capital’s central library will look at how the decision to create the site ‒ a decision the council says wouldn’t be made today ‒ came about.

Wellington City Council has appointed Colin MacDonald, the former head of Internal Affairs and chief digital officer, to undertake the review.

Council chief executive Matt Prosser said in a statement that Wellingtonians were entitled to know how the website project came in at the cost it did.

“There has been considerable public interest and concern about the cost for the concept design, creation and hosting of a standalone website for Te Matapihi ki ti Ao Nui | Wellington Central Library, which appears disproportionate to the final product,” he said.

Read more:

• Wellington Library’s $14k website bill was actually closer to $600k

• Mystery link on under-fire Wellington library website a ‘mistake’, cost review under way

• Wellington’s library website - why did it cost so much and did it need to?

“I am clear that a value for money lens must be placed over every decision and expenditure the council puts in place. This was a decision made in a different time, and we are already on the record as saying that such a project, if proposed today, would be unlikely to get approval.”

This review will consider whether the website represented value for money, was defensible in terms of the outcomes sought, whether its procurement was in line with council policies, and it was delivered efficiently and effectively, and was overseen appropriately

As well, the review will look for ways to strengthen decision-making processes.

The review is due by mid-September and will be made public as soon as the findings have been received and the council’s response considered.

MacDonald will undertake the review for no fees, but will cover reasonable expenses, as well as any technical advice and report writing support required.

“For the avoidance of doubt, the council offered to pay Mr MacDonald for his time and efforts but he declined, having offered his time free-of-charge on the basis he wanted to give something back to our city.”

The glitzy website launched to celebrate the opening of Wellington’s refurbished central library building Te Matapihi also developed and built by an Auckland company and has been denounced by one councillor as “gold-plated promotional spending”.

The Post was told, in an official information response that the production cost for the dedicated Te Matapihi website was $13,961.

However, the full cost of designing and building it (the end-to-end delivery) was actually $595,801.

In apologising for the misunderstanding, the council said the almost $600,000 spend covered design, development, website build, user testing and launch. The $13,961 figure quoted to The Post was the cost of an “interim mini-site”.

A procurement process was undertaken for the work, with final contract spend approved by the chief operating officer.

Terms of reference

Value for Money Review Terms of Reference

1. Background

Te Matapihi ki te Ao Nui is Wellington City Council’s redevelopment of the Central Library in Te Ngākau Civic Square, restoring and strengthening the building into a base-isolated, modern civic facility.

The project retained and upgraded the existing building to deliver a resilient, future-proofed, multi-purpose community hub, integrating traditional library services with archives, creative spaces, and cultural facilities.

The project’s final budget envelope was $217 million.

Following the re-opening, concerns have been raised by Elected Members and members of the public about the cost of the Te Matapihi website, which has been reported as costing $600,000.

The concerns include:

• Judgement of those approving the expenditure

• The commercial arrangements of the procurement, particularly given the functionality of the website appears limited

• That the website was only a brochure site and that most functionality including joining the library referenced to other sites

• The lack of transparency about the cost.

1. Purpose and Objectives

2.1 Purpose

This review is being commissioned to evaluate whether the website:

• was defensible in respect of the outcomes it was seeking (were the outcomes appropriate and appropriately approved),

• procurement was in line with policies and procedures and represented value for money (in line with any established/approved criteria),

• costs and scope were defined, tracked and understood,

• was delivered in the most efficient and effective way (in line with established criteria),

• delivered optimal value for money in achieving its intended outcomes against the established criteria, and

• was appropriately governed.

2.2 Objectives

The review will:

• Assess whether costs are reasonable compared to outputs and outcomes delivered (for example there is criticism that the website diverts visitors to another website for more practical purposes of joining the library). In doing so, an assessment should be made on whether appropriate modern website development methods and products were applied.

• Assess the extent to which regard to economy, efficiency and effectiveness was given (for example was this included in the planning for the procurement).

• Determine whether governance, management, risk management (including cybersecurity), and accountability arrangements were in line with expectations and supported value for money.

• Evaluate whether the website is contributing to intended outcomes and impacts.

• Identify opportunities for improved performance, cost-effectiveness, and service delivery.

• Benchmark performance against comparable organisations or best practice (for example was the design of the website over scoped compared to other Council bespoke websites)

• Provide recommendations that support continuous improvement and public accountability.

2.3 Value for money — definition and basis of assessment

For this review, value for money is assessed using the framework the Office of the Auditor-General applies to public spending.

Value for money is the relationship between what was spent and what was achieved; it is not the same as lowest price. It has three dimensions:

• Economy — acquiring the resources used at the right price (spending less);

• Efficiency — the relationship between the resources used and the outputs produced (spending well); and

• Effectiveness — the extent to which the spending achieved its intended outcomes (spending wisely).

The assessment will consider whole-of-life cost — the total cost of designing, building, hosting, maintaining and supporting the website over its expected life — rather than the initial build price alone. Where relevant to the website's purpose, 'value' includes non-monetary value such as public accessibility and reach.

The review will assess the decisions made against the information and options reasonably available to decision-makers at the time, not solely with hindsight. A finding that the website cost more than expected does not by itself establish poor value for money; equally, compliance with process does not by itself demonstrate that value for money was achieved.

1. Scope of the Review

The review will cover:

• Financial performance (cost structures, unit costs, cost drivers)

• Service delivery or programme outputs and outcomes

• Governance, decision-making, risk management (including cybersecurity), and accountability arrangements

• Procurement, contract management, and supplier selection and performance

• Benchmarking against peers or standards

• Ongoing hosting costs and importantly the cost of maintenance.

The review will focus on the entire period covered by the consideration of the website through to implementation.

The review will be undertaken independently. The reviewer will have full and unrestricted access to relevant information, systems, documentation, and personnel required to complete the review, and will be able to apply appropriate review techniques without restriction.

1. Reporting and Use of Findings

The findings from this review will be documented in a report to the CEO. The findings are intended to:

• Support accountability to elected members and the public

• Inform and drive continuous improvement