Nelson City Council considers ‘residual risk’ of Lisa Austin conflict
Thursday, 4 June 2026
The legal implications of a conflict of interest surrounding a first-term Nelson city councillor have been discussed in a closed doors meeting.
Lisa Austin has come under scrutiny over concerns work her trucking company undertook on council projects poses a conflict of interest.
On Thursday the council held a closed-doors extraordinary meeting of the audit, risk and finance committee to consider the “position of the Audit Office regarding members interests under the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968”.
Following the meeting, mayor Nick Smith released a statement saying the committee had met to consider “any potential residual legal risks following the decision of the Auditor-General not to institute proceedings against Councillor Lisa Austin under the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968”.
The committee received the report, and the matter would now go to the full council for a decision next Thursday, he said.
That debate will also be held behind closed doors.
“As this matter remains legally privileged, council asks that the confidentiality surrounding this issue be respected until it is resolved. We recognise it is a matter of significant public interest and will make a public statement following the decision.”
The issue first came to the fore in May when the Audit Office said it was considering prosecuting the elected member.
It later decided against it, but last week Austin accused councillor Aaron Stallard of trying to force her to resign - an accusation Smith rejected.
The issue arose over concerns about Austin and her husband’s business, Austin Transport Tippers Ltd, which supplied trucks for council contractors on set rates, but did not contract directly with the Nelson City Council.
The Local Authorities (Member’s Interests) Act 1968 set rules for the financial interests of elected members with contracts with a local authority amounting to more than $25,000 in a financial year.
The act said elected members could seek approval for their non-disqualification from the auditor-general. But, when the council applied for an approval for Austin the office declined, because the earnings occurred before she was elected.
The office also said it was deciding whether to prosecute, and that she could be dismissed from the council.
The Audit Office then wrote to the council saying they had decided not to prosecute Austin, as it would not be in the public interest.
In a statement to the Nelson Mail at the time, the Audit Office said the Act provided that contracts with the council can make candidates ineligible for election, or, if they are elected, disqualify them from office.
“Any further steps in relation to Ms Austin are for the council. The council is responsible for complying with the Act and responsibility for its own decision-making processes remains with the council.”
On Friday, Austin doubled-down on her belief she had done nothing wrong, and accused Stallard of trying to “oust” her from office.
She would not resign, she said.
“I have done nothing wrong and I will not let down the Nelsonians who voted for me at the last October elections … I see nothing being gained for Nelson by a $200,000 by-election.”
Stallard is a member of the committee that met on Thursday.
In a statement last Friday, Smith said the matter was legally privileged and staff and councillors were working to get a solution that, if possible, avoided a by-election.
“Cr Stallard has assured me that he is not seeking to oust Cr Austin, and I believe him. Cr Stallard is responsibly performing his role as a councillor in seeking to understand and mitigate the risk that this issue brings to the council organisation, as we all are.”