Public Copy
A G E N D A
COUNCIL MEETING
Wednesday, 29 July 2020, 9.00AM
Council Chamber Hauraki House William Street PAEROA
Membership
Mayor
D A Adams
Councillors
Cr P G Anderson Cr R D T Broad Cr P D Buckthought Cr C A Daley Cr R G E Garrett Cr B J Gentil Cr R Harris Cr S Howell Cr P A Milner Cr D Smeaton Cr A M Spicer Cr J R Tilsley Cr R L Wilkinson
Executive Leadership
L D Cavers D Peddie A de Laborde P Thom S Fabish
Public Distribution
Paeroa Office/Library Plains Area Office Waihi Area Office/Library
Chief Executive L D Cavers
Hauraki District Council, P O Box 17, William Street Paeroa, New Zealand P: 07 862 8609 or 0800 734 834 (within the District) E: [email protected] www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz
Ngà Karakia Timatanga (opening)
(1)
Kia tau te rangimarie May peace be widespread Kia whakapapa pounamu te moana May the sea be like greenstone Hei huarahi ma tatou i te rangi nei A pathway for us all this day Aroha atu, aroha mai Let us show respect for each other Tatou i a tatou katoa For one another Hui e! Taiki e! Bind us all together!
(2)
Whakataka te hau ki te uru, Get ready for the westerly Whakataka te hau ki te tonga. and be prepared for the southerly. Kia mākinakina ki uta, It will be icy cold inland, Kia mātaratara ki tai. and icy cold on the shore. E hī ake ana te atākura he tio, May the dawn rise red-tipped on ice, he huka, he hauhunga. on snow, on frost. Haumi e! Hui e! Tāiki e! Join! Gather! Intertwine!
Karakia Whakamutunga (closing)
Kia whakai-ria te tapu Restrictions are moved aside Kia wātea ai te ara So the pathways is clear Kia turuki whakataha ai To return to everyday activities Haumi e. Hui e. Tāiki e! Join Gather Intertwine!
COUNCIL AGENDA
Wednesday, 29 July 2020 – 9.00am
Council Chambers, Hauraki House, William Street, Paeroa
Presentations
11.00am: OceanaGold Waihi Limited Update on Mining Activity – Waihi
Order of Business Pages
1. Karakia timatanga – Cr Buckthought 2. Apologies 3. Declarations of Late Items 4. Declarations of Interests 5. Confirmation: Council Minutes – (15-07-20) (2787997) 6 6. Mayor’s Task Force for Jobs Community Recovery Programme (2790243) 15 7. Electoral System and Representation Arrangements Review - 2020 21 (2790765)
8. Appointment to Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee 30 (2790294) Appendix A - Invitation to Waihou Piako Flood Protection Advisory 32 Subcommittee (2788126) Appendix B - Terms of Reference - Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittees 34 (2788152) Appendix C - Code of Conduct for External Members 2018 (2788153) 38 9. Annual Dept. of Internal Affairs Report 01 July 2019 - 30 June 2020 50 (2789910)
10. CEO Monthly Report for July 2020 (2790220) 57 11. Planning and Environmental Report - June 2020 (2789748) 104 12. Wharekawa Coast 2120 Project Budget Update (2790237) 114 13. Transport Report - June 2020 (2790200 - including Appendix A) 120 Appendix B – Waitawheta Bridge Controls Options Study – (included separately in content locker) (2790203)
14. Water Services Report to Council July 2020 (covering June) (2790719) 137 15. Solid Waste Activity Report - June 2020 (2790898) 147 16. District Drainage Activity Report - June 2020 (2790909) 152 1 Council Agenda 29-07-20 Doc. Ref: 2790892 Public Excluded Pages
17. Item 1: Future of Tetley’s Quarry 156
Matters to be taken with the public from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
Item General subject Reason for passing Ground(s) Under No. of each matter this resolution in Section 48(1) for to be considered relation to each the Passing of this matter Resolution
1 Future of Tetley’s Section 7(2)(i) Section 48(1)(a) That Quarry Prejudice to the public conduct of Commercial the relevant part of the Position/Negotiations proceedings of the To enable the local meeting would be authority holding the likely to result in the information to carry on, disclosure of without prejudice or information for which disadvantage, good reason for negotiations (including withholding would commercial and exist. industrial negotiations.
Public Included
18. New Leases Bordering Tetley’s Quarry, Maramarua (2790539) 168 Appendix A - Tetley's Quarry Options - Map (2766469)
19. Easement and Gobles Forestry (2791469) 181 Appendix A - Gobles Forest Plan (2790061) 189 Appendix B - Harvesting Estimate Area B and C (2790822) 190
2 Council Agenda 29-07-20 Doc. Ref: 2790892 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 6
HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, WILLIAM STREET, PAEROA ON WEDNESDAY, 15 JULY 2020 COMMENCING AT 9.00 AM
PRESENT D A Adams (His Worship the Mayor), Cr P A Milner (Deputy Mayor), Cr P G Anderson, Cr R D T Broad, Cr C A Daley, Cr R G E Garrett, Cr B J Gentil, Cr R Harris, Cr D Smeaton, Cr J R Tilsley and Cr R L Wilkinson
IN ATTENDANCE Messrs L D Cavers (Chief Executive), A de Laborde (Group Manager - Engineering Services), D Peddie (Group Manager - Corporate Services), P Thom (Group Manager - Planning & Environmental Services), S B Fabish (Group Manager - Community Services and Development), Ms C Mischewski (Strategic Planner), Ms M Clive (Strategic Planner), D Varcoe (Community Services Manager), S de Laborde (Infrastructure Systems and Planning Manager), P Matthews (Parks and Reserves Manager), A Chwesik (Community Facilities Officer), D Lees (Property Manager), Mrs D Bezuidenhout (Property Officer) J McIver (Community Engagement Manager), Ms K McLaren (Community Engagement Officer), D Fielden (Economic Development Manager), Ms R Jenks (Economic Development Officer) and Ms C Black (Council Secretary)
Karakia timitanga
Cr Wilkinson opened the meeting with a karakia.
APOLOGIES
RESOLVED
THAT the apology of Cr A Spicer, Cr S Howell and Cr Buckthought be received and sustained.
C20/276 Gentil/Broad CARRIED
LATE ITEMS
There were no late items.
DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS
Cr Tilsley declared a conflict of interest in Item 13 – LoveHauraki.
CONFIRMATION: COUNCIL MINUTES: 24-06-20 (2778459)
RESOLVED
THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Hauraki District Council held on Wednesday, 15 July 2020 are received and confirmed as a true and correct record.
C20/277 Wilkinson/Tilsley CARRIED
MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
There were no matters raised.
1 Council Minutes – (15-07-20) Doc Ref: (2787997) Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 7
RECEIPT AND ADOPTION: COMMUNITY GROWTH COMMITTEE UNCONFIRMED MINUTES- 30- 06-20 (2781985)
RESOLVED
THAT the minutes of the Community Growth Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 30 June 2020 be received and the recommendations therein adopted.
C20/278 Daley/Harris CARRIED
MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES
There were no matters raised.
SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT POLICY REVIEW - STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL AND PROPOSED POLICY (2784045)
The Strategic Planners presented a report that provided the background to the Significance and Engagement Policy review 2020. The Statement of Proposal and the proposed Policy were also presented for Council’s consideration and adoption prior to the special consultative procedure.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/279 Adams/Garrett CARRIED
RESOLVED
THAT the Council pursuant to the Local Government Act 2002 adopts the Statement of Proposal and proposed Significance and Engagement Policy for consultation, and
THAT the Council considers these decisions to be significant under its Significance and Engagement Policy 2017, and
THAT the Council approves the special consultative procedure be undertaken from 17 July 2020 to 17 August 2020.
C20/280 Milner/Smeaton CARRIED
GAMBLING POLICY REVIEW - STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL AND PROPOSED POLICY (2784036)
The Strategic Planners presented a report that provided the background to the Social Impact Assessment, Statement of Proposal and proposed Gambling Policy review 2020 for Council’s consideration and adoption prior to the special consultative procedure.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/281 Adams/Daley CARRIED
RESOLVED
THAT the ‘2020 Social Impact Assessment’ be received, and
THAT the Council has regard for the Social Impact Assessment in considering the adoption of the proposed Gambling Policy, and
2 Council Minutes – (15-07-20) Doc Ref: (2787997) Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 8
THAT the proposed Gambling Policy be adopted for public consultation in accordance with section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002, and
THAT the proposed Gambling Policy Statement of Proposal (SOP) document be adopted for public consultation in accordance with section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002.
C20/282 Anderson/Daley CARRIED
DRAFT DANGEROUS AND INSANITARY BUILDINGS POLICY 2020 AND STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL (2784654)
The Strategic Planners presented a report that provided the background to the Draft Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy and the Statement of Proposal on the policy for adoption prior to the special consultative procedure.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/283 Adams/Wilkinson CARRIED
RESOLVED
THAT Council:
a) In accordance with section 131 of the Building Act 2004, approve the draft Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy 2020 (as attached) for community consultation, and in accordance with section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002, adopt the Statement of Proposal (as attached), and
THAT the Council use the special consultative procedure for community engagement on the draft Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy 2020 and the timeframes and approach are approved.
C20/284 Adams/Broad CARRIED
NUISANCE BYLAW AMENDMENT - STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT (2784042)
The Strategic Planners presented a report that provided the background to the Nuisance Bylaw Amendment - Statement of Proposal and Proposed Amendment for adoption prior to the special consultative procedure.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/285 Adams/Smeaton CARRIED
RESOLVED
THAT in accordance with section 155(1) of the Local Government Act 2002 the proposed amendment to the Nuisance Bylaw 2019 is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems, and
THAT in accordance with section 155(2) of the Local Government Act 2002 the proposed amendment to the Nuisance Bylaw 2019 is the most appropriate form of bylaw and does not have any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, and
3 Council Minutes – (15-07-20) Doc Ref: (2787997) Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 9
THAT in accordance with section 145 and section 159 of the Local Government Act 2002 the Council approves the proposed amendment to the Nuisance Bylaw 2019 (as contained in the Statement of Proposal attached) for public consultation, and
THAT the special consultative procedure is used for community engagement on the proposed amendment to the Nuisance Bylaw 2019 and will proceed from 17 July to 17 August 2020.
C20/286 Tilsley/Harris CARRIED
DRAFT FREEDOM CAMPING BYLAW AND STATEMENT OF PROPOSAL (2784599)
The Strategic Planners presented a report that provided the background to the draft Freedom Camping Bylaw and Statement of Proposal for adoption prior to the special consultative procedure.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/287 Adams/Wilkinson CARRIED
RESOLVED
THAT in accordance with section 155(1) of the Local Government Act 2002 and section 11(2) of the Freedom Camping Act 2011 the proposed Responsible Freedom Camping Bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problems, and
THAT in accordance with section 155(2) of the Local Government Act 2002 the proposed Responsible Freedom Camping Bylaw is the most appropriate form of bylaw and does not have any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, and
THAT in accordance with section 145 and section 159 of the Local Government Act 2002 the Council approves the proposed Responsible Freedom Camping Bylaw [as attached] for public consultation, and
THAT the special consultative procedure is used for community engagement on the draft Responsible Freedom Camping Bylaw, and
THAT in accordance with sections 156(1)(a) and 86 of the Local Government Act 2002 the Council adopt the attached Statement of Proposal for the proposed Responsible Freedom Camping Bylaw.
C20/288 Garrett/Anderson CARRIED
HŪNUA TRAIL ENDORSEMENT (2784919)
Franklin Local Board members from Auckland Council - Angela Fulljames, Malcolm Bell, Andy Baker (Local Board Chair) attended the meeting to present the Auckland Council’s plan of the Hūnua trail from Clevedon to Kaiaua.
The local board members also sought the support of HDC ‘in principle’ to incorporate the portion of the proposed trail that is within the jurisdiction of the Hauraki district and to work with HDC staff in progressing the development of this portion of the trail.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/289 Harris/Gentil CARRIED
4 Council Minutes – (15-07-20) Doc Ref: (2787997) Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 10
RESOLVED
THAT Council choose Option 2 - endorse in principle the development of the Hūnua Trail from Clevedon to Kaiaua through the Hūnua Ranges Regional Park, incorporating the portion of the proposed trail that is within the jurisdiction of the Hauraki District Council, and
THAT Council endorse Hauraki District Council staff to work with Auckland Council staff to progress the trail development and delivery, including tourism opportunities for the Firth of Thames communities that Hauraki District Council and Auckland Council share responsibility for.
C20/290 Harris/Anderson CARRIED
The meeting adjourned at 10.20am. The meeting reconvened at 10.38am.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Cr Tilsley declared a conflict of interest in the following item and took no part in the discussion and decision.
LOVEHAURAKI SOCIAL MEDIA CONTENT (2785443)
The Economic Development Officer and Economic Development Manager presented a report that sought consideration from Council for providing budget for an external contractor to write content for the LoveHauraki Facebook page.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/291 Harris/Wilkinson CARRIED
RESOLVED
THAT Council approves a budget of $4,500 for content writing and post boosting for the LoveHauraki Facebook page for a period of 3 months from the existing Community Growth Budget and that it be preferred the person employed for this role be from within the district.
C20/292 Adams/Garrett CARRIED
HISTORICAL MARITIME PARK QUARTERLY REPORT FEB-JUNE 2020 (2784909)
The Economic Development Officer presented a report that provided a summary of progress on the Historical Maritime Park Provincial Growth Fund project between February and June 2020.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/293 Milner/Smeaton CARRIED
PROPERTY FILE DIGITISATION (2784970)
The Group Manager – Corporate Services presented a report that sought Council approval of the digitalisation project that is to replace Council’s current paper property records to electronic form.
5 Council Minutes – (15-07-20) Doc Ref: (2787997) Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 11
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/294 Adams/Harris CARRIED
RESOLVED
THAT the Council approves Option 2 (bring forward the project to start in the 2020/21 year and resource the project internally, including an assessment stage) from unbudgeted operating expenditure of $450,000 for the property file digitisation project from the Corporate Services support activity in 2020/21, and
THAT the Council considers these decisions to be not significant under its Significance and Engagement Policy 2017, and
THAT Council advise the public that it has approved this project.
C20/295 Daley/Broad CARRIED
RECOVERY WORKING PARTY DELEGATIONS AND TERMS OF REFERENCE (2785117)
The Group Manager – Planning and Environmental Services presented a report that sought the formalisation of a Recovery Working Party. The purpose of the Recovery Working Party is to provide regular governance oversight regarding the Recovery Planning for the Covid-19 Pandemic and drought relief actions.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/296 Adams/Wilkinson CARRIED
RESOLVED
THAT the Recovery Working Party Delegations and Terms of Reference, as amended, are received, and
THAT Council establishes the Recovery Working Party, with the membership of five, consisting of the Mayor as Chair, Deputy Mayor as the Committee Deputy Chair and the ward chairs, and
THAT Council adopts the Recovery Working Party delegations and amends the Delegations Manual accordingly, and
THAT Council adopts the Recovery Working Party terms of reference.
C20/297 Anderson/Tilsley CARRIED
HAURAKI BOWLING CLUB NEW LEASE AGREEMENT (2785456)
The Property Manager presented a report that provided the background on the Council leased land to the Hauraki Bowling Club and sought approval of the new Deed of Lease with the club.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/298 Broad/Wilkinson CARRIED
6 Council Minutes – (15-07-20) Doc Ref: (2787997) Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 12
RESOLVED
THAT Council approves a new lease agreement between Hauraki Bowling Club and the Hauraki District Council for a period of 5 years with a further term of 5 years, and
THAT the lease be subject to the conditions set out in the report.
C20/299 Garrett/Smeaton CARRIED
NEW LEASE STEEN ROAD QUARRY (2785840)
The Community Services Manager presented a report which advised and sought approval of two lease renewals for two areas of Council land bordering Tetley’s Quarry, Steen Road, Waitakaruru.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/300 Broad/Daley CARRIED
The area of the grazing land is 15.4 hectares and is currently leased to Heaven Farms Limited. The lease on the land has expired.
Another party, Waitakaruru Honey Ltd, has approached Council to lease some land adjacent to their property located next to the quarry on Steen Road. This party is also interested in leasing other land owned by Council.
RESOLVED
THAT the consideration of the two leases at the Steen Road Quarry are deferred and be considered at the end of month Council meeting on 29 July.
C20/301 Broad/Adams CARRIED
COMMUNITY INITIATIVES REPORT - JULY 2020 (2785320) APPENDIX A - WAIHI COMMUNITY PATROLS REQUEST FOR FUNDING (2772935
The Community Engagement Manager and Engagement Officer presented the monthly activity report on Community Initiatives to July 2020.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/302 Tilsley/Smeaton CARRIED
Waihi Community Patrol
A request has been received from the Waihi Community Patrol seeking financial assistance from Council towards the upkeep of their sponsored patrol vehicle.
RESOLVED
THAT the correspondence from Waihi Community Patrol be received, and
THAT $1,000 is granted from the Waihi Ward Community Assistance Fund to the Waihi Community Patrol towards the patrol vehicle upkeep costs.
C20/303 Gentil/Smeaton CARRIED
7 Council Minutes – (15-07-20) Doc Ref: (2787997) Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 13
COMMUNITY RECREATION REPORT - JULY 2020 (2785422) APPENDIX A - NGATEA LIBRARY AND SERVICE CENTRE WORKING PARTY TERMS OF REFERENCE (2783358)
The Libraries Manager, Community Engagement Manager, Facilities and Parks/Reserves Manager presented the monthly activity report on community recreation to July 2020.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/304 Wilkinson/Broad CARRIED
Ngatea Library and Service Centre Working Party
The Ngatea Library and Service Centre Working Party have agreed that the Plains Ward Chair be removed from the Ngatea Library & Service Centre Working Party and that no additional Plains Ward Community Representative be added. It was considered that the group is well represented by Councillors Ray Broad and Rodney Garrett and would allow Ward Chair Ross Harris to concentrate on other ward and portfolio matters.
RESOLVED
THAT Council approves the removal of the Plains Ward Chair from the Ngatea Library and Service Centre Working Party and no additional Plains Ward Community Representative be added.
C20/305 Daley/Anderson CARRIED
The meeting adjourned at 12.05pm The meeting reconvened at 12.33pm
Consideration of the Recreation Activity Report resumed.
LIBRARY SERVICES CHANGE OF HOURS (2785313)
The Libraries Manager presented a report that proposed a change to the current Paeroa and Waihi libraries opening hours.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/306 Wilkinson/Smeaton CARRIED
RESOLVED
THAT the Paeroa and Waihi Libraries change opening hours to Monday-Friday, 9.30am- 4.30pm with Saturday opening hours from 9.30am-12.30pm remaining unchanged, for a trial period of 3 months, and
THAT the Paeroa and Waihi libraries open mid-week, one day per week, for a late night opening for a trial period of 3 months, and
THAT staff report back to Council on the findings of the trial and recommendations for the future opening hours, and
THAT the Council considers these decisions to be insignificant under its Significance and Engagement Policy 2017, and
8 Council Minutes – (15-07-20) Doc Ref: (2787997) Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 14
THAT the level of engagement considered appropriate for this matter now is to inform (i.e. one-way communication disseminating information to the Community).
C20/307 Smeaton/Broad CARRIED
COMMUNITY FACILITIES REPORT - JULY 2020 (2785431
The Property Officer and Facilities Officer and Parks and Reserves Manager presented the monthly report on community facilities activity to July 2020.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/308 Adams/Gentil CARRIED
CAMPBELL FLOODGATE (2785833)
The Infrastructure Systems and Planning Manager presented a report that sought support of a solution to address and alleviate the issues of flooding around the Campbell floodgate located within the Eastern Plains Drainage District.
RESOLVED
THAT the report be received.
C20/309 Garrett/Tilsley CARRIED
RESOLVED
THAT to address the Campbell Floodgate flooding situation, Council supports Option 1 as detailed in the report, that a letter be written to the Waikato Regional Council placing the responsibility on them to ensure that the Campbell Floodgate can meet the level of service to 382ha.
C20/310 Adams/Gentil CARRIED
Karakia whakamutunga
Cr Wilkinson closed the meeting with a karakia at 1.20pm.
CONFIRMED
D A Adams Mayor
29 July 2020
9 Council Minutes – (15-07-20) Doc Ref: (2787997) Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 15
FOR DECISION MŌ TE WHAKATAUNGA
TO Mayor and Councillors
AUTHOR Rebecca Jenks Economic Development Officer
FILE REFERENCE Document: 2787294
PORTFOLIO HOLDER/S Councillor Harris Community Growth Portfolio Councillor Tilsley Community Initiatives Portfolio MEETING DATE 29 July 2020
SUBJECT Mayors Taskforce for Jobs Community Recovery Programme
RECOMMENDATION | TE WHAIKUPU
THAT the report be received.
THAT Council support the development of a proposal for the Mayors Taskforce for Jobs Community Recovery Programme, and
THAT if the proposal is approved, Council roll out the proposed programme.
1 PURPOSE | TE ARONGA
The purpose of this report is to seek a decision from Council on whether to be involved in the Mayors Taskforce for Jobs Community Recovery Programme and seek feedback on the proposed programme of work.
2 BACKGROUND | TE KŌRERO Ā MUA
In response to COVID-19, the Mayors Taskforce for Jobs has developed a Community Recovery Programme in collaboration with the Ministry of Social Development. The pilot of the programme was successfully rolled out in four districts, Central Hawkes Bay District, Ōpōtiki District, South Wairarapa District and Rangitikei District.
This programme allows rural councils who are part of Mayors Taskforce for Jobs to apply for funding of up to $500,000 to support recovery through employment.
What the funds are for: Employment related funding to assist small to medium enterprises (SME) businesses to support recruitment, training and other requirements as needed. Requirements could also include wage subsidies to support the hiring of young people (excluding capital items). Focus is on those not in education, employment or training (NEETS) and/or people who have been displaced from their employment under COVID-19.
Whaarangi 1 | 6 M 2787294 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 16
The employment of a local ‘coordinator’ to deliver the programme and support for youth to be retained and placed into employment.
Initially, Council can apply for up to $250,000 and additional funds, a further $250,000, can be applied for at a later date depending on need and the success of the previous investment. The expectation is that one sustainable employment outcome be generated for every $10,000 invested.
The programme runs from 1 July 2020 until 30 June 2021, though we would likely start in August if Council decide to support this programme and it is accepted by the Ministry of Social Development’s Regional Commissioner.
3 THE ISSUES | NGĀ TAKE
COVID-19 has had a large impact on our communities, leaving many unemployed. In our district there are currently 60% more people on Jobseeker Work Ready support than in June 2019 (approximately 200 people). There are now 156 more people on Jobseeker Work Ready support in June 2020 than there was in February 2020 (Ministry of Social Development, 2020).
HAURAKI DISTRICT JOBSEEKER - WORK READY BENFICIARIES
563 570 558
431 402 380 360 362
349 339 344 349 340 Number of people of Number
Jun 19 Jul 19 Aug 19 Sep 19 Oct 19 Nov 19 Dec 19 Jan 20 Feb 20 Mar 20 Apr 20 May 20 Jun 20 Date
Figure 1: People in the Hauraki District receiving Jobseeker – Work Ready grant (Ministry of Social Development, 2020)
Nationally, 46% of those who applied for Jobseeker Work Ready grants over lockdown had no benefit history or had last received a benefit over a decade ago compared with 26% in 2019 (Ministry of Social Development, 2020). Jobseeker Work Ready grants increased across all age groups but were high for those in their 20’s, where new grants increased from 37% to 45% during lockdown compared with the same period in 2019 (Ministry of Social Development, 2020). Approximately 30% of those receiving this grant are between 18 and 24 years old. These grants also increased for all ethnic groups but in particular for those identifying as NZ European. Their share of all new grants increased from 30% to 39% during lockdown compared with the same period in 2019. Māori declined as a share of Jobseeker Work Ready grants, falling from 42% to 27% of all grants. It is worth noting that Māori are still
Whaarangi 2 | 6 M 2787294 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 17
overrepresented in these figures compared to their share of New Zealand’s population at 17% (Ministry of Social Development, 2020). The number of people returning to New Zealand has increased the number of people on benefits compared with last year in the same period, but this only accounts for 12% of reasons recorded for new Jobseeker Work Ready grants. 45% were due to job loss (Ministry of Social Development, 2020).
3.1 Proposed programme
Council staff propose that Council employ a coordinator to lead this programme. This position will be fully funded by the Community Recovery Programme. The coordinator will be responsible for working with NEETs and displaced unemployed, stakeholders, employers and educators.
Council staff will liaise with local businesses to identify employment opportunities and discuss barriers to employment of young people e.g. finances, HR support, transport, training, to understand where the support is required. This will help form the programme that will be rolled out by the coordinator.
Once these key areas of support needs have been identified, Council staff will approach potential partners to participate, for example, training organisations.
After an initial “brainstorming session” of potential employers and projects, Council staff believe that at least 25 sustainable employment outcomes are achievable by 30 June 2021.
Funds could be used for: Employing a coordinator Entry-level training Wage based incentives Employment enabling initiatives Pastoral care
The Ministry of Social Development have confirmed that they will support our Council in developing the proposal and are prepared to work closely with the coordinator. This will ensure Council’s proposal compliments rather than duplicates their programmes.
4 ENGAGING WITH OUR COMMUNITIES | KIA UIA TE HAPORI WHĀNUI
Staff consider that the Council does have enough of an understanding of community views and preferences on this matter. The level of engagement considered appropriate for this matter, at this point in time, is to consult (i.e. two-way communication to obtain public feedback).
This will happen in the development of the proposal, including consulting with businesses, Ministry of Social Development and other stakeholders.
5 OUR OPTIONS | NGĀ KŌWHIRINGA A MĀTOU
Staff have identified the following options for the Council to consider: Council supports the development of a proposal and participation in the programme. Council does not support the development of a proposal and participation in the programme.
Whaarangi 3 | 6 M 2787294 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 18
These options and their advantages and disadvantages are outlined below.
5.1 OPTION 1: SUPPORT PROGRAMME
ABOUT THIS OPTION In this option, Council supports the development of a proposal to the Mayors Taskforce for Jobs Community Recovery Programme. If funds are received, Council will take the lead on rolling out the programme. ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES Supports Social and Economic Council is required facilitate these Development Strategy goals employment outcomes (one Works towards reducing deprivation by sustainable employment outcome per providing sustainable employment $10,000 spend) Supports community recovery from If the right coordinator is not found, COVID-19 through creating achieving the outcomes could be employment opportunities challenging Supports businesses to increase their staffing levels with support Would include a dedicated staff member to run the programme for one year – reduces the need for other staff to be involved in this, freeing them up for other priority actions FINANCIAL COSTS
Whole of life costs Capital costs: Office set-up costs Ongoing annual operating: costs covered by Mayors Taskforce for Jobs until 30 June 2021 One off operating cost: same as above Budget source Mayors Taskforce for Jobs Changes to budgets In order to accommodate these costs there will not need to be changes to budgets. These funds would be additional to existing budgets and financed externally.
Impact on the Council’s debt There is no impact on the Council’s debt. Potential impact on rates There will be no impact on rates because the initiative is funded externally.
5.2 OPTION 2: DOES NOT SUPPORT PROGRAMME
ABOUT THIS OPTION In this option, Council does not support the development of a proposal to the Mayors Taskforce for Jobs Community Recovery Programme.
ADVANTAGES DISADVANTAGES No additional financial risk to Council One opportunity to support community recovery is lost
Whaarangi 4 | 6 M 2787294 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 19
A programme that can help reduce deprivation and provide employment to young people is not taken up NEETs and people displaced by COVID- 19 may take longer to find employment An additional opportunity to support local businesses to increase their workforce is lost FINANCIAL COSTS
Whole of life costs Capital costs: Nil Ongoing annual operating: Nil One off operating cost: Nil
Budget source No budget required Changes to budgets No costs Impact on the Council’s debt There is no impact on the Council’s debt. Potential impact on rates There will be no impact on rates because there is no change unless Council wants to run another programme focused on employment that isn’t funded through this scheme.
6 PREFERRED OPTION| TE KŌWHIRINGA MATUA
Staff recommend proceeding with option 1 – Support Programme.
6.1 LINKAGES
STRATEGIC The preferred option IS consistent Links to Economic DIRECTION with the Council’s strategic Development and Social direction, including community strategies outcomes. LONG TERM PLAN / The preferred option IS consistent Does not require additional ANNUAL PLAN with the long term plan and/or budget from Council ALIGNMENT annual plan programmes and budgets. POLICIES, BYLAWS The preferred option IS consistent AND PLANS with the Council’s other ALIGNMENT strategies, policies, bylaws and plans. SIGNIFICANCE The decision IS NOT considered ASSESSMENT significant under the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy 2017. IMPLICATIONS FOR The decision DOES NOT involve a MĀORI significant decision in relation to land or a body of water.
Whaarangi 5 | 6 M 2787294 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 20
6.2 ASSESSING THE RISKS
Staff have identified the following risks associated with the recommended option.
Risk Description of risk Level of risk How we could soften the risk remaining If Council is unsuccessful Moderate Employing a suitable Low in developing proposed coordinator who is known in number of employment the community and is highly outcomes, some funds engaged will reduce the risk of may have to be returned not achieving the outcomes as (funds used to employ a well as working closely with coordinator would not MSD. need to be reimbursed)
Businesses are unwilling Moderate Similar to above. Businesses Low to participate will also be involved in the development of the proposal so that it is fit for purpose and will give an indication of their future involvement.
7 NEXT STEPS | TE ARA KI MUA
Timeframe Action Comments
29 July 2020 Advise Mayors Taskforce for Jobs of decision
By 7 August If approved, develop proposal for 2020 feedback
Mid-August Develop final proposal 2020
8 Approval
Prepared by Rebecca Jenks Economic Development Officer Approved by Langley Cavers Chief Executive
Whaarangi 6 | 6 M 2787294 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 21
FOR DECISION MŌ TE WHAKATAUNGA
TO Mayor and Councillors
AUTHOR Group Manager - Community Services and Development
FILE REFERENCE Document: 2790170 Appendix A: 2020/2021 Electoral System, Maori Representation and Representation Review Timetable PORTFOLIO HOLDER/S Mayor Toby Adams
MEETING DATE 29 August 2020
SUBJECT Electoral System and Representation Arrangements Review
SUMMARY | TE WHAKARĀPOPOTANGA
The Local Electoral Act 2001 provides for local authorities in 2020/21 to consider for the 2022 elections (i) the electoral system to be used, (ii) whether Māori wards should be introduced and, for some (iii) to undertake a representation arrangements review - a review is mandatory every six years, with the next representation review not due until 2024.
The review of the electoral system must be completed by 12 September 2020 and is to consider whether: ▪ the First Past the Post (FPP) electoral system is retained; or ▪ the Single Transferable Voting (STV) electoral system is introduced; or ▪ a poll of electors is held on which electoral system is to be used for the next two triennial elections.
Consideration of Māori wards is optional, but if these are to be introduced for the 2022 elections, a decision is required by 23 November 2020. If established, and assuming a total of 13 councillors remain, there would be two councillors elected from one or more Māori wards, and 11 councillors elected from one or more general wards.
A representation arrangements review is not required to be undertaken until 2024 unless Māori wards are introduced (and a representation arrangements review is required in 2021).
The decision is not considered to be a significant decision.
Whaarangi 1 | 9 M 2790170 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 22
RECOMMENDATION | TE WHAIKUPU
THAT the report be received, and
THAT pursuant to section 27 of the Local Electoral Act 2001, Council resolves for the 2022 Hauraki District Council triennial elections to:
Either -
(i) retain the First Past the Post electoral system; or
(ii) change to the Single Transferable Voting electoral system; or
(iii) undertake a poll of electors on the electoral system to be used for the 2022 and 2025 elections; and that public notice be given by 19 September 2020 of the decision and of the right of electors to demand a poll on the electoral system to be used, and
THAT pursuant to section 19ZA of the Local Electoral Act 2001, Council resolves to or not to introduce Māori wards for the Hauraki District Council for the 2022 and 2025 elections, and
THAT if Māori wards are to be introduced, pursuant to clause 1, Schedule 1A of the Local Electoral Act 2001, Council undertakes a representation arrangements review with an initial proposal required no earlier than 1 March 2021 and no later than 31 August 2021, and
THAT Council considers these decisions to be insignificant under its Significance and Engagement Policy 2017.
THAT Council engage and/or inform the district residents as appropriate with the decisions made.
1 PURPOSE | TE ARONGA
This report is for Council to consider for the 2022 elections: (i) the electoral system to be used (ii) whether Māori wards should be introduced and if another representation arrangements review is required.
2 BACKGROUND | TE KŌRERO Ā MUA The Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA) provides for greater flexibility and local choice in several electoral related matters. The principal matters requiring consideration by local authorities in 2020/2021 for the 2022 elections are (i) the choice of electoral system (FPP or STV), (ii) whether or not to introduce Māori wards and for some (iii) to undertake a representation arrangements review.
Consideration of the electoral system is required by 12 September 2020; consideration of Māori wards is optional and if to be established a resolution is required by 23 November 2020; and a representation arrangements review is not required until 2024 unless Māori wards are introduced, in which case a representation arrangements review would be required in 2021.
Whaarangi 2 | 9 M 2790170 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 23
Legislative Requirements - the history:
The LEA requires a local authority, when considering certain electoral matters, to comply with set requirements and timeframes. These are detailed in Appendix 1.
The dates contained in Appendix 1 are generally the last compliance dates and it is anticipated that most of the matters can be completed prior to these dates.
Electoral System
Council is required under section 27 of the LEA to consider every three years the electoral system to be used for the 2022 elections, by 12 September 2020.
Council has historically used the FPP electoral system and now has the opportunity to review the electoral system to be used for the 2022 elections.
For the 2019 triennial elections, 67 of 78 local authorities used the FPP electoral system, and 11 of 78 local authorities used the STV electoral system.
It is noted that currently all district health board elections must use the STV electoral system, however if the recent Simpson report on the future of district health boards is adopted, elections for district health board members may no longer be required.
A table comparing FPP and STV (as used in a territorial authority’s electoral system poll and approved by DIA) follows.
Whaarangi 3 | 9 M 2790170 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 24
3 THE ISSUES | NGĀ TAKE
The process that Council can follow to determine its electoral system is:
(i) Council can resolve which electoral system is to be used, with a required public notice;
(ii) Five per cent of electors can demand a poll at any time;
(iii) Council can choose to hold a poll, irrespective of whether or not a poll is demanded by electors.
Whaarangi 4 | 9 M 2790170 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 25
3.1 Council to resolve which electoral system is to be used
Council can resolve to retain the current electoral system (FPP) or resolve to change the electoral system to STV. Such a resolution must be made no later than 12 September 2020 (two years prior to the next triennial election) unless it decides to hold a poll of electors prior to the 2022 elections. Any such resolution changing the electoral system would take effect for the 2022 and 2025 elections, and continue in effect until either Council resolves otherwise, or a poll of electors is held.
3.2 Electors’ right to demand a poll
Under section 28 of the LEA, Council must give public notice, by 19 September 2020, of the right of electors to demand a poll on the electoral system to be used for the 2022 elections. If Council passes a resolution under section 27 of the LEA to change the electoral system from FPP to STV the public notice must include:
(a) notice of that resolution; and (b) a statement that a poll is required to countermand that resolution.
Section 29 of the LEA allows 5% of the electors enrolled at the previous triennial election to demand a binding poll be held on which electoral system is to be used for the next two triennial elections. The poll demand must be made in writing to the Chief Executive by a number of electors equal to or greater than 5% of the electors (717 electors) and can be made anytime, but to be effective for the 2022 elections, must be made by 21 February 2021.
If a valid demand for a poll is received after 21 February 2021, a poll must be held after 21 May 2021 (e.g. with the 2022 elections), the outcome effective for the 2025 and 2028 elections.
3.3 Council may decide to hold a poll of electors
Council can decide to hold a poll of electors at any time (section 31 of the LEA), but to be effective for the 2022 elections, must decide no later than 21 February 2021, irrespective of whether a valid demand has been received, or the time has expired for electors to demand a poll.
Public notice of the poll must be given as soon as practicable after the resolution and the poll itself must be completed by 21 May 2021 (to be effective for the 2022 elections).
The result of the poll is binding and will determine whether FPP or STV is to be used for at least the next two triennial elections (2022, 2025) and for all subsequent elections until either a further resolution takes effect or a further poll is held.
The estimated cost of a stand-alone poll is $30-35,000 + GST.
3.4 Māori Wards
Council may consider (it is optional), under section 19Z of the LEA, whether or not to introduce Māori wards for the 2022 and 2025 elections, by 23 November 2020.
Should Māori wards be introduced, a formula to determine the number of Māori and general councillors is contained in Schedule 1A of the LEA and is:
nmm = mepd x nm mepd + gepd
Whaarangi 5 | 9 M 2790170 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 26
Where -
nmm = number Māori ward members mepd = Māori electoral population of district gepd = general electoral population of district nm = total number members
For the Hauraki District Council, the Māori electoral population is 2,874 and the general electoral population is 17,145 (as at the 2018 Census).
Assuming a total of 13 councillors (plus mayor) remain, the formula when populated would require two (1.87 rounded up to two) councillors elected from one or more Māori wards and 11 councillors elected from one or more general wards.
The process that Council can follow to consider Māori wards for 2022 and beyond is:
(i) Council may make a decision to introduce Māori wards, but if it does, public notice must be given;
(ii) five per cent of electors can demand a poll at any time;
(iii) Council may choose to hold a poll, irrespective of whether or not a poll is demanded by electors.
(I) COUNCIL TO RESOLVE TO ADOPT MĀORI REPRESENTATION
Council may resolve to introduce Māori wards for the next two triennial elections (2022, 2025). If it decides to introduce Māori wards in time for the 2022 elections, it must do so no later than 23 November 2020 (two years prior to the next triennial election), unless it decides to hold a poll of electors.
Any such resolution would take effect for the 2022 and 2025 elections, and continue in effect until either Council resolves otherwise, or a poll of electors is held. Council may also simply choose to do nothing, in which case no public notice is required.
(II) ELECTORS’ RIGHT TO DEMAND A POLL
If Council resolves to adopt Māori wards by 23 November 2020, it must give public notice of the right of electors to demand a poll on the matter. If Council passes a resolution under section 19Z of LEA to introduce Māori wards, the public notice must include: (a) notice of that resolution; and
(b) a statement that a poll is required to countermand that resolution.
Section 19ZB of the LEA allows 5% of the electors enrolled at the previous triennial election to demand a binding poll to be held on a proposal whether or not Māori wards is to be introduced for the next two triennial elections. The poll demand must be made in writing to the Chief Executive by a number of electors equal to or greater than 5% of the electors (717 electors) and can be made anytime, but to be effective for the 2022 elections, it must be made by 21 February 2021.
If a valid demand for a poll is received after 21 February 2021, a poll must be held after 21 May 2021 (e.g. with the 2022 elections), the outcome effective for the 2025 and 2028 elections.
Whaarangi 6 | 9 M 2790170 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 27 PUBLIC COPY NGATEA SERVICE CENTRE (III) COUNCIL MAY DECIDE TO HOLD A POLL OF ELECTORS
Council can also decide to hold a poll of electors at any time (but must decide no later than 21 February 2021 to be effective for the 2022 elections), irrespective of whether a valid demand has been received, or the time has expired for electors to demand a poll.
Public notice of the poll must be given as soon as practicable after the resolution and the poll itself must be completed by 21 May 2021 (to be effective for the 2022 elections).
The result of the poll is binding and will determine whether Māori wards are to be introduced for at least the next two triennial elections (2022, 2025), and subsequent elections until either a further resolution under section 19Z of the LEA takes effect or a further poll is held.
Consultation with Māori on whether Māori wards is desirable should be undertaken. For some local authorities, such consultation has resulted in Māori wards not being introduced, with Māori advising there are better ways of achieving representation for their people (for example Māori Standing Committees or Iwi Partnership models e.g. Rotorua District Council/Te Arawa Partnership).
3.5 Representation Arrangements Review
A representation arrangements review must be undertaken at least once every six years (section 19H of the LEA). The last review was undertaken in 2018, and accordingly a review is not required until 2024, unless Māori wards are to be introduced and a representation arrangements review is required in 2021 (clause 1, Schedule 1A of LEA).
Should a representation arrangements review be required in 2021, key dates would be:
• 1 July 2020 – 28 February 2021: informal consultation can occur to assist Council in determining their initial proposal
• 1 March 2021 – 31 August 2021: - consideration of review scenarios - making an initial proposal
• by 8 September 2021: public notice of the initial proposal made, call for submissions
• by 8 October 2021: one-month submission period
• by 19 November 2021: - submissions heard - final proposal determined - public notice of final proposal made, call for appeals/objections
• by 20 December 2021: one-month appeal/objection period • by 15 January 2022: if any appeal/objection received, to Local Government Commission • by 11 April 2022: determination from Local Government Commission
Whaarangi 7 | 9 M 2790170 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 28
4 ENGAGING WITH OUR COMMUNITIES | KIA UIA TE HAPORI WHĀNUI
Staff consider that the Council does have enough of an understanding of community views and preferences on this matter. The level of engagement considered appropriate for this matter now is to inform (i.e. one-way communication disseminating information).
5 Approval
Prepared by Steve Fabish Group Manager - Community Services and Development
Approved by Langley Cavers Chief Executive
Whaarangi 8 | 9 M 2790170 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 29
APPENDIX A
Whaarangi 9 | 9 M 2790170 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 30
FOR DECISION | MŌ TE WHAKATAUNGA
TO Mayor and Councillors
AUTHOR Steve Fabish Group Manager - Community Services and Development
FILE REFERENCE Document: 2788095 Appendix A: 2788126 - Invitation Appendix B: 2788152 - Terms of Reference Appendix C: 2788153 - Code of Conduct PORTFOLIO HOLDER Mayor Toby Adams
MEETING DATE Wednesday, 29 July 2020
SUBJECT Appointment to Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee
SUMMARY | TE WHAKARĀPOPOTANGA
Council has historically appointed elected members to a number of external committees. The Chair of the River and Catchment Committee has written to invite Council to appoint an elected member to the Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee. The Terms of Reference of the Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee provides for one elected member from each of Hauraki District Council, Matamata Piako District Council, South Waikato District Council and Thames Coromandel District Council (who may each appoint one or more alternate).
The subcommittee meets 3 times per calendar year to provide input to river and catchment management activities and operations.
This report requests Council to make an appointment to the Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee.
The decision is not considered to be a significant decision.
RECOMMENDATION | TE WHAIKUPU
THAT the report be received, and
THAT Council appoints Councillor Phillip Buckthought (and Councillor Rodney Garrett as alternative) to be the Hauraki District Council representative to the Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee.
PURPOSE | TE ARONGA
The purpose of this report is to allow Council to consider the appointment of the Mayor to the Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee. The matter or suggested decision does involve a new activity, service, programme, project, expenditure or other deliverable. Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 31
BACKGROUND | TE KŌRERO Ā MUA
The Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee has been established by the Waikato Regional Council to ensure effective input from valued community members and stakeholders, and is targeted at the region’s most significant regional flood protection and land drainage infrastructure. The Advisory Subcommittees’ role is to provide local advice to the River and Catchment Management Committee and receive information pertaining to Council’s catchment operational work programme. It will also provide input into a proposed annual work programme and budget, review flood protection schemes, review levels of service and any other matters that will affect the operation, maintenance and renewal of scheme infrastructure plus provide input into priority areas for catchment management investment for the Waihou-Piako. The Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee makes recommendations to the WRC River and Catchment Management Committee.
The 2020 committee dates have been set to be held at their Te Aroha office - Diprose Miller Board Room, (53-61 Whitaker Street Te Aroha) from 10am on Wednesday 12th August and Thursday 5th November.
PREFERRED OPTION | TE KŌWHIRINGA MATUA
Council can either decline or accept the recommendation. The Mayor recommends that the appointment be approved.
ENGAGING WITH OUR COMMUNITIES | TĀTOU WHAKĀRO
Staff consider that the Council does have enough of an understanding on community views and preferences. The level of engagement considered appropriate for this matter, at this point in time, is to inform (i.e. one-way communication disseminating information).
Approval
Prepared by John McIver Community Engagement Manager | Kaiwhakahaere Hononga Hapori Approved by Steve Fabish Group Manager – Community Services and Development | Pouwhakahaere – Ratonga Papori me Whakahiato
Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 32
Appendix A
File No: 03 02 00 Document No: 16634950 Enquiries to: Laura Van Veen
9 July 2020
His Worship Mayor Toby Adams Email: [email protected]
Dear Toby
Letter of invitation to join the Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee
Following Council’s decision late last year to disestablish our catchment and land drainage committees, Council, at its meeting held on 28 May 2020, have now decided to establish four separate Advisory Subcommittees with advisory powers to its River and Catchment Management Committee. This was to ensure effective input from valued community members and stakeholders which is targeted at our most significant regional flood protection and land drainage infrastructure.
Under the newly confirmed Advisory Subcommittee structure, two advisory subcommittees were confirmed to meet on matters relevant to the council’s flood protection programmes in the Lower Waikato and Waihou-Piako zones. Two drainage advisory subcommittees were also established in each of the Waikato and Thames Valley catchments. In confirming the establishment of these Subcommittee’s, Council supported the recommendation that the continued contribution of the Hauraki District Council would be critical to the success of the Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee.
Therefore, I would like to officially invite the Hauraki District Council to appoint an elected member of its Council to the Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee. To assist, I have attached the agreed Terms of Reference which outlines the scope of activity and administration framework that the Advisory Subcommittee will operate within. Also attached is the Waikato Regional Council’s Code of Conduct document to provide a better idea of what is expected of a Subcommittee member. Please email Laura Van Veen, Democracy Advisor at [email protected] with the appointed elected member contact details (including email address) once your council has made the appointment.
The first meeting of 2020 is scheduled to be held on Wednesday 12 August 2020 from 10am to 12.30pm at Diprose Miller Board Room, 53-61 Whitaker Street, Te Aroha. The second meeting of 2020 is scheduled for Thursday 5 November 2020 at the same time and location. Once you have confirmed your council’s confirmed appointee, a calendar meeting invite will follow. If your appointee is ever unable to attend meetings, we would appreciate a reply email to Laura Van Veen, Democracy Advisory at [email protected] advising us of this and (if applicable) advising of an alternate who you would like to attend in your place.
Doc # 0 1
Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 33
Please advise by Friday 24 July 2020 who Council’s appointee is, and also that person’s availability to attend this first meeting.
I look forward to your response and support.
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours faithfully
Cr Stuart Husband Chair – River and Catchment Management Committee
Doc # 0 2
Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 34
Appendix B
Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittees
REPORTING TO: River and Catchment Management Committee
CONSTITUTION: Chair, River and Catchment Management Committee Waikato Regional Council Constituent Councillors geographically aligned to the respective scheme area Targeted ratepayers, iwi, and stakeholders from the relevant scheme area(s), appointed by the River and Catchment Management Committee.
Refer to membership schedule below.
MEETING FREQUENCY: Three meetings per calendar year, for each of:
Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee Lower Waikato Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee
OBJECTIVE: To provide advice and effective liaison between river and catchment ratepayers, iwi and stakeholders in relation to the operational performance of flood protection assets in the scheme area.
QUORUM: Chair or Deputy Chair of the subcommittee and two members of the subcommittee, with at least one being an elected member of Waikato Regional Council.
SCOPE OF ACTIVITY:
1. The Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittees each have an assigned geographical area of interest and their role is to provide local advice to the River and Catchment Management Committee and receive information pertaining to Council’s catchment operational work programme. Specifically, to:
a. Provide input to river and catchment management activities and operations including the following: • Proposed annual work programmes and budgets for the (relevant) scheme • Flood protection scheme reviews, level of service reviews, and any other matters that will affect the operation, maintenance and renewal of scheme infrastructure • Priority areas for catchment management investment.
b. Assist Waikato Regional Council with dissemination of flood protection scheme information.
POWER TO ACT:
The subcommittee’s power to act is limited to the following activities that support its advisory function: Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 35
1. To complete meeting related procedural matters. 2. To receive information on the progress of operational work programmes undertaken as part of the flood scheme asset maintenance and capital renewals. 3. To receive information on emerging issues affecting flood protection scheme performance. 4. To make recommendations as set out below.
The subcommittee has no other power to act.
POWER TO RECOMMEND:
1. To provide advice to the River and Catchment Management Committee in relation to the flood protection work programmes and asset management in support of the development of annual and long-term plans. 2. To provide advice to the River and Catchment Management Committee on any work programme adjustments, that may be necessary, in relation to the progress of operational work programmes undertaken as part of the flood scheme asset maintenance and capital renewals. 3. To provide advice to the River and Catchment Management Committee on any emerging issues affecting flood protection scheme performance, in order that the River and Catchment Management Committee may consider a response.
MEMBERSHIP SCHEDULE
Lower Waikato Flood Protection Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Advisory Subcommittee: Subcommittee: The Chair – Chair of the River and Catchment The Chair – Chair of the River and Catchment Management Committee Management Committee Deputy Chair – As appointed by the Deputy Chair – As appointed by the subcommittee subcommittee Waikato Regional Council Constituents for Waikato Regional Council Constituents for the Lower Waikato zone the Waihou Constituent area Eight landowner targeted ratepayers which Eight landowner targeted ratepayers, which must include two land drainage targeted must include: ratepayers from the Waikato Land Drainage Advisory Subcommittee area (Waikato • Two Waihou scheme ratepayers drainage ratepayers). In the event that • Two Piako scheme ratepayers, and appointment of two Waikato drainage • Two land drainage targeted ratepayers ratepayers is not possible, then the Waikato from the Thames Valley Land Drainage Land Drainage Advisory Subcommittee will Advisory Subcommittee area (Thames be invited to nominate two of its members Valley drainage ratepayers). In the to also be members of the Lower Waikato event that appointment of two Thames Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee Valley drainage ratepayers is not following endorsement by the River and possible, then the Thames Valley Land Catchment Management Committee. Drainage Advisory Subcommittee will be invited to nominate two of its members to also be members of the Waihou-Piako Flood Protection Advisory Subcommittee following endorsement by the River and Catchment Management Committee. Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 36
One energy company representative (who Four Iwi representatives, one nominated by may appoint one or more alternate) each of Hauraki Māori Trust Board, Raukawa, Ngāti Hinerangi and Ngāti Haua (who may each appoint one or more alternate) One appointee from the Department of One appointee from the Dept of Conservation (who may appoint one or more Conservation (who may appoint one or more alternate) alternate) Four Iwi representatives nominated by One elected member from each of Hauraki Waikato-Tainui (who may each appoint one District Council, Matamata Piako District or more alternate) Council, South Waikato District Council and Thames Coromandel District Council (who may each appoint one or more alternate) One elected member Waikato District Council (who may appoint one or more alternate)
APPOINTMENT AND TERM OF SERVICE
1. Members are appointed for a term commencing on 1 July following each Regional Council election and concluding on the completion of each trienniumi (a period of approximately 28 months). Members may be reappointed for any number of subsequent terms. Landowner members are selected by Waikato Regional Council from expressions of interest. Candidates must meet the following criteria: a. Be regional ratepayers within, or having a responsibility for, the geographical area represented by the Advisory Group. b. Be willing to accept membership as a volunteer without compensation.
2. A candidate’s special interests may be taken into account when selecting landowner members. 3. The Chair will be held by the Chair of the River and Catchment Management Committee. The Deputy Chair may be any other member and will be appointed by resolution of the Subcommittee in accordance with Standing Orders. 4. Members who do not complete their term of appointment may be replaced at the discretion of either Waikato Regional Council or the authority they represent. 5. Waikato Regional Council may review the membership of the Subcommittee at any time. 6. Territorial authority, agency and Iwi membership is determined by the appointing authority(ies)
MEETING FREQUENCY AND OPERATION
1. There are three meetings held per year.
2. Meetings are advised by public notice. Agendas for the meetings are be compiled by staff in consultation with the Chair, River and Catchment Management Committee.
3. Members may request items to be placed on the Agenda for future meetings provided these are within the scope of these Terms of Reference.
4. A quorum is described above.
Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 37
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
1. Members must bring to the attention of the Chair any conflict of interest or potential conflict they may have with any item on the agenda. All relevant interests must be disclosed and kept up to date on a register of interests.
2. If a member is deemed to have a real or perceived conflict of interest in a matter that is being considered at a meeting, he/she will be excused from discussions, deliberations and voting on the issue.
3. Members must behave professionally during meetings and in accordance with the Waikato Regional Council Code of Conduct.
Advisory Note: being a landowner and scheme beneficiary does not constitute a conflict of interest.
CONFIDENTIALITY
1. During the course of the business of the Subcommittee, a member will, from time to time, be privy to confidential information. Any confidential information is protected and should not be disclosed until such time as it is released by Council.
2. The spokesperson for the Group is the Chair.
3. Except as otherwise allowed or required by law, the meetings are open to the public. Members may express their individual views on agenda matters. Members must avoid giving the impression that their individual views are necessarily those of Council.
COMMUNICATION AND REPORTING
1. The line of communication between Waikato Regional Council staff and the Subcommittee members will be through the constituent councillor.
2. Issues or actions arising from Subcommittee meetings are responded to by the Chair, River and Catchment Management Committee.
3. All formal communication and information updates to members are circulated electronically.
TERMS OF REFERENCE REVIEW
1. Waikato Regional Council may review this Terms of Reference at any time if it considers circumstances or its community collaboration processes have changed.
1 Trienniums normally commence in October and end in October 3 years (36 months) later.
i Trienniums normally commence in October and end in October 3 years (36 months) later. Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 38
Appendix C
Waikato Regional Council
Code of Conduct for external members appointed by Waikato Regional Council to Standing Committees and Subcommittees
Prepared by Waikato Regional Council July 2018
Doc # 12446448 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 39
Table of Contents
Part One : Introduction 1 x Objectives of the Code of Conduct 1 x Adoption of the Code 1 x Review of the Code 1 x General principles of good governance 2
Part Two : Roles and responsibilities 3 x External members 3 x Committee and subcommittee chair 3 x Deputy chair 4 x Meeting attendance 4
Part Three : General principles of conduct 5 x Relationships with other members 5 x Relationships with councillors 5 x Relationships with staff 5 x Relationships with the regional community 5 x Contact with the media 6 x Meeting decisions 6 x Confidential information 6 x Conflicts of interest 7 x Standing Orders 7 x Ethics
Part Four : Compliance and complaints 9
Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 40
Part One : Introduction
Waikato Regional Council (Council) has adopted a committee and subcommittee structure that provides for external membership which may include: x other councils’ representatives x key stakeholder representatives
External members are appointed by Council via public nomination or a ballot process. They are accountable to Council and the regional community. This Code sets out the standards of behaviour expected of external members in their dealings with: x other members of Council’s committees and subcommittees x Councillors x Council Chief Executive and staff x the public x iwi x the media.
Objectives of this Code of Conduct
The objectives of this Code of Conduct are to enhance mutual trust, respect, and tolerance among the committee and subcommittee members, and between members and those people with whom they interact in the course of their duties. This Code of Conduct aims to improve the effectiveness of the committees and subcommittees to support Council in its responsibility to provide good governance of the Waikato region.
This Code of Conduct seeks to achieve its objectives by recording: x an agreed statement of roles and responsibilities (Part Two of the Code) x agreed general principles of conduct (Part Three of the Code) x compliance requirements and procedures to manage complaints x sanctions that may be imposed if this Code is breached.
Adoption of the Code
This Code of Conduct is intended to provide guidance to external members in their relationships and the exercising of their functions and duties. It reflects the requirements of the Code of Conduct for Elected Members of Waikato Regional Council and provisions contained in the Local Government Act, the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and other relevant legislation and Council Standing Orders.
Compliance with this Code of Conduct is mandatory for all external members.
Review of the Code
Once adopted, this Code of Conduct for external members appointed by Waikato Regional Council continues in force until amended by Council. The Code can be amended at any time but cannot be revoked unless the Council replaces it with another Code.
Doc #1798917 Page 1 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 41
General principles of good governance
This Code of Conduct is based on the following general principles of good governance:
Public interest: External members serve the relevant sector interests of the Waikato region or the zone or area covered by the committee or subcommittee. They must never improperly confer an advantage or disadvantage on any one person or organisation.
Honesty and integrity: External members must not place themselves in situations where their honesty and integrity is in question.
Objectivity: External members must make decisions based on merit.
Accountability: External members are accountable for their actions and the manner in which they carry out their responsibilities.
Personal judgement: External members must take account of the views of others but reach their own conclusions on the issues before them, and act in accordance with those conclusions.
Respect for others: External members must promote equality and must not discriminate unlawfully against any person. They must treat people with respect, regardless of their race, age, religion, gender, sexual orientation or disability. They must respect the impartiality and integrity of Council staff.
Duty to uphold the law: External members must uphold the law and, on all occasions, act in accordance with the trust the Council and public place in them.
Doc #1798917 Page 2 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 42
Part Two : Roles and responsibilities
This part of this Code describes the roles and responsibilities of external members, and the additional roles of the committee or subcommittee chair and deputy chair.
External members
Members, acting as the committee or subcommittee, are responsible for: x representing the relevant sector interests of the residents and ratepayers of the Waikato region or the zone or area covered by the committee or subcommittee x recommendations to committee or Council that relate to development of work programmes and budgets, asset management plans, strategies, planning studies, submissions, and proposed new policy or policy amendments x general oversight and monitoring of work programmes and activities in nominated areas x assisting as appropriate in the implementation of programmes x providing committees and Council with advice and assistance x being a local contact for issues relating to the committee or subcommittee, including involvement with local groups to facilitate the flow of information between ratepayers and staff.
No individual member (including the chair) has authority to act on behalf of the committee or subcommittee unless the Council has expressly delegated such authority. No member may exceed or purport that they have the power to exceed their given authority.
External members, as individuals, must take responsibility for complying with the requirements of this Code of Conduct.
Committee or subcommittee chair
The appointment of a committee or subcommittee chair is recommended by the committee or subcommittee and confirmed by Council. The chair shares the same responsibilities as other members of the committee or subcommittee. In addition, the chair has the following roles: x Presiding member at meetings. The chair is responsible for ensuring the orderly conduct of business during meetings (as determined in Standing Orders) and that the committee or subcommittee acts within the powers delegated by Council (as set out in the committee’s or subcommittee’s terms of reference). x An advocate for the community. This role involves promoting the community and representing its interests with the support of the committee or subcommittee. x A leader and provider of feedback to other members with regard to teamwork, and monitoring of members’ compliance with this Code.
Some subcommittee chairs are voting members of Council’s relevant standing committee (for example Integrated Catchment Management Committee). In the event that they are unable to attend the standing committee meeting, they must advise their deputy chair as soon as possible so the deputy can attend in their place.
The Chair follows the same rules as other members with respect to making public statements and committing the committee or subcommittee to a particular course of action.
Doc #1798917 Page 3 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 43
Deputy chair
The deputy chair is recommended by the committee or subcommittee and confirmed by Council. The deputy chair exercises the same roles as other members. If the chair is absent or incapacitated, the deputy chair performs all of the responsibilities of, has the same duties as, and exercises the same powers as, the chair (as summarised above).
Meeting attendance
All external members are expected to attend and participate in all meetings and workshops, unless they have submitted an apology or obtained a leave of absence in advance for non-attendance. From time to time, working parties may be established by the committee or subcommittee to achieve specific outcomes.
External members will also attend community meetings and public forums as members and must behave in accordance with this Code during those attendances.
If an external member is absent from three consecutive committee or subcommittee meetings without an approved leave of absence or accepted apology, the member is deemed to have abandoned or vacated the position. Having noted this ‘resignation’ Council may then determine an appropriate course of action with respect to the vacancy. What is appropriate will depend on the particular committee or subcommittee, the point in the term of office cycle, the knowledge, expertise and stakeholder linkages involved, and other case by case considerations. It could involve: x leaving the position vacant until the next appointment process x calling for nominations to fill the vacancy x appointing the next most preferred person from the most recent nomination process x appointing a person identified by Council as meeting the position profile and requirements.
Doc #1798917 Page 4 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 44
Part Three : General principles of conduct
This part of this Code sets out standards of behaviour.
Relationships with other members
Successful teamwork is a critical element in the success of any organisation. No team will be effective unless mutual respect exists between members. With this in mind, committee and subcommittee members must conduct their dealings with each other in ways that: x maintain confidence in the role to which they have been appointed x are open and honest x focus on issues rather than personalities x avoid aggressive, offensive or abusive conduct.
Every member must act in good faith in relation to other members. Member must not make frivolous, partisan or political complaints. Nor should any member communicate to the media the existence or details of a complaint made under this Code unless a decision to do so has been made by Council.
Relationships with councillors
A successful relationship between members of committees and subcommittees and all regional councillors, including those who are not members of the committee or subcommittee, enhances the credibility and accountability of Council within its region. The relationship requires mutual respect and consideration. External members must not compromise the integrity of councillors or attempt to undermine their credibility.
Relationships with staff
The effective performance of a committee or subcommittee requires a high level of co-operation and mutual respect between members and staff. External members must: x recognise that the Chief Executive is the employer (on behalf of Council) of all Council employees, and as such only the Chief Executive may hire, dismiss, instruct or censure an employee x treat all employees with courtesy and respect (including the avoidance of aggressive, offensive or abusive conduct towards employees) x observe any guidelines that the Chief Executive puts in place regarding contact with employees x not do anything which compromises, or could be seen as compromising, the impartiality of an employee x avoid publicly criticising any employee in any way, but especially in ways that reflect on the competence and integrity of the employee x raise concerns about employees only with the Chief Executive, and concerns about the Chief Executive only with Council’s Chair or Deputy Chair.
Failure to observe this portion of this Code of Conduct may compromise the Council’s obligations to act as a good employer, and may expose the Council to civil litigation and audit sanctions.
Relationships with the regional community
Effective Council, committee and subcommittee decision-making depends on productive relationships between members and the community at large and as such, external members must act
Doc #1798917 Page 5 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 45
in a manner that encourages and values community involvement. External members must ensure that community members are accorded respect in their dealings with committees and subcommittees and have their concerns listened to.
External members must: x deal with members of the community in a fair, equitable and honest manner x be available to listen and respond to community concerns, but avoid promising things the member cannot deliver x strive to understand different points of view within the community x bring concerns expressed by the community to the attention of the designated committee or subcommittee staff or to the committee or subcommittee as appropriate. x consider all relevant interests.
Contact with the media
The media plays an important part in local democracy. To fulfil this role the media needs access to accurate, timely information about the activities of Council and its committees and subcommittees. Members may be approached to comment on a particular issue. This part of this Code deals with the rights and duties of external members when speaking to the media.
The following rules apply to contact with the media on behalf of Council and its committees and subcommittee: x Council’s Chair or Chief Executive are the first points of contact for official views on any issue. Where the Chair is absent, matters may be referred to Council’s Deputy Chair or relevant standing committee chair. x Council’s Chair or Chief Executive may refer any matter to the relevant committee or subcommittee chair for comment. x No external member may comment on behalf of the committee or subcommittee without having first obtained the Council Chair’s approval.
External members may express a personal view in the media at any time, provided: x media comments do not expressly or by implication purport to represent the Council or a committee or subcommittee’s view x confidential information is not disclosed or the impartiality or integrity of fellow members, councillors or staff compromised x Council, committee or subcommittee’s policy is not undermined.
Meeting decisions
Every external member who has the right to speak can lawfully express his or her opinion at any committee or subcommittee meeting within the limits imposed by Standing Orders. These meetings are open to the media and the comments may be reported.
Confidential information
In the course of their duties external members may receive reports containing information that is confidential. This will generally be committee or subcommittee information that is either commercially sensitive or is personal to a particular individual or organisation. External members must not use confidential information for any purpose other than the purpose for which the information was supplied to the member.
Committee or subcommittee business conducted where the public is excluded remains confidential and must not be disclosed to anyone outside the committee or subcommittee until either the
Doc #1798917 Page 6 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 46
committee or subcommittee decides by resolution to make it public or the Chief Executive determines (in response to a request under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, or the Privacy Act 1993), that there is no longer good reason to withhold it under the legislation.
Conflicts of interest
External members must be careful that they maintain a clear separation between their personal interests and their duties as members. This is to ensure that people who fill positions of authority carry on their duties free from bias (whether real or perceived).
Conflicts of interest include: x a pecuniary interest in the matter before the committee or subcommittee, which gives rise to a presumption that there is a conflict with the member’s duties. The pecuniary interest may be direct or indirect and involve either financial gain or financial loss. x non-pecuniary interests that may give rise to an actual or perceived conflict between personal interests and the member’s duties. These may be interests or relationships arising out of kinship, marriage, domestic relationships, wider family relationships, employment or membership of community, professional or industry sector organisations.
External members must take a precautionary approach to all conflicts of interest. In a case of doubt a member should withdraw. Members withdrawing must (to protect of their own and the committee or subcommittee’s interests) ensure that their actions are appropriately recorded.
The issue of conflicts of interest is a difficult one for members. Issues may arise at short notice. Matters which seem straightforward at the outset can become less clear as a matter progresses. Vigilance by members is required. While the decision to withdraw from debate or voting is ultimately a matter for the member alone, members should seek guidance and assistance from their colleagues.
Standing Orders External members must adhere to the Standing Orders adopted by Council. At meetings members may to use the provision of Standing Orders to raise a point of order to draw attention to and get a ruling on issues at the meeting that this Code covers, including the behaviour of members. Matters of behaviour in relation to meeting conduct may be the subject of a complaint under the Code.
Ethics
Council promotes the highest standards of ethical conduct amongst its members. Accordingly, external members must: x claim only for legitimate expenses as set out in Council policy x not influence, or attempt to influence, any Council employee to take actions that may benefit the member, or the member’s family or business interests.
Acceptance of substantial gifts, favours or hospitality may be construed as a bribe or perceived as undue influence. The offer and receipt of substantial gifts, including special occasion goodwill gifts, must be reported to the Chief Executive. Working meals and social occasions should be undertaken in an appropriate and reasonable manner.
To ensure that external members meet and are seen to be meeting their ethical obligations, the following principles apply to the receipt of gifts:
Doc #1798917 Page 7 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 47
External members may: x accept any gifts, hospitality or benefits that have an estimated value of less than $100 (including GST) provided that acceptance could not be perceived as a means of influencing a committee, subcommittee or Council decision making process x take part in committee or subcommittee working meals and social occasions as part of their duties as a member and in compliance with the requirements of this Code.
External Members must not: x solicit, demand or request, by any means, gifts, hospitality or benefits by virtue of their position x accept gifts, hospitality or benefits that have an estimated value of more than $100 (including GST), without recording the acceptance in the Council’s publicly available Gifts and Invitations Register x accept any offer of money under any circumstance x abuse the advantages of their position for personal gain.
Gifts that fall outside this policy must either to be refused, or where they can be, accepted and given to Council. The Council’s Chair and Deputy Chair may jointly authorise that gifts be accepted where they fall outside this policy and where it is reasonable in their view to do so.
Doc #1798917 Page 8 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 48
Part 4: Compliance and complaints
Compliance with the Code is mandatory for all external members of committees and subcommittees. Complaints under the Code may only be made by members of committees and subcommittees or by regional Councillors.
Where such a complaint is received, the response must accord with the principals of natural justice. This means that Council must act in a manner that is fair to the parties involved. The process that is to be followed and outcome will be determined by Council’s Chair (or Council’s Deputy Chair in the Chair’s absence) taking into account the nature of the complaint, but will meet the following requirements unless exceptional circumstances demand otherwise: x The complaint must be: x taken seriously and acted on promptly to achieve a resolution as a priority x treated with the level of privacy and confidentiality appropriate in the circumstances x provided to the member who is alleged to have breached the Code (respondent) x Enquiries must be made to establish the facts: x The respondent must be given the opportunity to respond. x All enquiries must be relevant to the complaint and its resolution.
Where possible, complaints must be resolved as informally and privately as possible taking into account Council’s responsibility to ensure that: x the principles of risk management are considered in its response; x the response is proportional to the issues raised in the complaint; and x issues are resolved at the lowest possible level.
Council’s Chair may refer the complaint to the appropriate authority if the complaint concerns a breach of law.
Where possible the following process will apply, except if Council’s Chair determines there are circumstances which require a different process be followed.
Doc #1798917 Page 9 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 49
Having considered the complaint, Council’s Chair will determine what action is required which may include, without limitation, the following options:
x dismissal of a member from a position as a chair or deputy chair x an invitation for the member to consider resigning from the committee or subcommittee x censure x removal of the member from committees, subcommittees or other bodies to which they have been appointed x a vote of no confidence in the member x removal of certain council-funded privileges x restricted entry to council offices x suspension (rather than removal) from committees, subcommittees or other bodies x education x mentoring x request or requirement for an apology.
Doc #1798917 Page 10 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 50
FOR DECISION MŌ TE WHAKATAUNGA
TO Mayor and Councillors
AUTHOR Michelle Matich Regulatory Services Team Leader
FILE REFERENCE Document: MDN: 2789088
PORTFOLIO HOLDER/S P Milner
MEETING DATE 29 July 2020
SUBJECT Section 10A Report to the Department of Internal Affairs - Dog Control – 2019/2020 Year
SUMMARY | TE WHAKARĀPOPOTANGA
This report has been written to provide Council the report that is required annually by the Department of Internal affairs. The report provides information and statistics for the year 01 July 2019 to 30 June 2020. It is to be noted in this period reported on that Covid 19 occurred and is still occurring.
Whaarangi 1 | 7 M 27889088 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 51
RECOMMENDATION | TE WHAIKUPU
THAT the report be received.
THAT pursuant to section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996, the Hauraki District Council report on Dog Control Policy and Practices for 2019/2020 be adopted and forwarded to the Department of Internal Affairs.
1 PURPOSE | TE ARONGA
Section 10A of the 2003 amendment to the Dog Control Act 1996 requires Council to report to Central Government on its Dog Control Policy and Practices for the period 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020. Once Council has adopted the report, public notice must be given of the report and a copy.
2 BACKGROUND | TE KŌRERO Ā MUA
Council has responsibilities for dog registration and animal control and aims to promote public safety, responsible dog ownership and the welfare of dogs. It has a statutory requirement to be involved in the Animal Control activity with a particular emphasis on:
dog registration systems and implementation, education of dog owners and the public, development and review of animal control bylaws and policies, public safety, enforcement of dog control issues to minimise danger, distress or nuisance from dogs, the provision and maintenance of pounds, impounding of wandering dogs, and prosecution of offenders.
The Dog Control Act 1996 is the legislation governing the control of dogs in the District. In order to enforce this Act the Council has a Dog Control Policy, as well as the Public Safety section of the Consolidated Bylaw, which in part pertains to restrictions imposed on dog owners.
The Dog Control Act 1996 provides for the impounding of dogs and the prosecution of their owners (when necessary). At present, the Council contracts out its Animal Control responsibilities except for administration and billing. The current contract for Animal Control includes the control of dogs and the warden duties required to implement the Consolidated Bylaw with respect to Whiritoa Beach. The private company employs two (2) full time animal control officers. The contractor provides a 24 hour, 7 days a week service. Animal Control issues such as wandering dogs are notified to the Council offices and these are then dealt with by the contractor and Council staff as necessary. The Council currently operates a dog pound in Paeroa.
Whaarangi 2 | 7 M 27889088 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 52
Levels of Service
Community Method of Levels of Service Baseline Targets 2012 - 2022 Outcome measurement
Council will ensure compliance with the Dog Control legislation and consolidated bylaw to provide public safety. Measure: All known dogs in the Registration 100% 100% of known dogs District are registered records 2018/19 registered. annually. Measure: 100% of complaints Dog attack complaints Contractor’s 100% responded to within are responded to within monthly report 2018/19 two hours. two hours. Dog and stock owners are aware of their rights and responsibilities.
The level of service targets were fully achieved for the period.
Dog Registration and Control Information and Statistics:
Registration Fees Dog registration fees cover one year from 1 July until 30 June. The following fees applied from 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020. Fee (incl Fee If Paid After 31 Dog Owner Classification GST) July General Dogs - Entire $100.00 $150.00 General Dogs - De-sexed * Vet Certificate required $75.00 $112.50 ROL (Responsible Owner Licence) Dog - Entire $57.00 Loss of licence ROL Dog- De-sexed * Vet Certificate required $42.00 Loss of licence Dogs in excess of three (3) $35.00 $52.50 Dangerous Dogs - Entire $150.00 $225.00 Dangerous Dogs - De-sexed * Vet Certificate required $112.50 $168.75 Replacement Tag $5.00 Consent to keep more than two dogs in urban area $52.00 (Hauraki) ROL Scheme Application Fee $32.00
Dog Fees - Other Fee Replacement Tags $5.00 Impounding *First offence $70.00 *Second Offence $100.00 *Third Offence $160.00 Sustenance Fee (per day) $12.00 Microchipping fee for dogs released from the pound $47.00 ROL Scheme Application Fee $32.00
Whaarangi 3 | 7 M 27889088 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 53
Consent to keep more than two dogs (urban area) $52.00 Property Inspection Fee $25.00
Responsible Dog Owner Licensing We encourage dog owners to become Responsible Dog Owners by applying for Responsible Dog Owner License (ROL). ROL licensing allows dog owners a reduction in registration fees, if they can show a good history of dog control and registration payment, a securely fenced section and they are able to pass a Dog Control written examination.
Relationship with the SPCA Council staff and the contractors have continued a good working relationship with the SPCA and in particular with the Thames branch which re-homes abandoned dogs suitable for fostering to new owners.
Property Visits Over the last year 300 properties were inspected to locate any unregistered dogs.
Dog Attacks Over the last year the number of reported dog attacks on people has been similar to the previous year 17 compared with 16 the previous year, although up on reported dog attacks on other dogs/animals, with 31 this year, compared with 22 for the last year.
Lost & Roaming Dogs Roaming dogs are a district wide issue, which can frighten, intimidate or annoy others, in addition to attacking other animals and people. There has been a decrease from 261 in the previous year to 214 in the 2019/20 year in the number of complaints received regarding roaming dogs, which is pleasing.
Prosecutions Hauraki District Council prosecuted one dog owner, for a dog attack, the hearing was held in February 2020.
Infringements The number of infringement notices filed to Court this year is down compared with infringements filed to Court in the previous year.
Barking dogs There has been a significant decrease in the number of barking dog complaints, compared to last year being 167 and this year 93.
Statistics – 01 July 2019 – 30 June 2020
Number of registered dogs 4426 (4446) Number of probationary owners 7 (11) Number of disqualified owners 4 (4) Number of dogs classified as dangerous under Section 31 12 (10) § s.31 1(a) due to owner conviction 0 (0) § s.31 1(b) due to sworn evidence 12 (10) § s.31 1(c) due to owner admittance 0 (0) Number of dogs classified as menacing under Section 33A 55 (39)
§ s.33A 1(b)(i) observed or reported behaviour 55 (39)
Whaarangi 4 | 7 M 27889088 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 54
§ s.33A 1(b)(ii) characteristics associated with breed 0
Number of dogs classified as menacing under Section 33C 70 (75)
Number of infringement notices issued – for failing to register 129 (207) a dog.
Number of dog related complaints (Total) 456 (622) § Aggressive or rushing at fence 57 (52) § Barking dogs 93 (167) § Dog bites/attack on people 17 (16) § Dog bites/attack on animals 31 (22) § Bylaw breach (eg: dog fouling in public) 7 (3) § Miscellaneous (eg: unregistered, or other 45 (55) general complaints) § Wandering/Roaming dogs 214 (261) § Dogs worrying other animals 2 (2) Number of prosecutions (Infringements) 76 (116)
( ) – are the figures for the previous year of 2019/19
Levels of Service
Community Method of Levels of Service Baseline Targets 2012 - 2022 Outcome measurement
Council will ensure compliance with the Dog Control legislation and consolidated bylaw to provide public safety. Measure: All known dogs in the Registration 100% 100% of known dogs District are registered records 2018/19 registered. annually. Measure: 100% of complaints Dog attack complaints Contractor’s 100% responded to within are responded to within monthly report 2018/19 two hours. two hours. Dog and stock owners are aware of their rights and responsibilities.
The level of service targets were fully achieved for the period.
Whaarangi 5 | 7 M 27889088 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 55
3 NEXT STEPS | TE ARA KI MUA
Timeframe Action Comments
31/08/20 Send report to Department of Internal Affairs
31/08/20 Place as Public Notice
4 Approval
Prepared by Michelle Matich Regulatory Services Team Leader Approved by Peter Thom GM Planning and Environmental Services
Whaarangi 6 | 7 M 27889088 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 56
Whaarangi 7 | 7 M 27889088 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 57
FOR INFORMATION NGĀ MŌHIOTANGA
TO Mayor and Councillors
AUTHOR Chief Executive – Langley Cavers
FILE REFERENCE Document: 2777205 Appendix A: 2777210
MEETING DATE Wednesday, 29 July 2020
SUBJECT Chief Executives Monthly Report – July 2020
RECOMMENDATION | TE WHAIKUPU
THAT the report be received.
1 Staff
An internal appointment has been made to the position of Utilities Reticulation Specialist Serviceperson within the Construction and Maintenance Business Unit. Rob Wotherspoon has been promoted from his Senior Serviceperson (Utilities) role into the specialist position, effective from mid-July.
Meanwhile, the Serviceperson (Drainage) position remains vacant after a second attempt at recruitment.
Antonia Branson and Vanessa Brocklehurst join our Customer Services team for 6-month and 12-month fixed term positions respectively. Both Antonia and Vanessa assisted in Customer Liaison Officer roles during COVID-19 transitional levels. They will boost the team of Customer Services Advisors while permanent staff are on leave, starting 20 July.
Christine Laurenson is also starting with HDC on 20 July in the position of Office Assistant within the Community Services and Development Department. Christine worked for the Council briefly some years ago so we welcome her back into her new role, replacing Bronwyn Hole.
Diane Farmer left her role as Business Unit Assistant Administrator within the Construction and Maintenance Business Unit to take up a full-time position closer to her home town. Diane’s last day was 10th July.
Ruth Vivian heads off on parental leave at the end of July, with a fixed term appointment pending for her position of Project Officer.
David Fielden will have his last day as Economic Development Manager on 30 July after almost 8 years in the economic development role within the Community Services and Development Department.
Whaarangi 1 | 3 2777205 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 58
Lyn Randall has been appointed to a permanent position as Information Management Officer within the Corporate Services Department. Lyn had been undertaking a fixed term role, but was promoted to her new position effective from 24 June due to the vacancy created with the promotion of Anna Harris to Administration Officer – Animal and Food Control earlier in the year.
Julie Sweeney has been promoted into a newly created Human Resources Manager position as part of an internal structure review. Julie has been Human Resources Advisor for a number of years, and will now formally manage the HR and Health and Safety teams as part of the change.
We welcome Liam Haigh to the position of Assistant Engineer within the Technical Services Business Unit. Liam has now completed his Bachelor of Engineering through a scholarship programme with HDC, taking up his 2.5 year fixed term position in accordance with the terms of his scholarship.
As previously reported, Steve Fabish will have his last day in his capacity as Group Manager Community Services and Development on 14 August. Steve has been with HDC for 9 years in the Group Manager position.
2 Local Government New Zealand Remits
Attached as Appendix A for the members’ information and feedback are the remits that will be considered at the LGNZ AGM on 21 August 2020. The remits have been circulated ahead of the AGM to allow for members to consider these prior to the AGM.
The Mayor will represent Hauraki District at the AGM. Feedback on the remits from the members to provide guidance to the Mayor on voting is requested
3 Proposed Change to LGNZ Rules
Malcolm Alexander, Chief Executive of Local Government New Zealand, has given notice of a proposed rule change to the LGNZ Constitution that will be put to the upcoming AGM on the 21 August 2020.
At a recent week’s National Council meeting a resolution was passed proposing a change to LGNZ rules for consideration by the members. Rule K1 confers on the National Council the right to propose a rule change. Pursuant to Rule K4(b), a two-thirds majority of members voting at the AGM is required to pass a rule change proposal.
The Proposal
The proposed rule change would reduce the term limit on the office of the President from three terms to two terms (nine years to six years).
The term limit was last altered at the Special General Meeting in early 2014 when the term was increased to three terms from two terms.
The proposed rule change reads as follows:
Whaarangi 2 | 3 2777205 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 59
Proposal – Change the maximum number of consecutive terms of office of the President from 3 to 2:
1. Rule F15: Delete the word “three” from the first sentence and replace with the word “two” so that Rule F15 then reads:
“F15 No person may hold office as President for more than two consecutive terms, provided that any person who holds office as President by virtue of an appointment in accordance with Rules F27 to F32 is eligible for re-election at the end of the unexpired term of office of that person’s predecessor. For the avoidance of doubt, a term under this Rule does not include any period of office held by a President by virtue of an appointment in accordance with Rules F27 to F32.”
Members support or otherwise of the rule change is requested.
Langley Cavers Chief Executive
Whaarangi 3 | 3 2777205 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 60
APPENDIX A
2020 Annual General Meeting Remits
Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 61
1 Public transport support
Remit: That LGNZ: • Acknowledges the Government for its recognition during COVID-19 of public transport as an essential service; • Acknowledges the strong financial support provided by the Government through Waka Kotahi NZTA during the COVID-19 Alert Levels, that enabled councils to continue to provide public transport for people providing essential services and transport for the public to receive essential services up to 30 June 2020; • Recognises that councils will continue to be under significant financial pressure to maintain the viability of public transport under current FAR rate settings for many months during the recovery phase from COVID-19; and • Calls on the Government to work with councils to maintain the financial viability of public transport during the recovery phase of COVID-19.
Proposed by: Greater Wellington Regional Council
Supported by: LGNZ Regional Sector
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
The Remit is important as an acknowledgement to the Government from the Local Government sector for the strong support for public transport during the response to the COVID-19 pandemic emergency, and to reinforce the need for ongoing support during recovery from COVID-19 to ensure the financial viability of public transport in councils across New Zealand.
The Remit meets the tests for acceptance of a proposed Remit to the LGNZ AGM in that it addresses a major strategic “issue of the moment”, and it has a national focus articulating a major interest and concern at the national political level.
2 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 62
2. Background to its being raised
This Remit gives deserved acknowledgement to the Government for its strong support of public transport during the response phase to the COVID-19 pandemic emergency. We know from experience in China that recovery of patronage on public transport has been slow following the passing of the worst of COVID-19. The recovery phase from COVID-19 in New Zealand may take many months, and even years, based on current projections.
The Government through Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) required and funded the delivery of public transport (as an essential service) throughout the Alert Levels.
NZTA has also funded:
• The shortfall in revenue for bus, ferry and train operations; • The additional costs that resulted from COVID-19 such as cleaning, stickers and advertising collateral; and • The Total Mobility Service receiving a full subsidy for a taxi service up to $80 /trip until the end of June.
As at 11 June, we do not know what financial support will be available from the Government through NZTA for public transport beyond financial year 2020/2021. This Remit is calling for the Government to continue to work in partnership with councils to ensure the ongoing viability of public transport in the regions, cities, towns and communities across New Zealand.
3. New or confirming existing policy
This issue is not currently covered by existing LGNZ policy.
It is new policy, in so far as it relates to COVID-19 and the associated ongoing financial viability of public transport. One possible tool could be an increase in the appropriate Financial Assistance Rate (FAR) during the Recovery Phase from COVID-19.
4. How the issue relates to objectives in the current Work Programme
The issue directly relates to Issue “1. Infrastructure and Funding” of LGNZ’s “The six big issues for New Zealand councils, Our work, Our policy priorities”: https://www.lgnz.co.nz/our-work/ourpolicy-priorities/the-six-big-issues/
This also indirectly relates to LGNZ’s social priorities, as it is vital that public transport continues to be available to those in our communities who rely on it.
3 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 63
5. What work or action on the issue has been done and what was the outcome
Because of the speed by which the pandemic has become an issue, no work has been undertaken on this issue by either LGNZ or the proposer. Current government support has primarily been concerned with the need to sustain public transport through the immediate response or emergency phase. This Remit is concerned with the sustainability of public transport during the recovery and rebuild phase’s post-COVID-19.
6. Any existing relevant legislation, policy or practice
• Land Transport Management Act 2003 , no 118 (as at 22 October 2019): http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2003/0118/77.0/DLM226230.html • Draft Government Policy Statement on Land Transport, 2021/22 – 30/31 including Outcome “Inclusive Access” (which includes “access to work, education and healthcare”), and Outcome “Resilience and security” (which includes “recovering effectively from disruptive events”): https://www.transport.govt.nz/multimodal/keystrategiesandplans/gpsonlandtra nsportfunding/gps-2021/ • National Action Plan 3 “Unite Against COVID-19”, as of 23 April 2020, National Crisis Management Centre: https://uniteforrecovery.govt.nz/assets/resources/legislation-and-key- documents/COVID19-National-Action-Plan-3-as-of-22-April-extended.pdf
7. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone or Sector meeting
Zone and Sector Meetings have not been held during COVID-19 Alert Levels.
8. Suggested course of action envisaged
That the President of LGNZ write to the Minister of Transport and the Minister of Local Government, to convey the Remit and seek a meeting with the Ministers to discuss a joint work programme between the Government and councils (through LGNZ) on policy to maintain the financial viability of public transport during the recovery phase of COVID-19.
4 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 64
2 Housing affordability
Remit: That Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ): • Calls on the Government to introduce legislation that would fully enable councils to address housing affordability in their communities through a range of value uplift and capture tools, one such tool being ‘inclusionary zoning’; • Seeks to establish a working group on affordable housing, comprising of relevant/affected councils, central government (MHUD, Kāinga Ora, MSD), iwi, and the community housing sector; and • Advocates to central government for an affordable housing National Policy Statement to be developed.
Proposed by: Hamilton City Council and Christchurch City Council
Supported by: Tauranga City Council; Tasman District Council; Waipa District Council; South Waikato District Council; and Waitomo District Council
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
Many towns and cities in New Zealand are grappling with how to provide more affordable housing – dwellings that are affordable to buy or rent for households on low to median incomes with secure tenure.
A more joined-up response is necessary. This remit therefore calls for:
• A working group on affordable housing be established, comprising of relevant/affected councils, LGNZ, central government (MHUD, Kāinga Ora, MSD), iwi and the community housing sector; and • LGNZ to advocate to central government for an affordable housing National Policy Statement to be developed.
The remit also covers one specific proposal: inclusionary zoning.
Councils need more tools to enable them to respond to housing needs in their communities. One such tool is inclusionary zoning that seeks land or financial contributions from developers being vested to nominated housing land trusts.
5 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 65
While this is not commonplace in New Zealand currently, it is widespread in other major housing hotspots around the world including in parts of the United Kingdom, Australia and the United States.
The term inclusionary zoning refers to district plan rules that require a portion of new land development to be retained as affordable housing for people on low-to-moderate incomes. The theory of inclusionary zoning is that when land is up-zoned (for example, from rural to residential), it creates a significant uplift in value, and the community should share in the benefit of that uplift. This value uplift is enabled through council planning processes, including but not limited to private plan changes, granting of resource consents or council-initiated district plan rezoning under the Resource Management Act (RMA) process.
As an example of inclusionary zoning, a council’s district plan could require that land developers provide 5 per cent of titled sections from up-zoned land or on a specific unit threshold of consented residential development, or the equivalent monetary value, to a community housing trust. This land would then be retained on behalf of the community in perpetuity and used for affordable housing.
It is critical that government reinstate the ability to secure financial contributions as one of the options for local government funding for securing and providing a basis for a monetary contribution. This remit supports the Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 (RLAA) and its proposal to repeal the current provisions which stop the ability to secure contributions after April 2022.
An early form of inclusionary zoning was central to the early success of the Queenstown Lakes Community Housing Trust (QLCHT), enabling it to grow its housing stock significantly since it was established in 2007. Inclusionary zoning was a key tool for the Queenstown Lakes District Council (QLDC), utilised primarily for the period from 2006 through to 2013, ensuring that the Council could negotiate the inclusion of affordable housing through the planning process.
Although QLDC’s first inclusionary zoning plan change was settled in July 2013, Queenstown was subject to legal challenges in the Environment Court, High Court and Court of Appeal by some land developers during the period 2009-2013 on its plan change to add a set of objectives, policies and rules into its district plan. The settlement forced the Council to make its inclusionary zoning provisions a matter of assessment, rather than rule-based and mandatory, reducing the effectiveness of these provisions in addressing the District’s severe housing affordability issues. Today these provisions represent an inclusionary zoning opportunity that was not completely realised, having achieved only piecemeal and limited further contributions, facilitated through non-mandatory schemes and with limited certainty going forward.
Because of continuing acute housing affordability issues, the QLDC intends notifying new inclusionary zoning provisions in the next stage of its district plan review and is anticipating the same legal challenges and likely lengthy and costly appeals process.
6 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 66
The housing affordability challenge is wide ranging and complex. Inclusionary zoning is not the sole answer. However, it is a vital tool in enabling councils to secure a longer-term supply of land or funds in partnership with registered housing trusts and that legislation is needed to ensure inclusionary zoning can be applied consistently across the regions and minimise the risk of legal challenge.
For the avoidance of doubt, this remit proposes that councils have the clear legal opportunity in legislation to pursue inclusionary zoning. It would not be mandatory.
2. Background to its being raised
The Queenstown Lakes Community Housing Trust
In 2007, QLDC recognised a serious lack of affordable housing in its district and acted by forming the QLCHT. The trust is an independent, not-for-profit, community-owned organisation that maintains a strong relationship with the Council, with a shared goal of creating decent, secure housing for the community. The consensus to establish the QLCHT and develop planning tools to deliver affordable housing were two of 34 action items set out in the 2005 ‘Housing Our People in our Environment’ strategy, a significant milestone of council commitment to address its housing issues with local leadership, and central government participation and investment.
The Trust operates across the housing continuum. As at June 2019, it had assisted 130 households into their assisted ownership programmes, ten into rent-to-buy schemes and 34 into affordable rental properties. The Trust has over 600 households on its waiting list and has set the goal of providing 1,000 homes over the next ten years. This goal was reaffirmed though the October 2017 Mayoral Housing Affordability Task Force report.
QLDC negotiated its first inclusionary zoning agreement with a developer over 15 years ago. This resulted in a cash payment of over $5 million, which enabled the trust to buy a large piece of land and build its first development in an affordable subdivision of Queenstown. Since then, subsequent agreements with developers have delivered residential land valued at over $12 million to the Trust, with some further cash contributions.
This remit suggests that the approach taken by QLDC has been one of the few effective approaches in the country in capturing and retaining value uplift for delivery as affordable housing.
Proposed National Policy Statement on Urban Development 2019 (NPS-UD)
Although the proposed NPS-UD looks at providing for intensification and a range of housing typologies, density and variety to support housing capacity assessments, the policies are not generally focused on housing affordability, despite this being an essential part of providing for peoples wellbeing in the proposed Objective O2 of this NPS.
7 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 67
Establishment of the Waikato Community Lands Trust
A housing stocktake, carried out by the Waikato Regional Housing Initiative in 2018, found that Hamilton was the third least affordable house market in New Zealand, with a median house price of 6.8 times the average household income. Three times the median income is considered affordable.
In 2019, Hamilton City Council approved the establishment of the Waikato Community Lands Trust to help address housing affordability – a community owned trust with the purpose of holding land in perpetuity to provide access to affordable housing for the benefit of the community (like the QLCHT model). Hamilton City Council also committed an initial $2 million to the Trust as a seed funding for purchasing land. However, for the trust to grow its capacity and build a sustainable, long-term model going forward, inclusionary zoning provisions will be needed.
Other councils
While we understand that other councils are interested in exploring the use of inclusionary zoning, few have the appetite for the risks of legal challenge through the Environment Court, High Court, and Court of Appeal that QLDC faced. However, if there were an acceptable pathway that councils could follow to enable their implementation of a local housing strategy, founded on a robust needs assessment, which allowed inclusionary zoning as one of their tools, many are likely to consider such a path. The lack of enablement to local government was raised as the primary barrier to wider uptake at the 25 February LGNZ Housing Symposium.
Challenges to implementing inclusionary zoning
At present, councils that introduce inclusionary zoning provisions into their district plan open themselves up to legal challenge. The risk of lengthy and expensive legal challenges is a key barrier to councils adopting inclusionary zoning as a housing affordability lever.
The risk of legal challenge can be seen from the Queenstown example. In 2010, the QLDC inclusionary zoning requirements were challenged in the Environment Court. The outcome of the initial legal challenge was favourable for the Council and housing trust. The Court decided that the inclusionary zoning provisions were allowed under the RMA because they were a way for the Council to ‘mitigate’ the impacts of its policy to protect the area’s unique landscape by constraining land use (which is critical for tourism and economic development in the area but puts pressure on land prices).
Appeals to the High Court and Court of Appeal by a small set of developer appellants during the period 2009-2013 on its plan change to add a set of objectives, policies and rules into its district plan were focused only on whether affordable housing was an RMA matter. The successive rulings in council’s favour affirmed that in the specific case of QLDC’s tourism-based economy focused on protecting the outstanding natural landscapes of the district, housing affordability was in fact a matter within scope of resource management, and therefore, application of district plan provisions. However, the substantive case of whether the specific rules and implementation provisions were correct was never heard by any Court.
8 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 68
Therefore, a cloud remains as to whether the specific mandatory tools designed by QLDC for implementation through a local housing trust would comply with the RMA. The settlement forced the Council to make its inclusionary zoning provisions a matter of assessment, rather than rule-based and mandatory, reducing the effectiveness of these provisions in addressing the District’s severe housing affordability issues.
QLDC is currently considering further provisions for delivery of affordable housing through its District Plan Review. Clear legal authority from central government to enable councils to address affordable housing would assist both QLDC, Hamilton City Council, and likely any Council around New Zealand which has the local mandate to develop and implement its local housing plan.
3. New or confirming existing policy
This is a new policy.
4. How the issue relates to objectives in the current Work Programme
Affordable and healthy housing are key ingredients to promoting wellbeing in local communities. LGNZ has recognised housing affordability as a key issue and its National Council agreed that housing should be a 2018 priority topic. As part of its Housing 2030 Project workstream, LGNZ currently has two separate working groups – the Supply Working Group and Social and Community Housing Working Group.
5. What work or action on the issue has been done and what was the outcome
Community Housing Aotearoa (CHA) has outlined in its submissions to central government on the Urban Development Bill the need for councils to have clear enabling authority to implement tools locally such as inclusionary zoning. The reason CHA supports this approach is that it supports local strategies between councils and community housing providers across the country to combine local land value uplift with investment through philanthropic channels, blended with central government investment (such as the Income Related Rent Subsidy for social housing or Progressive Homeownership fund) to deliver locally-relevant housing solutions. CHA will continue to work with councils and Local Government New Zealand on the enabling approach to see this tool work for councils that choose to utilise it.
9 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 69
6. Any existing relevant legislation, policy or practice
The RMA enables district plans to explore inclusionary zoning policies to a limited degree but only if councils retain the ability to seek and secure financial contributions. However, without a legislated mandate for affordable housing and in the absence of legislation like the Housing Accord and Special Housing Areas Act (2013) (HASHAA) which is now rescinded, this still comes with uncertainty and relies on individual councils making a strong demonstrable evidence- based case for its own housing need and has a risk of legal challenge.
7. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone/Sector meeting
Not possible in the revised timeframes.
8. Suggested course of action envisaged
We assume that, by August’s LGNZ AGM, it will be too late to alter the proposed NPS-UD, although it may be possible to make changes at the time of any subsequent amendment. Instead, the remit calls for LGNZ to advocate for there to be a National Policy Statement specifically focused on affordable housing.
This remit also encourages a working group be formed, compromising of relevant/affected Councils, central Government (MHUD, Kāinga Ora, MSD), iwi, and the community housing sector. The group would work on the inclusionary zoning proposals set out in this remit, and work in partnership on other means of addressing the affordable housing challenge, leading to the delivery of the proposed National Policy Statement.
10 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 70
3 Returning GST on rates for councils to spend on infrastructure
Remit: That Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) request that the Government use the appropriate mechanisms to enable the 15 per cent Goods and Services Tax (GST) charged on rates be returned to councils to spend on local or regional infrastructure projects.
Proposed by: Hamilton City Council and New Plymouth District Council
Supported by: Auckland Council; Christchurch City Council; Tauranga City Council; Nelson City Council; Tasman District Council; Gisborne District Council; Waipa District Council; Waikato District Council; and South Waikato District Council
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
Whereas GST is not applied on the vast majority of other taxes, it is applied on rates. This causes hundreds of millions of dollars per year to leave the area in which they were generated and go to central government, whilst driving up rates.
One option, of course, would be not to levy this ‘tax on a tax’. The option proposed in this remit is that LGNZ negotiate with central Government for this sum to be returned to councils for them to spend directly on local or regional infrastructure. This option has been proposed by – amongst others – respected economist Shamubeel Eaqub.
As well as, we believe, being a fairer and more rational system, this would provide much needed support to councils, whilst ensuring the money is ringfenced to be spent on infrastructure projects of local, regional and national benefit, thus helping to address New Zealand’s longstanding infrastructure challenge.
2. Background to its being raised
In 2017, a remit from Gisborne District Council proposing that a proportion of all GST be returned to the region in which it was generated, for councils to use on servicing visitor infrastructure was supported at LGNZ’s Annual Conference, although subsequent discussions with the Government did not prove fruitful.
11 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 71
Three years on, with pressure on local government greater than ever following the COVID-19 outbreak, we think the time is right to raise a similar issue. This remit has also been developed noting that the need for investment in New Zealand’s infrastructure, particularly in its three waters infrastructure, is ever clearer.
3. New or confirming existing policy
The proposed remit would be consistent with LGNZ’s position, as voted through at Annual Conference in 2017, that some GST should be returned to the local or regional level. However, the exact focus of this remit is different.
The issue around GST was also raised by LGNZ in its February 2015 Funding Review discussion paper, as well as in their submission to the New Zealand Productivity Commission’s Local Government Funding and Financing Inquiry that commenced in July 2018.
Hamilton City Council also raised the issue of investigating use of various financing tools that are linked to the growth and development in a council’s administrative area in its submission to the Productivity Commission’s Local Government Funding and Financing Inquiry. The submission noted that “this could involve councils receiving a set portion of the Government’s GST ‘take’ from their administrative area, or alternatively, a set amount of the total ‘spend’ in a council’s administrative area that is captured as an additional levy to the current GST component, potentially in the form of an increase to the GST rate. Such funding streams should be dedicated to core infrastructure maintenance and enhancement”.
4. How the issue relates to objectives in the current Work Programme
The remit is broadly consistent with existing LGNZ policy, but with a slightly different focus.
5. What work or action on the issue has been done and what was the outcome
No formal work undertaken.
6. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone or Sector meeting
Not possible in the revised timeframes.
12 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 72
4 Natural hazards and climate change adaptation
Remit: That central government undertakes, in collaboration with all of local government, a comprehensive review of the current law relating to natural hazards and climate change adaptation along New Zealand's coastlines, and coordinates the development of a coastline strategy for the whole of New Zealand which would cover: the roles and responsibilities of territorial authorities, regional councils and central government; greater direction on an integrated approach; and development of principles for “who pays”.
Proposed by: Hauraki District Council
Supported by: Hawke’s Bay Regional Council, Thames-Coromandel District Council; Napier City Council; Hastings District Council; and Northland Regional Council.
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
Central government has provided guidance to local government on how to apply a risk-based adaptive approach to planning for climate change in coastal communities. Many councils are now following this guidance and working with their communities using adaptive planning approaches. As these councils look ahead to how adaptive approaches can be implemented, they are encountering limitations in existing legislation and a lack of guidance from central government on the legalities and practicalities of doing so.
Councils report difficulty in determining their respective roles (territorial and regional) and who should do what in the area of managing the risks of natural hazards arising from climate change. Furthermore, they note that there is a lack of direction over who pays for what and who owns/maintains/is liable for any assets that may be required.
Councils also have many unanswered questions around how a managed retreat option should be implemented. For example, where managed retreat is identified as a preferred adaptation option, how should this be undertaken, by who, where should costs fall, whether compensation is payable and if so by whom?
Furthermore, councils see difficulties in how adaptive approaches can be implemented through statutory documents such as District and Long Term Plans, especially as councils are being asked to plan at least 100 years into the future using adaptive approaches which may require rapid implementation (eg in response to a ‘trigger’ event). This combination of long timeframes, deep uncertainty, and potentially rapid action is not well provided for by these documents.
13 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 73
2. Background to its being raised
Beginning in 2014, Hawke’s Bay councils (Napier City Council; Hastings District Council; and Hawke’s Bay Regional Council) and tangata whenua partnered to develop a Coastal Hazards Strategy that was ultimately the first project of its type to follow the approaches set out in the Ministry for the Environment’s coastal hazards guidance (the Guidance). The councils and tangata whenua are now working on the implementation phase of the strategy.
Hauraki District Council are working with Waikato Regional Council, Waikato District Council and Iwi to prepare a community plan (Wharekawa Coast 2120) for the western Firth of Thames area, using a similar approach to the Hawke’s Bay Coastal Strategy, and following the Guidance. Hauraki District Council is aware of other work of this nature being undertaken in the Waikato region by Thames-Coromandel and Waikato District Councils, in the Wellington region, and scoping is underway for work in the Northland region.
All of these projects recognise the importance of regional and territorial authorities working collaboratively with their communities to respond to increasing natural hazard risks in coastal areas, due to climate change. These projects are at different stages of development, but eventually will all be facing the same implementation issues.
3. New or confirming existing policy
This remit is a new policy.
4. How the issue relates to objectives in the current Work Programme
This remit raises issues around how local government can practically implement approaches and responses to natural hazards risks in coastal areas developed under the Guidance. These issues are related to LGNZ’s policy priorities: Climate Change and Environment (Natural Hazards). In particular, the topics of community resilience and climate future fit, as well as LGNZ’s climate change project.
5. What work or action on the issue has been done and what was the outcome
The Ministry for the Environment recently published a case study on challenges with implementing the Hawke’s Bay Coastal Strategy. This case study highlights many of the issues identified by this remit and provides more detailed analysis.
The Wharekawa Coast 2120 Joint Working Party (comprising elected members and iwi representatives) recently considered a paper on project implementation funding issues. Discussions regarding this information, and other papers reviewing Deep South Science Challenge research, prompted the preparation of this remit.
14 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 74
Also of relevance to the issues raised by this remit is the Productivity Commission’s recent local government funding and financing inquiry.
6. Any existing relevant legislation, policy or practice
The following legislation is considered relevant to the remit: Resource Management Act 1991 and New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement 2010, Local Government Act 2002, Public Works Act 1981, and Building Act 2004.
7. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone/Sector meeting
This has not been discussed at zone or sector meetings to date.
8. Suggested course of action envisaged
LGNZ works with central government to prepare a nationwide coastal strategy that provides further direction on an integrated approach to climate change adaptation issues including: a. The roles and responsibilities of territorial and regional councils; b. How managed retreat should be implemented including funding arrangements and whether compensation is payable and if so by whom; c. A protocol for considering how costs for adaptation actions should be allocated both between local government itself (territorial and regional councils), between local and central government, and between public and private beneficiaries; d. How adaptive planning approaches should be implemented, for example by providing better linkages between LGA and RMA processes or by potentially new natural hazard risk management and climate change adaptation-specific legislation; and e. How councils could be supported to implement appropriate restrictive zoning behind defensive measures to respond to ‘moral hazard’ issues.
15 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 75
5 Annual regional balance of transfers
Remit: That LGNZ work with Treasury, Statistics New Zealand and other government agencies to develop an annual regional balance of transfers to show how much each region contributes in taxes and how much each region receives in government funding.
Proposed by: New Plymouth District Council
Supported by: Thames-Coromandel District Council; South Taranaki District Council; Hastings District Council; Rangitīkei District Council; and Rotorua Lakes Council.
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
Regional New Zealand often questions whether the government returns more or less to the region than it receives in tax and other revenue sources. This remit proposes that LGNZ work with relevant government agencies – particularly Treasury and Statistics New Zealand – to develop an annual publication of a regional balance of transfers outlining the inwards and outwards flow of money between the region and the government.
As with many regions, Taranaki has perceived that it has received low investment from government compared to the amount of tax paid by the region. Various attempts have been made to provide an estimate of the gap, however obtaining regional financial information from government agencies has proved difficult. Many agencies cannot provide breakdowns of expenditure and collection of revenue is difficult to obtain at a regional level.
A regional balance of transfers would provide transparency for all of New Zealand and promote more open democracy where inclusiveness and accountability is strengthened. It would enable better performance measurement and the assessment of outputs in a community against that of other regions and New Zealand.
2. Background to its being raised
Attempts to get a clear picture of a regional balance of transfers – identifying what is paid to and received from central government – have been unsuccessful. There is great inconsistency in reporting and data collection between government agencies and a general unwillingness to be open and transparent in what is spent in regions.
16 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 76
Official Information Act requests often generate responses such as “our information is not structured in such a way that would enable the questions to be answered”.
It is recognised that a full set of actual data may not be able to be provided and assumptions will need to be made in some situations, such as when making “overhead allocations” to the regions for national costs of government.
In recent years there has been a greater focus on measuring the performance of local authorities but not of the performance of central government. A regional balance of transfers would be one factor to help measure equity and the performance of government.
A balance of transfers would also go a long way to build trust in government through transparency and accountability of where public money is spent and where it has come from and in decision-making. This data would also be able to be used by government ministers to help monitor the performance and of their portfolios in an open and consistent manner.
According to Treasury, an objective of the Government “is to continually improve public confidence in the tax system and Inland Revenue. The system should help people meet their obligations, be fair, and inspire confidence. The Government is committed to raising revenue in ways that meet these objectives”. It is believed that the gathering and reporting of a regional balance of transfers would greatly assist government in this aim.
3. How the issue relates to objectives in the current Work Programme
This remit is related to the LGNZ and New Zealand Initiative work on localism whereby this data would help ensure that power and authority flows up from citizens and communities, not down from the government.
LGNZ has led the way in the assessment of council performance through the successful CouncilMARK™ programme that provides qualitative assessment of council performance across a wide range of facets. This remit would help LGNZ to do the same for our communities when considering central government performance and equity.
This remit would also contribute to LGNZs six big issues for New Zealand councils – particularly infrastructure and funding, social and economic.
4. What work or action on the issue has been done and what was the outcome
Attempts have been made to gather the required information from government agencies to create a regional balance of transfers. This has been unsuccessful as the data is apparently not gathered.
17 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 77
5. Any existing relevant legislation, policy or practice
The remit seeks LGNZ to work with Treasury, Statistics New Zealand and other government agencies to develop a regional balance of transfers to show how much each region contributes in taxes and how much each region receives in government funding. To be successful, this would require directives to all government agencies to gather data and give it to either Treasury or Statistics New Zealand to compile and report on.
6. Suggested course of action envisaged
This remit suggests that LGNZ work with Treasury, Statistics New Zealand and other government agencies to develop an annual regional balance of transfers that show how much each region contributes in taxes and how much each region receives in government funding. This is likely to require government Ministers to give such a directive.
18 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 78
6 Local Government electoral cycle
Remit: That the local government electoral cycle be extended from three to four years.
Proposed by: Northland Regional Council; Rotorua Lakes Council; Whanganui District Council; and Hamilton City Council.
Supported by: Hastings District Council; Palmerston North City Council; Napier City Council; Manawatū District Council, South Taranaki District Council, Rangitīkei District Council
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
The election cycle, or term of office, refers to the number of years an elected representative serves between local government elections. In New Zealand, the length of the term of office of a local government elected representative is three years. At a meeting of Northland Regional Council on 18 February 2020, it was agreed to seek formal support for this remit from Zone One as a pre-requisite for proposing at the LGNZ 2020 AGM.
2. Background to its being raised
Northland Regional Council’s remit background
Advocates for extending the election cycle to four years would say that a longer electoral term:
• Promotes longer term thinking and decision-making by councillors. An example of this would be a longer electoral cycle would encourage councillors to lengthen their investment horizon when making financial investment decisions; • Allows for more time to implement a local government vision by extending the productive working time of a council and reducing councillor turnover; • Gives more time for new councillors to learn and conduct their duties thereby increasing councils’ overall productivity as councillors spend more time governing and less time campaigning; • Reduces voter fatigue and in turn may result in increased voter turnout; • Reduces the administration costs of setting up and inducting a new council thereby increasing operational efficiency – particularly of governance staff;
19 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 79
• Provides more opportunity to direct energy and provide certainty for longer term planning and more significant activities such as large capital projects; • More stable decision-making framework for council through greater opportunity for long term planning; • Enables implementation of longer term council policies within a single term of office; • Less pressure on new councillors to get up to speed; • Longer terms have the potential to be more conducive to stable governance; and • Provides cost savings by reducing the number of elections. The cost of the last election was approximately $180,000 – a four year cycle would save this complete amount each third electoral cycle.
Opponents would say that:
• A longer electoral term is a barrier to participation as potential councillors must make a longer commitment to their term in office; • There is additional expense to educate the public of the change as New Zealanders are very accustomed to three year electoral cycles for both local and national government; • The shorter term enforces more accountability on elected representatives who face getting voted out if they don’t perform as expected; • Elected representatives must engage more frequently with constituents as they seek to stay top of mind for the next election; • A longer term may be seen by some as reducing accountability as the community must wait a year longer to judge their council’s performance through the voting process; and • A longer time between elections gives voters less opportunity to express their opinions on the performance of their elected officials.
Extending the local government electoral cycle from three to four years would result in local government and central government elections being held in the same year once every three years. If this was considered to be an issue, then the central government electoral cycle could also be extended to four years. Similar advantages and disadvantages to the change would apply.
Rotorua Lakes Council remit background
By international standards, New Zealand’s three- year electoral cycle is short. Far more jurisdictions have a four-year term for central government and in most cases, the length of term of office of local government will be the same as that of their central government.
Madden (2013, July 16) notes that “New Zealand is the only liberal democratic country with a unicameral system and a three-year term. Other unicameral democracies with proportional electoral systems – such as Israel, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Finland, have four year terms.”
20 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 80
Boston et al. (2019) state “For decades, numerous politicians, civic leaders and academics have supported extending the term of Parliament to four years. It has been argued that a modest extension of this nature would enhance the capacity for governments to undertake thoroughgoing policy reforms in a more careful, considered, evidence-informed manner…”
The members of the Constitutional Advisory Panel (2013, November) found that while a reasonable proportion of people supported a longer term, others felt that “elections are the best means for voters to hold government to account and should not be made less frequent.”
Those in favour of a four-year term provided the following reasons for their support:
• The ability to take more time to develop and implement policy could result in the public having better information about the intention of policy, to weigh the pros and cons and see results. • The three-year term was seen as reducing certainty as policies are perceived to change every three years. • Conversations regularly highlighted that any extension to the term of Parliament would need to be counter-balanced by mechanisms to improve law-making and accountability.
An Australian report (Bennett, 2000) promoting four-year terms for the House of Representatives provided a list of benefits that supporters for a four-year term claim.
Those of relevance to New Zealand Central and Local government include:
• Longer terms would encourage governments to introduce policies that were long- term rather than merely politically expedient. • Longer terms would enhance business confidence. • Over time money would be saved by having fewer elections. • Australians dislike the frequency they are required to vote. • Longer periods between elections would raise the standard of political debate.
Boston et al. (2019) note that any reforms to the electoral cycle would require public endorsement via a referendum and that the main political challenge would be convincing the public of the desirability of change. They also point to the two referenda held in New Zealand in 1967 and 1990 on increasing the parliamentary term, which were both heavily defeated. The Constitutional Advisory Panel (2013, November).
While achieving public support for change would be a challenge, another commentator (Singh, S., 2019) notes that the composition of New Zealand has changed dramatically since the two referenda. He points out that New Zealand’s migrant population has significantly increased and that “to many…who have lived overseas and seen a five-year parliamentary term, the idea of a three-year cycle, is an intriguing deviation from an experience they have understood as normal.”
21 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 81
While the case for changing the electoral cycle for central government may be stronger, discussion by elected members in local government in New Zealand supports a change to a four- year term for local government also. Their comment is included below.
• The new norm is that there is an expectation that central and local government will work together in partnership. The current three-year electoral cycle is unbalanced. In addition, generally seven out of every ten years is an election year for either local or central government. This is disruptive and short-term political decision-making results. • In local government, a longer electoral cycle would enable new councillors to be better educated and informed on long term, infrastructure and financial planning. Currently the importance of the Long Term Plan window (ten years) is not well understood in the sector. • Short-term political decision-making by local government results in uncertainty and a lack of investor confidence. This is also detrimental to the new partnership approach that councils are seeking to develop with their local investors and stakeholders.
Dr Mike Reid notes that for a four-year term for local government to be acceptable to New Zealand citizens, there must be an adequate accountability framework to protect communities. He notes that if local government was to move to a four-year term, there must be a way for citizens to call a new election should the governing body become inoperable. An accountability framework could include a recall provision which would, on the basis of a petition signed by a sufficient number of residents, force a new election, as argued for in the LGNZ manifesto in 2017.
22 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 82
7 Water bottling
Remit: That LGNZ works with the Government to: 1. Place a moratorium on applications to take and/or use water for water bottling or bulk export; 2. Require and enable regional councils to review inactive water bottling consents, with a view to withdrawal of the consent and discourage consent ‘banking’; 3. Undertake an holistic assessment of the potential effects of the current industry, its future growth and the legislative settings that enable Councils to effectively manage those effects; and 4. Initiate a comprehensive nationwide discussion on the issue of water bottling and implement any changes to legislation and policy settings as required. Proposed by: Queenstown-Lakes District Council
Supported by: Greater Wellington Regional Council; Tauranga City Council; Thames- Coromandel District Council; Upper Hutt City Council; and Waitaki District Council.
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
The water-bottling industry in New Zealand is young and relatively unregulated. A comprehensive review of legislation and policy needs to be developed in order to fully understand and address its potential effects on community wellbeing and resilience.
The sustainability of water bottling and its associated implications for global plastic waste, local property rights and Māori freshwater rights need to be considered. The effects of climate change on groundwater systems are not yet well understood. Further research is required.
The implications of ‘banking’ water-bottling consents needs to be fully explored. The amount of water bottled reaches 157.8 million litres annually (as at January 2018), however there are consents available to extract 71.575 million litres of water per day for both bottled water and for mixed uses. The consequences of rapid uptake and growth in the industry are unknown, but could artificially raise land values and make access to water unaffordable.
23 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 83
Therefore, where water is unlikely to be bottled, consents should be available to be reviewed, or in the case of mixed-use consents, water bottling removed as a purpose of the water take.
It is timely to reconsider legislation and policy, given many catchments are nearing their allocation limits and the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management is under development.
It is important to note that the intent of this remit is not to impact existing water-bottling operations, nor to make judgements on the merits or otherwise of the industry. The focus of this remit is on obtaining a comprehensive understanding of the industry, its potential for growth, the range of externalities such growth may cause and the policy and legislative settings required to address this.
2. Background to its being raised
The Industry
Large-scale water bottling is a relatively new industry in New Zealand. As a result, there is no clear policy governing the use of water for bottling, and the industry is not specifically regulated. Managing the effects of the industry requires the alignment of a range of interdependent policies and legislative tools that determine who can access water, for what purpose and under what conditions. A review is required to understand how best to co-ordinate these tools.
The value proposition of water bottling has resulted in the ‘banking’ and sale of water bottling consents, raising the value of land and effectively creating an unregulated market for water. This can lead to confusion between these outcomes and s122(1) RMA which states that a resource consent is neither real nor personal property. This issue is exacerbated by increasing demand for water, the fact that many catchments are at or approaching full allocation, and the extent to which some regional plans enable existing water consents to be varied to enable water bottling. As the future utilisation of water will become increasingly competed for, understanding what our communities’ priorities for this resource are must be fully debated and understood.
Any review needs to also consider the value and reliance placed on consents by owners and operators, and the impact on established property rights, which will need to be addressed.
Overseas Interests
Since 2013, New Zealand Trade & Enterprise (NZTE) has invested in eight water bottling companies through its Focus 700 Group programme, to support the growth of water exports. Although NZTE no longer encourages the sale of NZ’s water, it does facilitate the sale of land for the holders of water permits. It is worth noting that certain provisions of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) make it unclear whether NZ drinking water suppliers can be prioritised to ensure NZ communities will always have access to affordable clean drinking water.
24 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 84
Under the OIA foreign investment in NZ’s water cannot be managed effectively as water is not defined as a ‘sensitive’ asset. Treasury has confirmed that our existing free trade agreements do not allow the creation of new classes of sensitive assets.
Therefore, foreign investment in water bottling can only be limited where the water is to be extracted from sensitive land and only if the ‘good character’ or ‘benefit to NZ’ tests are not met.
In 2018 Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) Minister Eugenie Sage was unable to decline Cresswell NZ’s application to purchase of sensitive land for a water bottling plant. She stated that the provisions of the Overseas Investment Act prevented her declining the application. Subsequently, the government has proposed amendments to the OIA6 that (if enacted) will allow applications involving the extraction of water for bottling to be declined if they are likely to result in a negative impact on water quality or sustainability.
Community Sentiment and Maori Cultural Values
New Zealand has demonstrated community concern in relation to water bottling in recent years, presenting petitions and participating in protests on a number occasions.
On the matter of water export and Maori cultural values, Ngati Awa has appealed the Environment Court Decision arguing that the application is “for too much water to be sold too far away” (at [35]). Their position is that in these circumstances te mauri o te wai and their tangata whenua right to act as kaitiaki of the water are lost.
Waste and Plastic
On the matter of plastic production, it is unclear under which vehicle this can be managed. In the Minority Judgement of the Environment Court against Cresswell NZ (10 December 2019), Commissioner David Kernohan found (at [346]) that “the pollution created from the production and specifically end use disposal of plastic water bottles does not meet the objectives and policies of the RMA”. However, the Majority of the Court found that the end uses of the water which involved putting the water in plastic bottles were found to be “ancillary activities which are not controlled under the Regional Plan” and that there had been “no suggestion that control of such activities comes within the ambit of the functions of the regional council under s30RMA” (at[64]).
Impact on Local Government
The effects of the water bottling industry on local councils, as water suppliers and as the owners of transport networks, may be significant and there are a number of examples of this being the case. However, their ability to submit and appeal may be limited by notification provisions.
There are currently three appeals before the High Court. These challenge applications for consent in Belfast and Otakiri and deal with questions related to the allocation of water for water bottling including the ability to consider the effects of plastic bottle production as an end- use of water, the effects of water export on te mauri o te wai and kaitiaki rights under Te Tiriti and the correct process for changing the purpose of a water take.
25 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 85
A levy on water bottling is a response to perceived issues of fairness but this policy could itself have unintended consequences if implemented in isolation and without an assessment of the kind proposed by this remit.
QLDC is therefore proposing comprehensive policy and legislation based on consultation with councils and the community.
3. New or confirming existing policy
This Remit represents a new policy position for LGNZ and for central government.
4. How the issue relates to objectives in the current Work Programme
This remit could accelerate the debate on water allocation and highlight any issues within the RMA and/or the NPS-FM. This could significantly influence the existing LGNZ programme of work in relation to strategic and policy advice to Central Government.
The results may feed into Stage 2 of the reform of the RMA as well as LGNZ’s Water 2050 project which could lead to changes that ensure communities are resilient in the face of climatic changes that will impact productive land and water bodies, including sources of drinking water.
The following matters may be raised in delivery of the current work programme in relation to this remit: Resource Management Act
• Adding consideration of the effects of plastic production to the RMA as a Part 2 matter of national importance. • Adding effects on Climate Change to the RMA as a Part 2 matter of national importance. • Greater use of regional councils’ powers under s30 RMA to allocate water amongst competing activities with a view to:
o Zoning water and controlling its use in the same way land use is controlled. o Using water allocation as a tool to incentivise resilience and sustainable outcomes.
o Protecting our deep, clean aquifer water for domestic and community supply. • Reviewing the provisions governing the variation and transferability of water permits and the effects of those on consent holders’ rights as well as the possibility for unregulated water markets.
26 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 86
National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management Development
• Redefining ‘efficient allocation’ in the draft NPS-FM and regional plans so that when councils are deciding “how to improve and maximise the efficient allocation of water” and identifying in “methods to encourage the efficient use of water”12 within regional plans, it is clear they are seeking to not only maximise jobs and minimise ‘waste’, but also to maximise the wider economic, social, cultural, environmental and health benefits of water allocation. • Re-wording Policy 4 of the draft NPS-FM and the policies for implementing integrated management of land and freshwater (at 3.4 (1) to (4))13. The proposed approach is one directional, considering only the effects of land use on fresh water. Rewording these policies may lead to more efficient and sustainable allocation of water.
5. What work or action on the issue has been done and what was the outcome
QLDC wrote to Minister Parker in February requesting a moratorium on new and existing water bottling consents. This was written in support of an initial proposal by Upper Hutt City Council.
6. Any existing relevant legislation, policy or practice
Existing legislation, policy and practice reflects a complex landscape where far greater alignment is required if effective regulation and understanding is to be achieved.
There is some concern that a levy implemented in isolation may not address the issues that communities and local councils will be faced with if the industry grows. Concerns have also been raised that a levy may incentivise or prioritise the grant of water bottling consents as a result of the revenue stream that would be created.
Section 30 RMA 14 provides regional councils with the power to add rules to their plans to allocate water amongst competing activities, in much the same way as district councils can zone land and prioritise, discourage, prohibit or otherwise control different land uses. This power has not been exercised to any great extent to date. Regional Councils have preferred to allocate water on a ‘first complete application, first assessed’ basis in line with case law, and to grant consent as long as the water ‘take’ is sustainable and the purpose reflects efficient use. However, in theory, regional councils could undertake a broader assessment of the effects of using water for bottling, and then either prioritise, discourage or prohibit water bottling (across whole catchments or for specified water bodies or depths).
Christchurch’s ground water zones are by and large fully allocated and new applications to take water are prohibited. Consent holders have been applying to Environment Canterbury to vary existing industrial and irrigation consents to enable water bottling. There is no ability to use s127 due to the activity being outside the scope of the original applications.
27 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 87
The process being used to vary the consents involves the grant of a new ‘use’ consent. Whether this process is lawful under the RMA and the Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan, will be determined by the Court. This highlights the difficulty for planners implementing resource management provisions that are unclear and inadequate in terms of managing the allocation of water in fully allocated catchments. Three consents have been varied in this way and a fourth is being processed.
Plan changes of this nature would come at significant cost to the ratepayer and could not be implemented quickly. Signalling such a plan change might trigger a wave of applications. Therefore, and given that this an issue that will affect all councils (albeit in different ways), the best way forward is likely to be a moratorium on new consents followed by a review or discussion covering the matters set out below. Any significant policy changes could be required to be implemented via Schedule 1 and an amendment to the NPS-FM, but only if a clear problem is identified and only after consultation with LGNZ and Councils.
The Overseas Investment Amendment Bill (No 3) also references water bottling and this is now with the Select Committee Finance and Expenditure (submissions closing 31 August 2020). Currently the Amendment Bill reads that if overseas investment in sensitive land involves the extraction of water for bottling or other extraction in bulk for human consumption, then an additional factor of the benefit to NZ test would be whether the overseas investment is likely to result in a negative impact on water quality or sustainability. If enacted this would not apply to all investments in water bottling plants by overseas interests.
7. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone/Sector meeting
Not considered by a Zone or sector meeting.
8. Suggested course of action envisaged
That LGNZ works with the Government to:
• Place a moratorium on applications to take and/or use water for water bottling or bulk export; • Require and enable regional councils to review inactive water bottling consents, with a view to withdrawal of the consent and discourage consent ‘banking’; • Undertake a holistic assessment of the potential effects of the current industry, its future growth and the legislative settings that enable Councils to effectively manage those effects. • Initiate a comprehensive nationwide discussion on the issue of water bottling and implement any changes to legislation and policy settings as required.
28 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 88
8 Quorum when attending local authority meetings
Remit: That LGNZ requests central government amend legislation to enable elected or appointed members, connecting remotely to a public council meeting, be included in the quorum. This would provide an option for local authority meetings to be held completely remotely, if required.
Proposed by: Waikato District Council
Supported by: Hamilton City Council; Hauraki District Council; Thames-Coromandel District Council; Taupō District Council; Ōtorohanga District Council; South Waikato District Council; Waipa District Council; and Waitomo District Council.
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, legislation required that members had to be physically present at a meeting to be included in the quorum. Under the LGNZ template Standing Orders, members attending by audio or audio-visual means can participate and vote on matters presented at meetings.
To enable public meetings to continue during COVID-19, the COVID-19 Response (Urgent Management Measures) Legislation Act 2020 (the COVID-19 Act) amended sections of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.
These amendments included:
• Local authority or committee members who join a meeting by audio or audio-visual means were counted for the purpose of a quorum. • Open public meetings to be livestreams, where reasonably practicable to do so. • Provide either an audio or video recording, or written summary, of the open public meetings on the local authority’s website as soon as practicable after the meeting.
For many councils, this has provided an opportunity to adopt an innovative approach to hold public meetings, resulting in benefits for local government democratic processes, financial and resource efficiencies and environmental improvements (detailed further below).
This remit requests that the legislative amendments introduced for COVID-19 are retained (beyond the term of the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice 2020) as an option for local authorities to adopt via their Standing Orders.
29 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 89
For clarity, the remit:
• Contemplates that:
o Members attending meetings by audio or audio-visual link are still entitled to participate and vote on agenda items; and
o Requests to attend a meeting by audio or audio visual link should still be made to the Chairperson, for his/her approval, prior to the meeting, as detailed in the LGNZ template Standing Orders; • Does not propose that meetings where a quorum (or more) of members attends remotely become the only or dominant means to hold local authority meetings; simply that this is retained as an option for each council to consider using via its Standing Orders; and • Supports the retention of the COVID-19 LGOIMA amendments to protect transparency and public access to local authority meetings.
2. Background to its being raised
The LGA was amended in 2014 to enable members to join a meeting by audio or audio-visual link, subject to certain procedural requirements being met and the local authority’s Standing Orders permitting such remote attendance. However, only members physically present are to be counted toward the meeting’s quorum. For council meetings, this requires:
• Half of the members to be physically present (if the number of members, including vacancies, is even); or • A majority of members to be physically present if the number of members (including vacancies) is odd.
The COVID-19 Act was enacted in response to the restrictions imposed on the New Zealand population, including travel prohibition and social distancing. The COVID-19 Act’s amendments to the LGA and LGOIMA (noted above) meant public meetings could be undertaken entirely by remote means (ie audio or audio-visual), subject to certain requirements to protect public access and transparency of local authority meetings. In particular, all members of a local authority or committee could attend remotely and be included in the quorum for a meeting (rather than having to be physically present at a specified meeting venue). These legislative amendments will be repealed on the expiry or revocation of the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID- 19) Notice 20201.
The remit’s proposal is made in a climate of uncertainty about the long-term impacts of the global pandemic, including financially for communities and councils alike, as well as the opportunities and flexibility that the legislative amendments have brought for local authorities and their respective communities in relation to public meetings.
30 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 90
3. New or confirming existing policy
This remit supports LGNZ’s existing policy framework around local democracy and the environment, in particular. No new policy work is required.
4. How the issue relates to objectives in the current Work Programme
The remit supports some of LGNZ’s key policy priorities: Local democracy
• Remote meetings help with LGNZ’s goals of reinvigorating local democracy and modernising local government legislation. • Wider public access to local authority and committee meetings, with potential of a significant increase in members of the public able to view livestreamed coverage compared to travelling to attend a meeting. This is a particular benefit for local authorities with large geographic boundaries or that have a significant rural resident population. • The wider reach of livestreamed meetings also enhances community engagement and understanding of local government, which may have a positive effect on voter participation at local authority elections. • The public still being able to participate in open public meetings, if required, via audio-visual tools available. • Supporting more diversity in representation as this would facilitate people who are unable to travel or be present in person because of workload, family commitments, disability or other factors.
Climate change
• Enabling members and communities to adapt towards a low carbon economy through reduction in travel.
5. What work or action on the issue has been done and what was the outcome
With the advance of COVID-19 Act changes, local authorities have been required to implement, and benefitted from, innovative ways to continue holding public meetings while maintaining the public’s access to local government decision-making. This has been able to be achieved at minimal cost to local authorities, which may not otherwise be in a position to put in place more high-tech options for live-streaming of meetings from council offices. As a result, for some councils, returning to a requirement for a quorum to be physically present at all meetings will be a ‘step backwards’.
31 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 91
In addition to the advantages already canvassed, providing an option for local authorities to have a quorum (or more) of members attending meetings remotely has resulted in:
• More efficient use of members’ time (eg reduction in travel required) for their other roles and responsibilities; and • Reduced operating costs associated with holding public meetings at council premises.
6. Any existing relevant legislation, policy or practice
The current, temporary legislative framework that has enabled greater utilisation of remote meetings has been noted above. The remit proposes that the legislative amendments to the LGA and LGOIMA are embedded permanently, with each council having the option of incorporating this framework in its Standing Orders (similar to that contemplated under clause 25A(1)(a), Schedule 7, LGA).
7. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone/Sector meeting
The issues in this remit have been discussed at the Waikato Mayoral Forum.
8. Suggested course of action envisaged
LGNZ is to:
• Work with central government and relevant stakeholders to advocate for legislative changes to the LGA and LGOIMA, enabling a quorum (or more) of members to attend a public local authority meeting remotely; and • Update the Standing Orders template to reflect the proposed legislative changes, which each local authority can adopt as an alternative option to holding ‘in person’ meetings.
32 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 92
9 Use of macrons by local authorities
Remit: That LGNZ work with central government to put in place a simplified process for the addition of macrons to council names if requested by that council or its community.
Proposed by: Waipa District Council
Supported by: Zone Two
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
Waipā is proposing that LGNZ work with central government to address the issue of the use of macrons by local authorities through legislative or other reform. Local authorities are corporate bodies created by statute under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), the legal names are listed in Schedule 2 of the LGA which can only be changed through rather complex legislative processes. Councils are not able to have trading names in the way that companies do, but some councils use a ‘trading name’ for the name or brand that the council prefers to operate under, which is different from the legal name in the LGA.
This is not uncommon, for instance, Kapiti Coast District Council trades as the Kāpiti Coast District Council, the Rotorua District Council trades as the Rotorua Lakes Council and the Manawatū-Whanganui Regional Council trades as the Horizons Regional Council.
There are some particular situations where Council needs to use its legal names (eg legal proceedings, contracts, invoices, etc) but other than that, it can use a trading name, for example for branding and signage.
2. Background to its being raised
To date, changes to local authority names to include macrons have resulted from applications to the New Zealand Geographic Board, which can alter the name of a district if the local authority consents to (third parties can apply), or requests the alteration. There is no fee for the request but a council will incur costs in preparing an application by undertaking research and preparing evidence to support the application (such as evidence of consultation with local Iwi).
33 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 93
Consideration of applications can take one to two years and involve the Geographic Board undertaking consultation on the matter. Any opposition is referred to the Minister for Land Information for decision. If the application is successful, then there will be a formal change in name for the district and the Government is obligated to instigate an Order in Council process to change the name in Schedule 2 of the LGA.
There are three councils which have gone through this process in the last two-three years. The Manawatū-Whanganui Regional Council applied to change its own name (to include the macron and adding an ‘h’ in to “Whanganui”). The two other changes for Ōpōtiki and Ōtorohanga District Councils resulted from applications by the Office of Treaty Settlements as part of settlement agreements with local Iwi.
Other councils, including Waipā use macrons but for which there is no macron in the legal name, as follows: • Kaikōura District Council; • Kāpiti Coast District Council; • Rangatīkei District Council; • Taupō District Council; and • Whakatāne District Council.
There are other councils which could include macrons but which do not currently use them and for which there is no macron in their legal name. For this reason, Waipā District Council considers that this matter has implications for the local government sector as a whole and that it would not be efficient or cost effective for councils to individually go through the legislative processes to change a name. Perhaps the use of a macron could be managed at a national level through a change for example to the LGA.
3. Suggested course of action envisaged
Based on legal advice from Simpson Grierson, there are five potential options for addressing this issue at a national level as follows:
• Option 1: New Zealand Geographic Board could proactively change the names of districts and regions. • Option 2: The Minister of Local Government could recommend local authority name changes that involve the addition of the macron (no legislative reform required for either of these options). • Option 3: Parliament could amend Schedule 2 of the LGA to change all local authority names that should include macrons. • Option 4: Parliament could amend Schedule 2 of the LGA to change the names of self-elected local authorities who wish to include macrons in their names. • Option 5: Parliament could insert a new section in the LGA to provide that use of a local authority name, or a district or region name, with the addition of a macron, is lawful and will not invalidate any action.
34 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 94
There are a number of advantages and disadvantages associated with each of these options. It is more appropriate that LGNZ assess the options and any other possible options and explore them further with central government. Waipā District Council passed the following resolution at its meeting on 31 March 2020 in relation to using a macron and in particular to a proposed LGNZ Remit: That – a) The ‘Use of Macron in Local Authorities Names’ report (document number 10374311) of Jennie McFarlane, Legal Counsel be received; b) Council adopt a trading name of “Waipā District Council” incorporating the use of a macron to reflect correct pronunciation, which may be used in all circumstances other than when the legal name of Council under the Local Government Act 2002 and other local government legislation is required to be used; c) Council approve taking a remit to the next Annual General Meeting of Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ), whenever that is held, requesting that LGNZ work with central government to address the use of macrons and changes to the names of local authorities, through legislative or other reform, in the interests of the local government sector and the wider community, in accordance with the process required by LGNZ for remits; d) Council to approve seeking support at the next Zone Two meeting or directly, from other local authorities in New Zealand for the proposed remit as required by the LGNZ remit process; and e) Council undertake further consultation with Waikato Tainui.
35 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 95
10 Rates rebates for low income property owners
Remit: That the Government lift the level of rates rebates available for low and fixed income property owners – with yearly increases taking into account the cost for inputs into local government services.
Proposed by: Whanganui District Council
Supported by: Palmerston North City Council; Napier City Council; Manawatū District Council; South Taranaki District Council; and Rangitikei District Council.
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
The following issues have been identified: (a) The level of rates rebates for low and fixed income property owners as a proportion of rates has gradually reduced for those on low and fixed incomes. (b) This level of support has not kept pace with the cost of living and provides significant financial hardship for some members of the community. (c) This level of support has not kept pace with the benchmark for council costs and provides significant financial hardship for some members of the community.
2. Background to its being raised
The rates rebate scheme is a partial refund for people who pay rates to their council, providing financial relief for low income residents who own their own home. This is funded by central government through the Department of Internal Affairs. A person who directly pays local authority rates, and meets the household income criteria, is currently eligible for a rates rebate of up to $640.
In 2006 the rates rebate was significantly increased and over the last decade there have been incremental yearly adjustments, however, these have lagged behind CPI increases. A further small boost to the scheme was introduced in 2019 – lifting the rate from $630 to $640 and the income abatement threshold from $25,180 to $25,660.
36 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 96
As local authority costs have increased above that of inflation, this has resulted in local authorities either needing to increase rates or reduce existing levels of service. The effect of this is that, over time, the level of rates rebates as a proportion of the total local authority rates has significantly decreased.
This issue is of particular concern for low and fixed income property owners who may be experiencing housing stress, notwithstanding the fact that they may own their own family home mortgage-free (eg superannuitants).
As at 2 March 2020 the Department of Internal Affairs had approved payments for 103,367 applications – a total of $60,201,285 (GST inclusive).1
Table 1: Increase in rates rebate, CPI and local authority costs from 2010 to 2020
Difference Difference between local between CPI Benchmark for authority costs CPI Max and Max Rebate local authority and Max Rebate Year Rebate % Change (Stats NZ) increases costs (Berl) increases
2010/11 $ 570 3.64% 5.35% -1.72% 2.28% 1.36%
2011/12 $ 580 1.75% 9.51% -7.76% 3.05% -1.30%
2012/13 $ 590 1.72% 7.23% -5.51% 1.94% -0.21%
2013/14 $ 595 0.85% 1.64% -0.79% 1.68% -0.83%
2014/15 $ 605 1.68% 3.80% -2.12% 2.09% -0.41%
2015/16 $ 610 0.83% 4.28% -3.45% 1.29% -0.47%
2016/17 $ 610 0.00% 1.74% -1.74% 1.49% -1.49%
2017/18 $ 620 1.64% 1.48% 0.16% 1.88% -0.25%
2018/19 $ 630 1.61% 1.67% -0.05% 2.77% -1.16%
2019/20 $ 640 1.58%
3. New or confirming existing policy
This remit would build on existing policy and would require the level of rates rebate to increase, with yearly adjustments taking into account the cost increases for inputs into local government services.
1 https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/119883361/productivity-commission-recommends-scrapping-rates-rebate-scheme Retrieved 12 March 2020.
37 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 97
The Productivity Commission suggests that: “the rates rebate scheme is poorly targeted and unfair”. It recommends that it be replaced with a national rates postponement programme, or that the scheme at least shift to being online. Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta has indicated that the government is carefully considering the recommendations.
4. How the issue relates to objectives in the current Work Programme
‘Social’ is one of LGNZ’s five policy priorities. This focuses on disparity, housing issues and ageing communities: “Social: Working alongside central government and iwi to address social issues and needs in our communities, including an aging population, disparity between social groups, housing (including social housing) supply and quality, and community safety.”
5. What work or action on the issue has been done and what was the outcome
This remit was originally prepared in 2018 and submitted for consideration. The LGNZ Remits Committee reviewed this and referred it instead to officials to raise with the Productivity Commission as part of the review of local government funding.
The Productivity Commission has since recommended that the government remove the rates rebate system and replace it with a national scheme for postponing rates. The Commission considered that central government is in the best position to tackle pressures on low-income households facing high housing pressures and the current scheme is inequitable, as well as administratively ‘cumbersome’ and modest in its approach (amounting to little over $12 a week).
This has not found favour with many groups – particularly those who advocate for older New Zealanders. For example, the national president of Grey Power has stated that the organisation “absolutely disagreed” with abolishing the scheme. In addition, a local association (Tauranga and Western Bay of Plenty) submission to the Commission recommended a resetting of the maximum rebate to restore it to previous levels and to align this with cost of living increases. This suggested a maximum rebate of $1,000 – indexed each year by the average rate increase across the country.
38 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 98
6. Any existing relevant legislation, policy or practice
Rates Rebate Act 1973
• Provides for a rates rebate on local council rates by a specified amount each year, dependant on income. • Since 2008 the specified amount has been adjusted each year through Orders in Council. • 2019/20 – Maximum rebate - $640.
Accommodation Supplement
• Available for very low incomes.
7. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone/Sector meeting
With the relevant Zone meeting postponed, support was sought from councils directly. The following councils endorse this remit: • Palmerston North City Council; • Napier City Council; • Manawatū District Council; • South Taranaki District Council; and • Rangitīkei District Council.
8. Suggested course of action envisaged
That LGNZ pursue an increase in the rates rebate for low income property owners and that this should match ongoing cost increases for local government.
9. Discussion and conclusion
The affordability of rates is not just a question of the quantum of rates and charges but also the ratio of rates and charges relative to income. The rates rebate scheme was introduced in 1974 and was designed to provide assistance to low income residential ratepayers. Over the longer term the quantum of the rates rebate has generally matched CPI, however, this ignores the fact that local authority core inputs are rising well above those of core inflation. Furthermore, over time the Act has not kept pace with the changing nature of tenure or technology. It is requested that the Government lift the level of rates rebates available for low and fixed income property owners.
39 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 99
11 Local Government’s CO2 emissions
Remit: That the Government implement an independent scheme, based on the United Kingdom model operated by the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, to measure and report on carbon emissions at a district level.
Proposed by: Whanganui District Council
Supported by: Palmerston North City Council; Napier City Council; South Taranaki District Council; Hastings City Council; and Horizons Regional Council.
Background information and research
1. Nature of the issue
The following issues with the current system have been identified:
• There is no national standard for reporting on carbon emissions at a district or regional level. • The system lacks incentives, structures and information sharing mechanisms that would enable and encourage local government authorities, regional economic development agencies and individual businesses to:
o Identify best practice in similar regions; and o Undertake targeted work that prioritises the reduction of their CO2 emissions.
• The proposal that large energy users publish Corporate Energy Transition plans as outlined in MBIE’s Discussion Document: Accelerating Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency, will only address these concerns to a limited degree.
2. Background to its being raised
New Zealand is committed to both domestic and international climate change progress. As a party to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) and the Kyoto Protocol, progress towards meeting our commitments is documented in New Zealand’s National Communication and Biennial Reports.
40 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 100
These summarise New Zealand’s domestic greenhouse gas emissions profile, climate change policies and measures, our support for developing countries, and progress on implementing our obligations under the UNFCCC. At present, New Zealand is not meeting its international targets and further actions need to be taken.
A feature of our national psyche is the pride New Zealanders place on performing above our weight in the sporting arena. There is significant, untapped potential for the nation’s competitive streak to be harnessed in pursuit of fulfilling our climate change mitigation ambitions. Developing and reporting on an externally administered measure of each district’s progress in reducing its climate impact in terms of CO2 outputs is one such way of doing this.
3. New or confirming existing policy
The remit may require minor amendment to the Local Government Act to ensure that information that is needed for calculations to be made is required to be produced at specified intervals.
4. How the issue relates to objectives in the current Work Programme
This remit directly aligns with LGNZ’s ‘Environment’ policy priority. In particular, it supports the Climate Change Project and is related to Outcome three: “A local government view on emission reduction targets for New Zealand, and how to achieve these.”
It assists with the following project deliverable: “Support councils to take action to mitigate the impacts of climate change, and encourage greater action by their communities on contributing to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.”
5. What work or action on the issue has been done and what was the outcome
No work has been undertaken specifically on this. However, the proposed model recommends use of the United Kingdom’s approach, which is administered by the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/uk-local-authority-and-regional-carbon-dioxide- emissions-national-statistics-2005-to-2017
The United Kingdom Greenhouse Gas inventory (GHGI) is compiled annually and reported on an end-user basis using international best practice guidance, drawing on a variety of National Statistics and sector specific data sources.
This is a technically complex statistical analysis which individual local authorities would be unable to replicate, but provides consistent inventories and emissions projections of greenhouse gases and air quality pollutants.
41 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 101
The credibility of the report allows the results to be reported each year to the UNFCCC and the European Monitoring Mechanism Regulation (MMR). It is also used to assess compliance with the United Kingdom’s domestic and international emissions.
The model has been used since 2005 and provides: “an important body of information [for] local authorities (LAs) and other relevant organisations to help identify high emitting sources of CO2 and energy intensive sectors, monitor changes in CO2 emissions over time and to help design carbon reduction strategies.” (Local and Regional Carbon Dioxide Emissions Estimates for 2005– 2017 for the UK Technical Report: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_d ata/file/812146/Local_authority_C02_technical_report_2017.pdf)
Over the period for which this model has been used, and where figures are currently available (2005-17), emissions have decreased in all regions of, and for all 391 local authorities, in the United Kingdom. A scan of local authorities suggests that performing well on these measures is a key ambition that drives decision-making for many of these bodies.
6. Any existing relevant legislation, policy or practice
• Local Government Act 2002. • Climate Change Response Act 2002. • Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Act 2019.
7. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone/Sector meeting
With the relevant Zone meeting postponed, support was sought from councils directly. The following councils endorse this remit: • Palmerston North City Council; • Napier City Council; • South Taranaki District Council; • Hastings District Council; and • Horizons Regional Council.
42 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 102
8. Suggested course of action envisaged
That a suitable government department be tasked with: (a) Analysing and publishing each district’s carbon emissions, in order to provide the most reliable and consistent possible breakdown of CO2 emissions across the country; and (b) Publishing interactive local authority level emissions maps that allow users to zoom in to any district and see the emissions for the area, as well as identify the significant point sources. Such maps should be possible to filter by different sectors, to view how emissions have changed across the time series so that areas of best practice can be identified.
This system would provide incentives, structures and low cost information sharing mechanisms that would enable and encourage local government authorities, regional economic development agencies and individual businesses to identify best practice in similar regions or businesses. It would also encourage them to undertake targeted work to reduce their CO2 emissions.
9. Discussion and conclusion
This proposal aligns with New Zealand’s international commitments, our national direction and LGNZ’s work programme in terms of the mitigation of climate change. It is a system that has been shown to have positive benefits in the United Kingdom and leverages existing characteristics of New Zealanders to achieve these collective goals.
43 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 103
Remits not going to AGM
The Remit Screening Committee’s role is to ensure that remits referred to the AGM are relevant, significant in nature and require agreement from the membership. In general, proposed remits that are already LGNZ policy, are already on the LGNZ work programme or technical in nature will be referred directly to the National Council for their action. Remits that fail to meet criteria will be declined.
1. Chief Executive remuneration
Remit: That LGNZ works with central government to investigate the potential of a centralised and independent organisation (such as the State Services Commission or the Remuneration Authority) to establish recommended remuneration levels/packages of local government chief executives.
Proposed by: Hamilton City Council
Supported by: Tauranga City Council; Waipa District Council; Tasman District Council; and Napier City Council.
Recommendation: That the remit is referred to the National Council for consideration.
2. Loans for low cost housing
Remit: That the Government provide interest-free loans to support the delivery of new low cost housing by relevant agencies, including councils, and that central government consider any additional mechanisms that would support councils and other relevant community agencies to respond to the housing crisis.
Proposed by: Whanganui District Council
Supported by: Palmerston North City Council; Napier City Council; Manawatū District Council; South Taranaki District Council; and Hastings District Council.
Recommendation: That the remit is declined on the basis that it is largely the same as the social housing remit adopted in 2019.
44 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 104
FOR INFORMATION NGĀ MŌHIOTANGA
TO Mayor and Councillors
AUTHOR Group Manager Planning & Environmental Services – Peter Thom
FILE REFERENCE Document: 2784390
MEETING DATE Wednesday, 29 July 2020
SUBJECT Planning & Environmental Services Report – June 2020
RECOMMENDATION | TE WHAIKUPU
THAT the report be received.
1 Summary
This month’s report outlines our activities with some end of financial year statistics and rate rebate applications are now completed for the financial year. The Mayoral Drought Fund has received 183 applications for the fund. Five policy and bylaw reviews are under way with public consultation. Matariki is now upon us and there a number of initiatives around Iwi Liaison that will begin to gain momentum after Covid. Council retained its Food Agency Recognition Certificate to inspect food premises from MPI. Development contributions are now in place and there has been a number of resource consent applications lodged prior to 1 July to avoid these. The Long Term plan work continues and work on the annual report begins. Oceana Gold has signalled new proposed works for Waihi mining operation.
2 Customer Services Team
June was a busy month for the Customer Services team, with dog registration invoices hitting the post, the processing of last minute rate rebate applications, assisting with the Mayoral Drought Relief Fund and our other services the team provides.
The team received 3,841 queue calls, an additional 800 calls compared to the same period last year, of which 3,500 were managed successfully. 341 calls were abandoned (result 8.9%, target 6.0%) and a service level of 76.5% was achieved (target 80% answered within 20 seconds). Over the month, the calls related to rates 16%, building 14%, planning 9%, animal control 7%, refuse and roading 5%, with the balance of calls spread across the Council.
Two fixed term Customer Service Advisor positions were advertised to cover extended leave; the successful applicants will start their training on 20 July.
Customer Services 2019-2020 year The team again adapted too many changes during the year including the implementation of the second phase of the new service request module as well as the telephony system that was
Page 1 of 10 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 105
upgraded earlier this year. 1,261 rate rebate applications were completed by the team; an increase of 38 applications on last year’s total. COVID-19 was also a challenging time. The Customer Services team worked hard ensuring the community were kept up to date with the changes relating to these unprecedented circumstances.
During the year, the team received 37,450 calls, of which 35,005 calls were managed successfully. The average service level for the year was 80.8% (target 80% of calls answered within 20 seconds). Over the year calls related to building 21%, rates, 11%, planning 8%, general information and refuse 6%, animal control 5% with all other calls spread across the organisation.
3 Development
30 June 2020
Consents Issued 2018/19 2019/20 Year to date
Building Consents 393 369 94%
Subdivisions 47 57 121% Land Use 92 64 70% Designations - - -% Objections 3 1 33% Certificates of Compliance 1 - -% Variations 22 25 114% Outline Plans 1 2 200% Right of Ways - 2 -% Extension of Time - - -% Permitted Boundary Activity 30 21 70% Certificates 196 172 88%
LIMs 450 404 90%
Landuse; Building Consent and LIM activity has slightly decreased for this financial year; while the number of subdivisions has increased.
4 Communications
During July, the comms team provided communication support in a number of areas including promoting initiatives to support our farmers such as the Mayoral Drought Relief Fund, and Elephant in the Paddock. The latter involved refreshing the campaign brochure and interviewing local champions whose stories will be used to raise awareness and promote wellness in our rural communities over the coming weeks. The team also worked with the strategic planning team on the statement of proposals for five policy and bylaw reviews, as well as publicising the feedback period and how people can tell us what they think. The communications officer refreshed and produced a number of brochures and newsletters, including the winter edition of the Over a Cuppa pensioner’s newsletter and Keeping of Animals and Barking Dogs brochures. The communications designer is also working with the strategic planning team on teardrop banners and other collateral for public engagement and council events.
Issues with manganese in the water kept the team busy on social media during working hours. This month we transferred afterhours monitoring of Facebook to Palmerston North City
Page 2 of 10 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 106
Council. The new system is working well. The number of people and organisations following our Facebook page has now topped the 5000 mark and continues to grow. The Palmerston North City Council Client Liaison Manager has also noted that our Facebook page is particularly active in comparison with other similar sized councils.
“It’s great to see this high level of activity from your community on Facebook. As this volume is higher than similar size communities that we monitor. So it’s a welcomed surprise.”
The senior communications advisor is part of a council project team put together by the CE following OceanaGold’s announcement of its proposed new mining development, Project Quattro. From a communications point of view, she’ll be working with other staff to ensure all information is available to the community as soon as possible and that people are aware there is a process to go through before the project is approved, and how they can participate in the decision making process.
Other major focus areas for the next month include communicating upcoming changes to building consent regulations, planning for communications training sessions across the organisation in September, as well as working through options and opportunities for doing things differently following Covid-19. As part of the recovery effort, the comms team is also providing content for Thames Coromandels annual magazine Our Coromandel (distributed to 17,000 TCDC ratepayers, with a view to encourage Coromandel holidaymakers into the Hauraki District to discover what we have to offer. The two-page feature, called ‘Off the Rails’, follows a three-page spread promoting the Hauraki Rail Trail, and highlights less well known businesses and experiences outside of the Rail Trail and off the beaten track.
5 Iwi Liaison
Matariki is now upon us and with the beginning of the New Year. Traditionally, this was the time to reflect on those who have passed and begin preparations for the year ahead. This year, the Matariki Stars were higher than normal in the sky and very visible. To Māori, this normally signals a long hot summer.
In progressing the following body of work. The four key priorities identified for 2019 are still being used as the basis for the Iwi Liaison Portfolio. These being: • Increase Council and Staff awareness of Hauraki Māori within the boundaries of the HDC. • Develop and implement Cultural Competencies Toolkit and training for Council and Staff • Increase and Improve Council relationships with Hauraki Māori • Development of a Māori Engagment Framework for Staff.
June: Policy Review and Planning 2021: - Developing a Māori Strategy that aligns with the well-being and identity of Māori within the Hauraki District Council. What key indicators will influence the lifting of low socio economic whānau. - Māori Strategy and Relationships 2050 - Dual Signage in Council Strategy. This project is about closing the gaps between Council and Māori and developing positive relationships. A cost effective project that provides large outcomes. Using Te reo Māori to create Council/ Public areas that where Iwi are more comfortable in participating. - Māori in decision making (Working document)
Yearly Strategic Outcomes Report This includes Māori values reporting Monitoring Council change towards engaging with Māori. Council achievement and growth towards outcomes of the Benchmark Report 2018. What have we achieved and what are we working towards, possible score card system to monitor the change in Council
Page 3 of 10 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 107
Māori Language Week Objectives 2020 Develop a key Project for Māori language week in September 2020. (This year’s Focus will be on dual signage and creating environments that allow for positive engagement with Hauraki Māori. A Report will be provided to Council on Dual signage and the effectiveness of passive projects that enhance the building of relationships. The best form of creating closer relationships with Māori is to ensure we are taking positive steps forward to using and promoting the Māori Language. Te Reo Māori forms the basis for all Māoridom. By assisting staff and the wider community to develop better use of Te Reo Māori will have a big impact on positive relationships with Māori. By Council taking the initiative to progress Te Reo Māori will be a large positive on developing better relationships. This was also identified as a key area to work on within the Benchmark Report. This year’s objective is to create a specific Hauraki focus on implementing positive long-term change with using Te Reo Māori.
Online Training Module development With the recent Emergency Event that occurred. A review of how we might engage with training was undertaken. This involved creating online training modules that still allow staff to complete required training. This will allow staff in upskilling their knowledge and capacity to work with Māori. 12 online modules are currently being developed that allow different forms of Engagement and learning. These online modules are designed for easier staff engagement as we move into an uncertain future with Covid 19. Follow up Hui will take place to further in bed the learnings within Council and staff practice. These follow up training hui will either be in a face to face format or via zoom. Ahurea 1 and 2 were the introductory courses designed to introduce Council and Staff, with a better insight of understanding Hauraki Māori and Māori thinking. The next phase is to move into a more detailed training that set’s a platform for all Staff and Council moving forward. Training that develops a deeper knowledge of staff understanding. The specific goal is to work towards creating better methods of engaging well with Māori.
With Covid 19 creating an unknown future. It is wise we look to develop online resources that allow Staff knowledge to increase and grow. Treaty Claims will still progress regardless. If we look at positive alternatives that allow staff to increase their understanding of Hauraki Māori, we can then plan better for outcomes that are more positive with Māori. Key objective is: - Create more in-depth Staff and Council training focused on aspects of Māori - Develop Key outcomes that allows for better Māori input in all areas of work - Focus on project development that closes the gaps between Council and Māori
6 Planning Implementation
6.1.1 Processing
The following applications were lodged during the month of April:
Subdivision = 3; Land use = 2; Combined subdivision and land use = 2; Variation to an existing subdivision = 3; and Permitted Boundary Activity = 1
A number of applications that have been on hold awaiting information have resumed processing during this time.
12 Subdivision and five Landuse applications were processed over the month all within the statutory time frame. All Duty Planner Days are covered by staff located in either the Paeroa or Waihi office. Consent processing staff are, where appropriate, continuing to work a couple of days per week from home.
Page 4 of 10 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 108
6.1.2 District Plan Changes The District Plan Committee considered the draft Proposed Plan Change 4 – Miscellaneous Plan Change document at its meeting on 24 June, and confirmed that all the items should be proceeded with. The Proposed Plan Change document and Section 32 report (evaluation of costs and benefits) are being finalized, and will have been provided to Iwi before the Council meeting. Should the Iwi provide any advice on the proposals this will be considered, and recommendations made to the Committee in relation to this. Consultation with other parties will also be occurring. As advised last month, depending on the level, and nature, of feedback received, it is intended that the finalized Proposed Plan Change will be placed before the Council in August for the formal resolution to proceed with public notification. Once publicly notified all the Items will be open for submissions – in support or opposition.
A separate meeting of the District Plan Committee will be held to further consider the proposed Waihi and Paeroa rezoning proposals.
6.1.3 Tirohia Landfill Waste Management lodged resource consent applications (with both WRC and HDC) to build a new landfill cell within the boundaries of the area of land already owned by Waste Management at Tirohia. The applications were received by HDC at the end of June.
WRC are taking the lead in relation to a number of technical reporting aspects and will share all relevant information with HDC. A number of areas of the application are currently undergoing peer review, including geotechnical, noise and landscape and visual.
6.1.4 Fast Track RMA consenting The Government’s Covid-19 Recovery (Fast-Track Consenting) Act came into force on 9 June 2020 after receiving Royal Assent, accepting recommendations of the Environment Committee.
The Act’s purpose is to urgently promote employment growth to support New Zealand's recovery from the economic and social effects of COVID-19. It also aims to support the certainty of ongoing investment across New Zealand while continuing to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources.
Former Principal Environment Court Judge Laurie Newhook has been appointed to convene the expert consenting panels that are enabled under the Act. These panels will determine applications for resource consents and notices of requirement for designations, and to issue certificates of compliance. The panels replace the role of local authorities as consenting authorities under the RMA. The fast-track consenting process is available for listed projects and referred projects.
The Act includes 11 projects listed as Government-led infrastructure projects. Consent applications or Notices of Requirement for these will automatically be referred to one of the panels to determine.
Private projects and non-listed Government projects can also apply to the Minister for the Environment to have their project fast-tracked. If the Minister considers the project is suitable to be fast tracked, the Minister will recommend making an Order in Council which would refer the project to a panel to consider. These decisions will be made jointly with the Minister of Conservation if any part of a project would occur in the coastal marine area.
7 Regulatory Services
7.1 Building Team
In the month of June 49 Building Consent applications were lodged with 6 of these being dwellings. 26 Building Consent applications were issued, with an 18 day average processing rate. The building team is in the beginnings of the BC (Building Consent) online application and processing system. The project is in its initial stages of configuration of data, so the system can operate with our own software and document systems, with the next stage of testing the configuration.
Page 5 of 10 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 109
7.2 Food Control
Our Environmental Health food control team have been busy this month, catching up with verifications that were due in the Covid level 4/3/2 period. Level 2 continued with Remote verifications, but as we have now moved into level one, onsite verifications can now be undertaken. In December 2019 the Food Control Team underwent an IANZ audit, and on 01 July we successfully received our Agency Recognition Certificate, which will expire on 28 February 2023. The team worked hard throughout the audit, so this is a pleasing result. This allows us to conduct food verifications for businesses under Food Control Plans (FCP’s) and National Programmes (NP). It is to be noted that for the 2020/21 year Council approved to waive the $100 Registration Fee for food businesses under FCP’s and NP’s, as a result of Covid and to encourage business in the hospitality industry.
7.3 Alcohol Licensing
Alcohol licences lodged with Council in the month of June, were four General Managers licences, one Online Licence, and one Special Licence.
7.4 Animal and Noise Control
The Animal Control team is now very busy with the annual registration period, with dog registrations due by 31 July. July will see the team busy with sending out reminder registration letters, dealing with returned mail (registrations) and following up with dog owners on changes, and the annual ROL (Responsible Owner Licence) testing. We are currently sitting about 1-2% higher than last year in our registered dog’s statistics, so that is encouraging. 8 Noise complaints were received in the month of June.
8 Strategic Planning
2021 Long Term Planning The predominant LTP focus for staff is the preparation and reviewing of budgets and the supporting information ready for the two-day LTP budget workshop with Elected Members on the 18th and 19th August.
Activity Managers are in the process of aligning their activity plans with forecast assumptions and the community outcomes that have been recently approved by Council.
Development Contributions Policy – effective 1 July 2020 Community consultation took place on the draft Development Contributions Policy in May, with a hearing of feedback and deliberations meeting on 10 June 2020. At that meeting, the Council adopted the policy, which came into effect on 1 July 2020.
Policy and Bylaw consultations A review has been undertaken of the following policies and bylaws are now being consulted on with the community: • Freedom Camping Bylaw • Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy • Gambling Policy • Significance and Engagement Policy • Amendment to the Nuisance Bylaw
The written feedback has opened and is from 17 July to 17 August 2020 and the hearing and deliberations meeting is scheduled for Wednesday 9 September 2020.
Carbon Footprint Inventory The Council signed on to a Regional Carbon Footprint Inventory. The Inventory was recently presented to the Mayoral Forum and will be presented to the Council in the near future. The Council has also undertaken an assessment for the Council (as opposed to the district) and the findings will also be presented to the Council soon.
Page 6 of 10 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 110
Separate items on the agenda Attached as separate items on the agenda for consideration are: • Update on Wharekawa Coast 2120 budget
2019/20 Annual Report and non-financial performance for the fourth quarter The 2019/20 financial year is now complete, and staff are preparing their fourth quarter and end of year non-financial performance results. These will be presented to Council in September. Meanwhile, staff are also working to prepare the necessary information for inclusion in the annual report document, including the projects and actions completed within the year. The Finance team are continuing to prepare the end of year financial information.
9 Mining Matters
Project Quattro As the Council will already be aware, on 17 July Oceana Gold ‘announced’ their intention to undertake community consultation on Project Quattro – a four pronged project the Company is proposing that entails: an extension to the Martha Open Pit (Phase 5), a new tailings storage facility (TSF3), a new open pit (Gladstone) and a large rock stack (the Northern Rock Stack).
Oceana Gold intends to undertake extensive community consultation over the next 2-3 months prior to lodging a private plan change request and resource consents with the Council (with resource consents to also be lodged simultaneously with the Waikato Regional Council). The Company have publicly stated “The applications will be notified, and anyone can make a written submission to Council on the proposed project.”
Staff are currently working with Oceana Gold staff to try and determine likely dates for release of draft technical reports (i.e. noise, vibration, pit wall stability, etc.) that can begin to be peer reviewed by Council’s experts. Staff will keep Council up-to-date as the project develops.
Peer Review Each year an independent panel of peer reviewers assembles to review monitoring data from mining operations in Waihi. The annual peer review process involves the following steps:
• March 31st: End of reporting period • June 30th: Draft reports submitted by Oceana Gold NZ Ltd • July 31st: Peer review comments received by Oceana Gold NZ Ltd • September: Peer review meeting in Waihi • October: Final peer review reports received by Oceana Gold NZ Ltd
For HDC the three peer reviewers involving Council’s regulatory responsibilities are Phil Dight (geotechnical), Chris Kidd (hydrogeological) and Robyn Simcock (land rehabilitation). The peer review process is rigorous and provides Council staff with an additional level of comfort regarding environmental performance and compliance with regard to mining in Waihi.
Peter Thom Group Manager: Planning and Environmental Services
Page 7 of 10 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 111
Appendix A: Monitoring Report
Publication of the Annual The last Annual Report for 2018/19 was adopted on 30 October Report. 2019. That the Annual Report is completed, audited and adopted by Council by 31st October, each year.
Special Consultative This has been undertaken as required with all Council Plans; Procedure Policies and Bylaws. At the time of writing, the joint sub-regional That all issues subject to a review of the Waste Minimisation and Management Plan is special consultative currently being consulted on in the form of the special procedure meet the consultative procedure. requirements of the Local Government Act, 2002.
Resource Consents & LIMs
Target Progress towards success
30 June 2020 All notified resource consents applications are Notified Consents to the end of May 2020 decided and issued within statutory timeframes. In 2 Out of time 0 (Limited Notified) 99% of all notified resource consent applications are decided and issued within 70 working days.
All non-notified resource 1 July 2019 – 30 June 2020 consent applications are decided and issued within Total 172 In time 178 99% Out of time 1 1% statutory timeframes. All non-notified consent Subdivision 57 In time 57 100% Out of time 0 0 % decisions, not requiring a Landuse 64 In time 63 98% Out of time 1 2 % hearing, are issued within Other 20 working days. Misc/Desig 25 In time 25 100% Out of time 0 0 % Variations 25 In time 25 100% Out of time 0 0 % Objections 1 In time 1 100% Out of time 0 0 % Ext. of time - In time - 100% Out of time 0 0 %
Whaarangi 8 | 10 M 2737214 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 112
YTD YTD June 19 June-20 Issue 2018/19 2019/20 building No. of Consents 28 393 26 369 consents % in time 93% 100% within statutory timeframes. New Houses Paeroa 27 20 100% of all Waihi 54 60 building Plains 37 25 consents are TOTAL 118 105 issued within statutory timeframes - 20 working days
Whaarangi 9 | 10 M 2737214 Council Agenda - 29-07-20 Page 113
All LIMs are YTD YTD June -19 June-20 issued within 2018/19 2019/20 statutory No. of LIMs 32 450 49 404 timeframes % in time 100% 100% All LIMS are issued within
10 working LIMs by Ward days Paeroa 115 93 Waihi 195 184 Plains 140 127 450 404
# LIMS %in time Avg # LIMS %in time % Avg
2018/19 2018/19 Processing 2019/20 2019/20 Overtime Processing July 49 100% 6.50 34 100% 0% 5.9 August 49 100% 6.00 31 100% 0% 6.5 September 32 100% 6.10 24 100% 0% 5.8 October 45 100% 6.04 34 97.1% 2.9% 6.5 November 44 100% 5.30 57 100% 0% 6.3 December 28 100% 4.3 43 100% 0% 4.1 January 25 100% 4.7 32 100% 0% 4.4 February 34 100% 5.8 38 100% 0% 5.3 March 45 100% 6.5 32 100% 0% 7.4 April 32 100% 5.4 11 100% 0% 7.2 May 35 100% 6.3 19 100% 0% 4.7 June 32 100% 6.3 49 100% 0% 5.2 TOTAL 450 100% 5.76 404 99% 1% 5.8
Whaarangi 10 | 10 M 2737214