Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee

Open Ngā Mēneti | Minutes

Minutes of a meeting of the Corporate and Operations Committee held in the Te Aroha Council Chambers, 35 Kenrick Street, TE AROHA on Wednesday 28 October 2020 at 9.00am.

Ngā Mema | Membership

Koromatua | Mayor Ash Tanner Koromatua Tautoko | Deputy Mayor Neil Goodger District Councillors Donna Arnold Caitlin Casey Teena Cornes Bruce Dewhurst James Sainsbury Russell Smith Kevin Tappin (Chair) James Thomas Adrienne Wilcock Sue Whiting

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Ngā whakapāha | Apologies

Cr Russell Smith

Kaimahi i reira | Staff Present

Staff Name Staff Title Item No. Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer 8.3 Michelle Staines-Hawthorne Corporate Strategy Manager 7.1, 7.4, 7.5, 7.6 Stephanie Glasgow Committee Secretary and Corporate Administration Officer Niall Baker Senior Policy Planner 7.2, 7.3 Graham Robertson Senior Utilities Assets Engineer 7.7 Jo Gifford Information Team Leader 7.7 Heather McDonald Asset Systems Team Leader 7.7 Mike van Grootel Roading Manager 7.7 Aaron Toone Utilities Asset Engineer 7.7 Roger Lamberth Property and Community Projects 7.8 Manager Mark Naudé Parks and Facilities Planner 7.9 Susanne Kampshof Asset Manager Strategy and Policy 7.11 Rachael Singh Events and Promotions Co-ordinator 7.12 Andrea Durie Senior Communications Advisor 7.12 Dennis Bellamy Group Manager Community 7.12, 7.13, 8.1 Development Steve Carney Animal Control Manager 7.13 Lisa Dellow Animal Control Officer 7.13 Vicky Cowley Emergency Management Officer 8.1 Kate Stevens Health & Safety Facilitator 8.2

I reira | In Attendance

Time In Time Out Chloe Blommerde – Stuff Reporter, Waikato Times 9.00am 12.03pm Sylvia Robertson 10.00am 10.37am Robyn DeMasi – Matamata Lions Group Representative 11.19am 11.33am

Minutes Page 2

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

1 Whakatūwheratanga o te hui | Meeting Opening Chairperson Kevin Tappin declared the meeting open at 9.01am.

2 Ngā whakapāha/Tono whakawātea | Apologies/Leave of Absence Apology COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That the apology from Cr Russell Smith be accepted and leave of absence from the meeting be granted.

Moved by: Cr S Whiting Seconded by: Cr D Arnold KUA MANA | CARRIED

3 Public Forum There was no speakers to the Public Forum.

4 Pānui tāpiritanga take | Notification of Urgent Business Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states: “An item that is not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if- (a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and (b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public,- (i) The reason why the item is not on the agenda; and (ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.” Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states: “Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,- (a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if- (i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and (ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but (iii) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

5 Whākī pānga | Declarations of Interest There were no declarations of interest.

Minutes Page 3

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

6 WHAKAAETANGA MĒNETI | CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES COMMITTEE RESOLUTION THAT THE MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY MEETING OF THE CORPORATE AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE HELD ON WEDNESDAY, 23 SEPTEMBER 2020, BE CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD OF THE MEETING. MOVED BY: CR D ARNOLD SECONDED BY: CR A WILCOCK KUA MANA | CARRIED

NGĀ PŪRONGO A NGĀ ĀPIHA | OFFICER REPORTS 7 Pūrongo me whakatau | Decision Reports 7.1 CCO - Exemption for the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust 5 7.2 Waikato Plan Leadership Committee Update 9 7.3 Solid Waste Working Party - Minutes of meeting held on 14 October 2020 13 7.4 Documents Executed Under Council Seal 15 7.5 Community Ward Grants Round One 2020/21 16 7.6 Appointment of Alternate Representative for Ngāti Rahiri Tumutumu 20 7.7 Staff Long Service Presentation 21 7.8 Demolition/Removal of Council Buildings reaching end of Economic Life 22 7.9 Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and Related Legislation 27 7.10 Matamata Cemetery Wall Update - Matamata Lions Group 33 7.11 Approval for Shared Pathway 34 7.12 Recovery Working Party Minutes 38 7.13 Dog Control Annual Report 2019/20 40

8 Information Reports 8.1 Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Joint Committee - Meeting 7 September 2020 42 8.2 Safety and Wellness Report 43 8.3 Chief Executive Officer's Report 44

Minutes Page 4

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

7 Pūrongo me whakatau | Decision Reports CCO - Exemption for the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust

CM No.: 2272768

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

The Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust (the Trust) is the Governance entity for the cycleway known as the Hauraki Rail Trail (HRT). Currently the Trust is responsible for developing, managing and promoting the HRT, which is part of the New Zealand wide network of cycleways branded as Nga Haerenga. The purpose of this report is to undertake the fourth review of the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust (Trust) from being a Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and determine if the exemption is still appropriate.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. the report be received, and 2. The Committee resolve that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with the provisions of Section 79 of that Act determines that it does not require further information prior to making a decision on this matter; 3. The Committee grant the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust an exemption from the Council-Controlled Organisation requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 under section 7(3) of that Act.

Moved by: Deputy Mayor N Goodger Seconded by: Cr S Whiting KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background CCO status Section 6 of the LGA defines a CCO as an entity in respect of which one or more local authorities have, whether or not jointly with other local authorities or persons:  control, directly or indirectly of 50% or more of the votes at any meeting of the members or controlling body of the entity; or  the right, directly or indirectly to appoint 50% or more of the trustees, directors, or managers (however described) of the entity. The Hauraki, Matamata-Piako and Thames-Coromandel District Councils are settlors to the Trust Deed and the Trust fits the legal definition of a CCO as defined in the LGA because the councils indirectly control 50% of the votes at the Trust meetings. In accordance with the Trust Deed there must be between three and six Trustees on the Board of the Trust. Each Council has appointed a Trustee and local Iwi have appointed three, where those iwi have mana whenua status over the path of the HRT.

CCO - Exemption for the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust Page 5

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

In 2011 it was recommended by the now disbanded Hauraki Rail Trail Joint Committee (Matamata-Piako, Thames-Coromandel and Hauraki District Councils) that the Trust be treated as an exempt CCO. Council granted the Trust an exemption from the CCO requirements of the LGA on 14 December 2011, 12 November 2014, and again on 8 November 2017. Under section 6(4)(i) of the LGA this means that the Trust is currently operating as a Council Organisation (CO), not a CCO. Pursuant to section 7(6) of the LGA any decision to grant an exemption is required to be reviewed within three years after it is granted. Council is therefore required to consider the exemption and whether this should continue for another three years prior to 8 November 2020. CCO requirements under the Local Government Act, 2002 Part 5 of the LGA (sections 55 to 74 and Schedules 8 and 9) outlines the requirements for CCOs. These requirements include half yearly and annual reporting obligations and a requirement to prepare a statement of intent.

Ngā Take/Kōrerorero | Issues/Discussion Council needs to consider if the reasons for granting the Trust an exemption from the requirements of a CCO in 2011, 2014 and 2017 are still valid. Pursuant to section 7(3) of the LGA, Council may exempt a CCO from the requirements generally imposed on CCOs provided that they first consider the factors listed in section 7(5) of the Act. Those factors are:  the nature and scope of the activities provided by the CCO; and  the costs and benefits of granting the exemption to Council, the CCO and the community.

Nature and Scope of Activities (s7(5)(a)) The nature and scope of the Trust’s activities are set out in its Trust Deed. Section 5.1 of the Trust Deed states that ‘the Board shall hold the Trust Fund on Trust for the charitable purpose of providing benefits to the communities within the Region by operating, maintaining, repairing, developing and facilitating the use and enjoyment of the Cycleway’. This includes:  leasing and/or licensing land from any of the Settlors or any other party for use by the Cycleway;  developing and constructing extensions and additions to the Cycleway including, without limitation; an extension to the Cycleway from Kaiaua to Kopu; and additions and detours from the Cycleway to sites of interest close to the Cycleway;  maintaining all of the Cycleway;  ensuring that the Cycleway is developed and maintained to the standard required for it to be included in the Nga Haerenga/National Cycleway network;  raising funds to carry out and complete any of these charitable purposes.

Costs and Benefits (s7(5)(b)) The CCO regime would impose costs on the Trust arising from:  the time and costs associated with forming a Council Controlled Organisation by way of the special consultative procedure; and  ongoing administration and additional reporting costs. The question that therefore needs to be considered is whether these costs outweigh the potential benefits for Council in requiring the Trust to comply with the CCO regime.

Page 6 CCO - Exemption for the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

These potential benefits are:  receiving an annual Statement of Intent and additional financial reporting as outlined in the LGA; and  the democratic benefit of providing for public consultation in relation to the Trust becoming a CCO. Because the range of activities undertaken by the Trust is relatively narrow and limited to governance of the HRT, and there are several reporting and monitoring mechanisms already in place, both of these benefits are available to the Council without the costs and time delays associated with the CCO regime. In addition to this, consultation was undertaken by Council prior to agreeing to the establishment of the Hauraki Rail Trail and by Hauraki District Council as part the process to designate the Hauraki Rail Trail under the Resource Management Act 1991.

Ngā Whiringa | Options Council could:  decline to continue the exemption of the Trust from CCO status under the LGA; or  continue the exemption of the Trust from CCO status under the LGA. Council will need to consider if the rationale provided by the Hauraki Rail Trail Trust Joint Committee in 2011, 2014 and 2017 for the Trust exemption from the CCO regime is still valid. The rationale for continuing the exemption is set out below:  The requirements imposed on CCOs under the LGA are relatively onerous for the Trust given its size and scope of operation;  The Trust can be subject to sufficient Council oversight and control outside the CCO regime under the terms of the Trust Deed and Hauraki District Council’s Management Agreement;  The Trust has neither the funds nor the responsibilities that necessitate the reporting or consultation requirements imposed on CCOs;  There will be financial benefits and few, if any, costs to the local authority and the community in continuing the exemption;  The Trust is a charity, and may become dependent upon the Councils (and therefore the community) to meet the costs of the CCO requirements;  The Trust will not be in a position to meet the reporting requirements attaching to statements of intent without professional assistance, creating further costs, and those costs will outweigh any reporting benefits because of the small size of the organisation and it’s not for profit basis;  The Trust provides financial reports to the Charities Commission in order to maintain its status as a charitable organisation and those reports must also be provided to the Councils and to local Iwi upon request so there is still public transparency regarding its financial position; and  In the event that the Trust’s operations change over time, the Councils may revoke its status as an exempted organisation.

Ngā take ā-ture, ā-Kaupapahere hoki | Legal and policy considerations  The legal requirements under the LGA have been outlined above in this report. In order for the Trust to be exempted from CCO status under section 7(3) of the LGA, Council must grant the exemption by resolution.

 Under the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, a decision in accordance with the recommendation(s) is not considered to have a high degree of significance.

CCO - Exemption for the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust Page 7

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Ngā Pāpāhonga me ngā Wātaka | Communications and timeframes Council undertook extensive consultation prior to contributing funding to the Hauraki Rail Trail and Hauraki District Council undertook consultation in obtaining a designation over the rail corridor for the trail under the Resource Management Act 1991. No further consultation has been undertaken with the community on this matter.

Both Hauraki and Thames-Coromandel District Councils have reports seeking exemptions going to their Council meetings, it is anticipated that these exemptions will be granted by the respective Councils. If Council resolves to extend the CCO exemption this will mean that the Trust’s exemption will be reviewed again by all councils in 2023, the Trust will be advised in writing of Council’s decision. Council must resolve whether to continue the CCO exemption prior to 8 November 2020.

Te Tākoha ki ngā Hua mō te Hapori me te here ki te whakakitenga o te Kaunihera | Contribution to Community Outcomes and consistency with Council Vision Theme: Healthy Communities Community Outcome: - Our community is safe, healthy and connected - We encourage the use and development of our facilities.

Pānga ki te pūtea, me te puna pūtea | Financial Cost and Funding Source Should Council require the Trust to meet the requirements for CCOs under the LGA, it is anticipated that further discussions would be required with the Trust on the cost of meeting these requirements. Hauraki District Council report of 11 September 2017 (file reference: 2274463) to their council on 27 September 2017 states “Based on the Councils’ experience with Local Authority Shared Services Ltd, these additional costs are estimated at approximately $30,000 per annum”.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Sandra Harris Senior Policy Planner

Approved by Michelle Staines-Hawthorne Corporate Strategy Manager Manaia Te Wiata Group Manager Business Support Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer

Page 8 CCO - Exemption for the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Waikato Plan Leadership Committee Update

CM No.: 2350454

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary The Waikato Plan Leadership Committee has been established to facilitate and encourage the implementation of the Waikato Plan and undertake any reviews or updates to the Plan.

The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the Waikato Plan Leadership Committee meeting held on 14 September 2020. The minutes are attached.

Council asked for an item to be placed on the agenda for discussion regarding the Waikato Plan Leadership Committee. This report and the response from Waikato Regional Council is attached.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The information be received.

2. The Committee confirm its position on the Waikato Plan following the response to the issues Council raised.

Moved by: Mayor A Tanner Seconded by: Cr A Wilcock KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background Waikato Plan The Waikato Plan is the overarching strategic plan for the region. It was developed by the region’s leaders to address the social, economic, cultural and environmental challenges the region faces. It provides an action plan to support the integrated development of the region for the next 30 years. The plan development started in 2012/2013 and the plan was adopted in August 2017. Since then the focus has been on implementation.

A copy of the Plan, the summary document, and Implementation Programme is available at https://waikatoplan.co.nz/

Waikato Plan Leadership Committee The Leadership Committee has been established to facilitate and encourage the implementation of the Waikato Plan and undertake any reviews or updates to the Plan.

The Leadership Committee will function as a clearinghouse, facilitator and influencer, encouraging the allocation of resources to achieve agreed regional priorities. It will also act as the facilitator of the Waikato message, building the authority and influence the Waikato has by encouraging the many legitimate voices in the region to say the same thing and advocate for the same outcomes for the region.

Due to Hauraki District Mayor Toby Adams resigning from this committee, at its meeting on 22 July 2020 Council confirmed Mayor Ash Tanner as representative for Hauraki District Council (HDC) and Matamata-Piako District Council on the Waikato Plan Leadership Committee. Council

Waikato Plan Leadership Commitee Update Page 9

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

also resolved that Councillor Adrienne Wilcock be present at the Waikato Plan Leadership Committee in the absence of Mayor Ash Tanner if required. The appointment of Councillor Wilcock was accepted by HDC at their meeting on 26 August 2020.

Ngā Take/Kōrerorero | Issues/Discussion

Summary of Meeting on 14 September 2020 Waikato Plan Strategic Direction and Priorities Forum The following Committee Members are appointed as Workstream Leaders: a) Regional housing Committee Member: Lale Ieremia b) Youth and employment Committee Member: Bevan Smith and Otorohanga Mayor Max Baxter c) Regional climate change response Committee Member: Eugene Berryman-Kamp d) Community connectivity Committee Member: Hamish Bell.

Strategic Partners Forum Waikato Plan Leadership Committee membership The Leadership Committee agreed to appoint a representative from the Strategic Partners Forum as a voting member of the Committee. This was issue discussed at the July meeting.

Matters raised by Matamata Piako District Council Council raised matters regarding the Waikato Plan and the Leadership Committee. Waikato Regional Council provided the attached response.

Waikato Plan Projects Update The priority actions for the Committee include: 1. The development of a regional housing stock profile 2. Developing a project that looks at youth and employment 3. Understanding better mental health and wellbeing across the region 4. Waikato Wellbeing Project (SDGs) – included March 2019. 5. Electric Vehicles project – added March 2020

Te Waka update An update was provided to the Committee on relevant Te Waka activities. The following funding issues were noted in a presentation to the Committee:  The funding model is not fit for purpose − Reliance on councils for 1/3 funding within context of current LTP budget to June 2021 is problematic − Growing engagement with business and central government, but some way to go to achieve funding certainty − Lack of funding certainty makes it impossible to undertake senior recruitment.  Insufficient resources to deliver on current FY21 strategic plan − Current core team insufficient to deliver on FY21 objectives – even after re-prioritisation of resources − In particular the targeted sector, inward investment and regional business support network programs − Need to close cash shortfall of $500k ($950k annualised) as we transition with people and into the new plan  Our FY22-24 work program will require a step-change in funding from all partners − Initial estimates suggest need to double current budget from c.2m to c.4m at least to deliver on our purpose − Intention is to move from 1/3 councils, 1/3 business, 1/3 government towards 50% business over next 3 years  Ongoing commitment from councils vital as we enter the new LTP process − Your confidence underwrites our efforts to bring business and central government to the funding table − We need to understand how we can best support you to get your support in return

Page 10 Waikato Plan Leadership Commitee Update

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Suggested amendments to Waikato Plan Leadership Committee Terms of Reference The Leadership Committee endorsed amendments to the Committee Terms of Reference to provide for the following:  Removal of Thames Coromandel District Council from the Eastern Sub-region joint membership;  Inclusion of the Strategic Partners Forum membership; and  To allow each member of the Committee to appoint an alternate to attend the meeting in their place when they are unable.

Considerations Council has signalled that it may withdraw its involvement in the Waikato Plan as per the attached email.

Council also asked for clarification of the financial contributions made to the Waikato Plan implementation and that making any further financial contributions may not be appropriate if the concerns expressed remain unresolved.

Hauraki District Council staff have advised that Mayor Toby Adams has concerns with the project. Hauraki District Council staff have been instructed to provide updates to our elected members until the end of this financial year only and funding for supporting the project has not been included in their LTP 2021-2031 at this stage.

Mōrearea | Risk There is the potential for some reputational risk if Council does not continue to contribute to the Waikato Plan given it has been involved since the Waikato Plan got underway in May 2013. There is also a risk that the district is not part of key regional discussions and benefits that flow from this.

Ngā Whiringa | Options Council should considers its position on continued involvement and contribution to the Waikato Plan following the response to the issues Council raised.

Waikato Plan Leadership Commitee Update Page 11

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Pānga ki te pūtea, me te puna pūtea | Financial Cost and Funding Source Council

The Waikato Plan Implementation Support Budget 2017/18 - 2019/20 that was previously set is attached. It should be noted that this was on the basis that third party funding would be available which has not been achieved.

At the end of the 2018/19 financial year WLASS invoiced Council for the Waikato Plan contribution for 2018/19 of $50,000 + GST. This was challenged by staff and we only accrued $35,000 for 30 June 2019.

In 2018, the Waikato Plan had an independent review undertaken by Peter Winder (the Winder report). One of the Winder report recommendations was to “Strip implementation funding out of the Waikato Plan budget and secure implementation funding on a project-by-project basis based on the merits of the business case and the willingness of the partners to fund the activity”.

Around this time was reported to Leadership Group the expected central government funding did not materialise, which was intended to reduce the local government contributions as per the footnotes in the budget table. Council staff we were advised at the time it was anticipated that the funding levels previously agreed would continue.

On 20 September 2019 Council paid $35,000 that covered the 2019/20 year.

Council staff sought clarification on the budget set for the 2020/21 financial year and the expected contributions from Council. Waikato Regional Council staff have confirmed that the budget that will be sought from contributing councils will be base-lined to what is presently in 20/21 Annual Plans. The contribution that will be sought from MPDC will not increase and will remain the same.

Shortly MPDC will receive a letter from Waikato Regional Council Chief Executive asking for confirmation of contribution to the Waikato Plan. This should come out in the next couple of weeks.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. Waikato Plan Leadership Committee TORs and Appointments - July 2020 B. Report to 14 Sept Waikato Plan Leadership Committee - matters raised by MPDC in regard to the Waikato Plan C. Attachment 2 Responses to email received from MPDC 11 August 2020 D. Meeting Minutes Waikato Plan Leadership Committee 14 September 2020 E. Waikato Plan implementation budget 2017/18 - 2019/20

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Niall Baker Senior Policy Planner

Approved by Michelle Staines-Hawthorne Corporate Strategy Manager Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer

Page 12 Waikato Plan Leadership Commitee Update

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Solid Waste Working Party - Minutes of meeting held on 14 October 2020

CM No.: 2361875

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

Council has setup a Solid Waste Working Party made-up of Councillors Adrienne Wilcock, Caitlin Casey, Bruce Dewhurst and James Sainsbury. Councillor Wilcock is the Chairperson. The Working Party operates under a Terms of Reference approved by Council.

The purpose of this report is to report on the minutes of the Solid Waste Working Party meetings held on 14 October 2020

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The information be received.

Moved by: Cr C Casey Seconded by: Cr D Arnold KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background To ensure that the Matamata-Piako District Community has the best opportunity to set a new direction for solid waste, Council and the Chief Executive have agreed to establish a Solid Waste Working Party comprising of the Mayor and three Elected members, supported by staff, to work to assess and respond to a range of initiatives and opportunities to improve our solid waste services and reduce waste to landfill. The purpose of the working party is to:

 Identify, promote and assess opportunities to support the National, Regional and local Waste strategies to improve the Social , Cultural, Economic and Environmental wellbeing of the Matamata-Piako District community, through local solid waste activities  Work with Council staff on issues concerning solid waste including development of new plans, policies etc.  Make recommendations to Council and/or its committees  Work collaboratively with external partners and stakeholders

The Working Party membership is Councillors Adrienne Wilcock, Caitlin Casey, Bruce Dewhurst and James Sainsbury with Councillor Wilcock acting as the Chairperson. The Working Party operates under a Terms of Reference approved by Council.

The intention is that the minutes of the working party meetings will be reported to the Council or Corporate & Operations Committee with the Chairperson or their delegate providing a verbal update. Council can then make decisions on issues considered and recommended by the working party.

Ngā Take/Kōrerorero | Issues/Discussion The current focus of the working party is on:

Solid Waste Working Party - Minutes of meeting held on 14 October 2020 Page 13

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

 LTP Budgets, fees and charges  Engagement with waste industry representatives  Reviewing / updating the Waste Assessment and Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP); Arrangements that will lead to new arrangements at the conclusion of the current collection/transfer station contract in 2023.

Mōrearea | Risk There are no risks at this stage.

Ngā Whiringa | Options There are no relevant options.

Ngā take ā-ture, ā-Kaupapahere hoki | Legal and policy considerations The receipt of the working party minutes is not a significant issue in terms of the Significance and Engagement Policy.

There are no legal or policy considerations.

Ngā Pāpāhonga me ngā Wātaka | Communications and timeframes It is proposed to consult on a new WMMP and this will be reported back to Council at a later date.

Ngā take ā-Ihinga | Consent issues There are no consent issues.

Pānga ki te pūtea, me te puna pūtea | Financial Cost and Funding Source There is no financial costs associated with the operations of the Working Party.

Funding of specific initiatives will be from existing budgets, and within Council’s Policy on Delegated Authority.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. Minutes - Solid Waste Working Party - 14 October 2020 (six meeting) - PDF for agenda

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Niall Baker Senior Policy Planner

Approved by Michelle Staines-Hawthorne Corporate Strategy Manager Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer

Page 14 Solid Waste Working Party - Minutes of meeting held on 14 October 2020

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Documents Executed Under Council Seal

CM No.: 2360521

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary The schedule of documents for June to September 2020 executed under Council Seal is attached.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The report of the schedule of documents executed under Council Seal be received.

Moved by: Cr D Arnold Seconded by: Cr T Cornes KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background This document contains a list of all the Council documents that have the official Council Seal applied to them from June to September 2020. This is used mainly for legal or planning processes, it allows Council to keep track of what documents use the seal for auditing purposes.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. Schedule of Executed Documents - June - July 2020 B. Schedule of Executed Documents - August - September 2020

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Ellie Mackintosh Graduate Policy Planner

Approved by Michelle Staines-Hawthorne Corporate Strategy Manager Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer

Documents Executed Under Council Seal Page 15

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Community Ward Grants Round One 2020/21

CM No.: 2354379

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary Council has a Community Grants Policy to administer a $30,000 contestable grant. The first of two funding rounds held each year was open from 5 August to 9 September 2020 where Council invited applications to the fund. In total 29 applications were received. Councillors determined the outcome of the applications at their respective ward meetings. The purpose of this report is to provide information on the allocations for the first funding round of 2020/21.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The report be received.

Moved by: Cr J Thomas Seconded by: Cr T Cornes KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background Following the disestablishment of the Community Boards, Council adopted the Community Grants Policy (Policy) on 11 June 2014 to guide the administration of the $15,000 contestable grant. At its meeting of 26 July 2017, Council adopted the revised Policy and approved an increase to the total budget per year to $30,000, with $10,000 available for each ward (Matamata, Morrinsville and Te Aroha). The new Policy and budget became effective immediately (2017/18 financial year). The $30,000 contestable fund is shared evenly among the wards and is distributed in two funding rounds held in approximately August and February each financial year. Council resolved to carry forward leftover funding from last year’s funding round. This gave relevant wards the ability to use any extra funding across the next two funding rounds, bringing Matamata’s total to allocate to $10,615.00, Te Aroha’s total to $12,956.07 and Morrinsville’s total remained at $10,000. The Policy gives delegated authority to the ward Councillors to determine the outcome of applications received that are relevant to their ward. The results of each application are to be reported back to Council. A copy of the Grants Policy can be found at https://www.mpdc.govt.nz/pdf/CouncilDocuments/Policies/Grants/community_grants_policy_2017. pdf

Ngā Take/Kōrerorero | Issues/Discussion In total 29 applications were received throughout the district – 8 from Matamata, 6 from Morrinsville and 14 from Te Aroha and 1 that was district wide. Below is a summary of the applications received, and the funding decisions by the respective ward Councillors.

Amount Amount Matamata Ward Funding towards Reason declined requested granted

Page 16 Community Ward Grants Round One 2020/21

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Oversubscribed, Matamata Scout Group Painting sail boats. 1300.00 Declined incomplete bank details

Walton Tennis Club Replace 2 x tennis nets. 460.00 460.00

Assistance towards Matamata Dramatic advertising and publicity 2,000.00 1,000.00 Society for seven productions. Oversubscribed, Matamata Community Funding for commercial 2,500.00 Declined incomplete bank Dinners oven. details Funding for venue hire Matamata Country 1,000 towards and music 2,150.00 1,000.00 Music Club venue hire assistant/coordinator hire. Funding towards Hinuera Rugby & upgrading indoor cricket 2,500.00 1,000.00 Sports Club centre facilities. Replace changing shed roof and spouting, Bedford Park Trust 2,500.00 1,000.00 maintenance/repairs to equipment. Matamata Writers Assistance towards 1,000.00 1,000.00 For the layout Group printing costs of anthology.

Total funding requested/allocated 14,410.00 5,460.00 Starting budget 10,615.00 Granted 5,460.00 Remaining for second funding round 5,155.00

Amount Amount Morrinsville Ward Funding towards Reason declined requested granted Oversubscribed, Morrinsville Golf Club Facility maintenance costs incl. concrete, electrical 2,005.00 Declined suggest separate fundraising tagging, fire extinguishers Morrinsville Croquet Oversubscribed, To cover Club 1,800.00 Declined retrospective subscriptions/lawn mower funding 31 Squadron Fund new smoke alarms (Morrinsville) ATC 250.00 250.00 due to dampness

Morrinsville Soccer Funding 2 x new portable Club 1,894.00 1,894.00 goal posts

Community Ward Grants Round One 2020/21 Page 17

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Morrinsville Lacrosse Funding for new Oversubscribed, Association equipment for 2 x teams 2,500.00 Declined other funding options available and 1 x goalie gear

Morrinsville A & P Funding towards Society Incorporated promotion and advertising 2,000.00 2,000.00 of event

Total funding requested/allocated 10,449.00 4,144.00 Starting budget 10,000.00 Granted 4,144.00 Remaining for second funding round 5,856.00

Amount Amount Te Aroha Ward Funding towards Reason declined requested granted

Cover term costs for students (for those who Te Aroha Kaahui Ako 1,000.00 $800 can’t afford it) for Riding for the Disabled in Waihou Funding for 2 x new dehumidifiers to prevent Towards Future Te Aroha dampness and help 2197.00 $500 dehumidifier material/costumes last longer and a new phone Te Aroha Swimming Funding to cover training 1140.00 $ 760 Club Inc for 3 x volunteer coaches Funding to help cover Te Aroha Croquet Club 2500.00 $550 For verti-draining required turf maintenance Funding to cover flag, Te Aroha Athletics For blower and equipment, blower and 1994.17 750.01 Club trimmer grass trimmer Clearing weeds, fence For sealer and Enhance Te Aroha paint and maintaining 1250.00 592.00 preparation/paintin grounds by old rail station g Te Aroha Family Chair for new staff Oversubscribed, Budgeting Services member and replace 400.00 Declined received previous Incorporated phone/answering machine funding Upgrade water Te Aroha Riding for Upgrading water supply 431.25 478.53 supply from local Disabled for horses supplier 2 x picnic tables and new Towards new Te Aroha BMX Club 2500.00 1,200.00 larger air compressor compressor

Stanley Avenue Funding for new lawn 1,400.00 Declined Oversubscribed Croquet Club mower.

Page 18 Community Ward Grants Round One 2020/21

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Oversubscribed, Manawaru Historical Purchase an ‘open’ flag 185.00 Declined received previous Society sign and base. funding

Funding for CCTV system Te Aroha Dramatic to stream shows between 2,500.00 500.00 Towards CCTV Society Incorporated stage areas, dressing rooms etc.

Te Aroha & District Funding for backup water Oversubscribed, 2,500.00 Declined Health Services Trust supply ineligible

Grand Tavern Hunting Purchase a gazebo and 2,500.00 Declined Oversubscribed & Fishing Club have club logo inscribed

Total funding requested/allocated 22,497.42 6,130.54 Starting budget 12,956.07 Granted 6,130.54 Remaining for second funding round 6,825.53

Amount Amount District Wide Funding towards Reason declined requested granted Funding to hold a Tech Pam Fergusson Oversubscribed, Wananga at Waimakariri 2,500.00 Declined Charitable Trust ineligible Marae (Cambridge)

Total funding requested/allocated 2,500.00 0.00

Ngā Pāpāhonga me ngā Wātaka | Communications and timeframes The funding round was advertised in the local papers, on our website, various Facebook pages and an e-newsletter was sent to the Grants and Funding mailing list. The funding round was open between 5 August and 9 September 2020. Councillors assessed the applications at ward meetings on 21 and 23 September. All applicants have been advised of the decisions.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Sandra Harris Senior Policy Planner

Approved by Michelle Staines-Hawthorne Corporate Strategy Manager Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer

Community Ward Grants Round One 2020/21 Page 19

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Appointment of Alternate Representative for Ngāti Rahiri Tumutumu

CM No.: 2362019

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

The Heads of Agreement (attached) provides for the appointment of non-elected Forum Members by the Forum. This report informs Councillors of a new appointment by Ngati Rahiri-Tumutumu.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The information be received.

Moved by: Mayor A Tanner Seconded by: Cr C Casey KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background The Heads of Agreement (attached) provides for the appointment of non-elected Forum Members by the Forum.

The Ngati Rahiri Tumutumu Trust has advised Council of a decision to nominate Daniel Braid as its alternate member on the Forum (attached), alongside Jill Taylor.

Staff can confirm Council has received copies of the Trusts minutes regarding the appointment. A report will be sent to the Forum’s December meeting so the appointment decision can be made by Forum members.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. MPDC - DBraid Appointment Manawhenua Forum 19Sept20 B. TMF Heads of Agreement 3 March 2020

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Stephanie Glasgow Committee Secretary and Corporate Administration Officer

Approved by Michelle Staines-Hawthorne Corporate Strategy Manager Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer

Page 20 Appointment of Alternate Representative for Ngāti Rahiri Tumutumu

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Staff Long Service Presentation

CM No.: 2362069

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

Graham Robertson will be presented with a Long Service Award in recognition of 20 years’ service to Matamata-Piako District Council.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The information be received.

Moved by: Cr A Wilcock Seconded by: Mayor A Tanner KUA MANA | CARRIED

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Stephanie Glasgow Committee Secretary and Corporate Administration Officer

Approved by Michelle Staines-Hawthorne Corporate Strategy Manager Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer The meeting adjourned for morning tea at 10.11am and reconvened at 10.37am.

Staff Long Service Presentation Page 21

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Demolition/Removal of Council Buildings reaching end of Economic Life

CM No.: 2343057

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

Six Council buildings have been identified as being at the end of their economic life. Council do not receive any income and essential Health & Safety work is unfunded.

The buildings are not suitable for any other identified long term use, (apart from a possible one).

Earlier this year the demolition of Ngarua Hall was competitively tendered with a significant cost difference between the successful tenderer and the other short listed organisations.

A quotation has already been obtained from the above successful tenderer for the demolition of 100 Morrinsville-Walton Road which is very competitive.

If Council wish to expedite the removal of these buildings and benefit from expected economies of scale all the buildings could be packaged into one demolition contract.

The market has recently been tested through a public advertised tender process (Ngarua Hall). Consideration should be given for specialised procurement both for expertise and market rate.

It is suggested that tendering for this work would delay the most probable result and add further costs.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The report be received

2. The Skatepark Building at the Te Aroha Domain be optional for removal dependant on decision of Te Aroha Domain Working Party and confirmation from Council.

3. The properties identified are demolished/removed as one contract a) 100 Morrinsville-Walton Road, Morrinsville b) 61a & 61b Tower Road, Matamata c) Scout Huts r/o Wardville Hall, Wardville Road, Matamata d) 8 Tui Street, Matamata (ex Pancake House)

4. Special Procurement be approved based on recent public tendering of similar work

5. Funding to be from the income of property sales.

Moved by: Mayor A Tanner Seconded by: Cr J Sainsbury KUA MANA | CARRIED

Page 22 Demolition/Removal of Council Buildings reaching end of Economic Life

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Horopaki | Background Council has a number of buildings across the district that have reached the end of their economic life. Some have been associated with a lease, others used by community groups that have “walked away”.

These buildings do not have a budget associated with them so any essential work required to protect the public is unfunded.

Due to their location, condition or community requirements these buildings have not been identified as suitable for any other activity.

100 Morrinsville-Walton Road, Morrinsville. This residential building was part of the lease with the Morrinsville Trotting Club and occupied by their manager. Approximately two years ago the manager passed away and subsequent to this a number of Waikato Trotting Clubs amalgamated. This building has not been occupied since. The building has been on the site for approximately 40 years but was relocated from another site, based on the materials used and design the age of the building is likely to be from the late 1940’s. It does not meet the Residential Tenancies Act requirements, has suffered from substantial movement and piles have likely failed. Dry rot is also evident. It is located within the Roy Scott Recreation Reserve designation. The new lease with the Waikato Harness Racing Club does not include the house.

61a and 61b Tower Road, Matamata. These two adjacent properties were part of the Kiwitahi Maize lease over the land where the Matamata Bypass was designated. They are located close to the Managwhero industrial sub-division.

Approximately two years ago the sub-tenants of these residential buildings moved out due to upgrades being required to meet Tenancy Act requirements (Insulation & Healthy homes), also reports from Matamata Police indicated that Methamphetamine had been consumed within the premises. Testing has been carried and levels are just below the new tolerance levels. The buildings are more than 50 years old and also contain small amounts of asbestos.

Skatepark Building Te Aroha Domain. This building has not been used for at least 15 years and at various times has been occupied by squatters. It contains a significant amount of asbestos products and had no identified future use. Over the last year the boarding up of all windows/doors has been strengthened, successfully preventing any more break-ins.

This area is planned to be redeveloped as part of the Provincial Growth Funding arrangements.

Scout Huts r/o Wardville Hall. There are two standalone asbestos clad huts at the rear of the Wardville Hall section behind the tennis courts. These were previously used by Scouts NZ but were abandoned at least 15 years ago. It came to Councils attention nearly two years ago that the external envelope was asbestos panelling that had been vandalised to the extent it was considered friable. As a consequence security fencing was installed with the aim to prevent access.

8 Tui Street Matamata – known as “Pancake House”. This building was leased and used as a restaurant until May 2016. It has been subsequently used as an office/storage for MPDC particularly during the building of the Matamata-Piako Civic and Memorial Centre. The site is adjacent to a designated council carpark.

Earlier this year a Registration of Interest was publically notified for the removal of Ngarua Hall. This building contained both friable and non – friable asbestos. Eleven submissions were received and these were shortlisted to five organisations that demonstrated acceptable competencies.

Demolition/Removal of Council Buildings reaching end of Economic Life Page 23

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Five tenders were received and evaluated. The lowest price of $116,675 from Waikato Demolition was accepted.

The other tenders received were: $185,539 $187,713 $226,385 $224,050 – this did not include dump fees.

Waikato Demolition actively recycle building materials wherever possible. This resulted in almost $70,000 below the next price.

Ngā Take/Kōrerorero | Issues/Discussion There is no income generated from the buildings identified. Essential Health & Safety measures/protection has to be funded from other property operational budgets. The buildings are subject to vandalism and their original purpose is historic. Some of the buildings are in the public eye and generate concerns and adverse opinions.

Following the successful demolition and removal of the Ngarua Hall, the Contractor was approached and requested to provide a quotation for the demolition and removal of 100 Morrinsville-Walton Road. A very competitive price has been quoted.

If Council wish to expedite the removal of these buildings and benefit from economies of scale both in establishment, supervision and the required asbestos removal monitoring, consideration should be given to package all the buildings into one demolition contract.

Initial valuation of the Ngarua Hall site indicates that there will be a surplus after deducting the cost of the works. This surplus could be used to (part) fund the removal of the buildings indicated above. It is anticipated that further surplus property sales would generate income to balance the costs and create a surplus.

As the market has recently been tested there is a case for specialised procurement both for expertise and market rate.

Tendering for this work would delay the inevitable result and add further costs.

100 Morrinsville-Walton Road is approximately 70 years old, has significant movement, does not meet any of the requirements for heathy homes under the Residential Tenancies Act is located on a designated Recreational Reserve and vehicle access is in a vulnerable location.

61a & 61b Tower Road are located on designated rural land (previously bypass) the land has been used for cropping and the houses do not meet the requirements for heathy homes under the Residential Tenancies Act. The lessees do not require the buildings for their business activities. They have been unoccupied for approximately two years. The office estimated to refurbish, decontaminate and bring up to current Tenancy Act standards for 61a is considered uneconomic, ($250,000). The location is remote and suitable tenants may be a challenge. 61b although remote could be refurbished and brought up to a legal and acceptable standard for approximately $150,000 – $160,000 (a full spec would be needed for an exact price). Rental for a four bedroom unit is likely to bring in just over $20,000 per year

Page 24 Demolition/Removal of Council Buildings reaching end of Economic Life

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Skatepark Building Te Aroha Domain. This has been identified by the Domain Working Party as a priority for removal as the area could be used for alternative purposes that have been identified. The building contains significant amounts of asbestos and is not suitable for other purposes.

Scout Huts rear of Wardville Hall are abandoned asbestos clad buildings that have created a health and safety issue. Demolition is the only viable option.

8 Tui Street, Matamata. Since its use as a “Pancake House” stopped it has been used as a temporary office, meeting room, IT hub, and storage during the rebuild of the Matamata-Piako Civic and Memorial Centre. A number of enquiries have been received about use / leasing but none have proved viable. Demolition and expansion for off street parking would make greater use of this site.

Mōrearea | Risk A negative view from the community, particularly around those buildings in the public eye on a daily basis.

Potential contaminated site at 8 Tui Street (ex service station)

Not to do anything will generate more unbudgeted costs.

Ngā Whiringa | Options Leave buildings in their current status and provide funding for essential safety works.

Ngā take ā-ture, ā-Kaupapahere hoki | Legal and policy considerations Future use of the vacant land will need to be consistent with the current designation.

Ngā Pāpāhonga me ngā Wātaka | Communications and timeframes Adjoining owners – if applicable will be notified and consulted if the decision to demolish is made.

Based on the Ngarua Hall demolition work started approx. 4 weeks after award of contract.

Ngā take ā-Ihinga | Consent issues Demolition Building Consents will be required for all of the buildings.

Resource Consent may be required for the “Pancake House” due to its previous use as a Service Station. (Potential contaminated site)

Te Tākoha ki ngā Hua mō te Hapori me te here ki te whakakitenga o te Kaunihera | Contribution to Community Outcomes and consistency with Council Vision Theme: Connected Infrastructure Community Outcome: Quality Infrastructure that supports community wellbeing Theme: Healthy Communities Community Outcome: The community is safe, healthy and connected

Demolition/Removal of Council Buildings reaching end of Economic Life Page 25

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Pānga ki te pūtea, me te puna pūtea | Financial Cost and Funding Source The financial cost is not known, however by allocating property sales income to this proposal costs can be balanced. Valuation of Ngarua Hall sites at the beginning of this year was $290,000. The costs for the removal of the hall were approx. $150,000

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Roger Lamberth Property and Community Projects Manager

Approved by Manaia Te Wiata Group Manager Business Support

Page 26 Demolition/Removal of Council Buildings reaching end of Economic Life

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and Related Legislation

CM No.: 2321641

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

The Ministry of Health is conducting a review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and related legislation and is seeking submissions from interested parties. As many of the proposed changes to legislation affect cemetery management by local authorities, Council may wish to make a submission. Submissions close on 31 October 2020.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The report be received;

2. The Committee wishes to make a submission to the Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and Related Legislation;

3. The Committee endorses the draft submission (Attachment A) with minor amendments.

Moved by: Mayor A Tanner Seconded by: Cr J Sainsbury KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background In 2013, the Law Commission reviewed the Burial and Cremation Act 1964. Council made a submission to that process (Attachment B). The Law Commission’s report in 2015 made more than a hundred recommendations to modernise the law that governs death, burial, cremation and funerals in New Zealand. The Commission found that the law is outdated, sometimes difficult to understand, and has not always kept up with subsequent laws, such as the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Local Government Act 2002. They also found that the wording of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 makes it difficult to respond to trends in society such as the increasing use of cremation instead of burial, the increasing demand for eco-burial or other non-traditional body disposal etc. The Ministry of Health is now conducting a review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and related legislation and is seeking submissions from interested parties. Submissions close on 31 October 2020. A copy of the consultation document, entitled Death, Funerals, Burial and Cremation: a Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and Related Legislation, published by the Ministry of Health, has been circulated with the Agenda. The document is also available to download on the Ministry website. As many of the proposed changes to legislation affect cemetery management by local authorities, as well as regulatory functions, Council may wish to make a submission.

Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and Related Legislation Page 27

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Ngā Take/Kōrerorero | Issues/Discussion

Scope of Review MoH is considering a range of options for modernising the legislation relating to death, burial, cremation and funerals in New Zealand, including the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 (the Act), Cremation Regulations 1973 and the Health (Burial) Regulations 1946. The review includes matters relating to: A. Death certification and auditing B. Regulation of the funeral services sector C. Burial and cemetery management D. Cremation regulations and the medical referee system E. New methods of body disposal. The Law Commission recommended that the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 should be replaced by a new statute, to be administered by the Department of Internal Affairs, with most of the operational functions being delivered by local government. Policy relating to the death certification and auditing of death certification would remain with the Ministry of Health. Many of the proposed changes are more pertinent to medical practitioners, funeral directors and crematorium operators. The most direct impact on local authorities is likely to be in the area of cemetery provision and management however, some of the proposals would also impose additional administrative burdens on local authorities (in terms of planning and regulatory functions). The report and draft submission therefore focus mainly on issues considered to be most relevant to Council roles.

Death certification and auditing There are proposals to improve the way death is certified and audited. Proposed changes and options mainly affect medical practitioners and the Ministry of Health and are intended to clarify requirements, improve the quality of documentation and improve oversight and auditing of death certification. None of the options presented in the review directly affect local government duties and responsibilities. Any quality improvements in the death certification system are however likely to benefit our communities, particularly the families and friends of deceased persons. Council may wish to support the intent of these reforms in principle or may wish to remain neutral.

Regulation of the funeral sector Under current regulations, which date from 1946, funeral directors must be registered with the local authority however, there are no legal grounds for a local authority to refuse to register a funeral director. Each premises that a funeral director operates must be registered with the local council. Unlike many other trades and professions, funeral directors are not regulated or licenced. They may choose to become members of industry associations. These organisations typically have a code of ethics and minimum qualification requirements for membership. Membership of an industry association is not mandatory. There is no national licencing board or similar regime. There is no legal requirement in New Zealand to disclose funeral pricing information with consumers before entering into a contract to provide funeral services. This means the total cost of a funeral is often not known up front and can come as an unpleasant surprise to grieving relatives.

Page 28 Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and Related Legislation

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

There is no statutory body to deal with complaints about funeral directors. The Disputes Tribunal is often the only option available. Providing a funeral director is a member of the Funeral Directors Association of NZ (FDANZ) then a customer can lay a complaint with FDANZ if they feel that the FDANZ Code of Ethics has been breached. FDANZ does not however deal with pricing complaints. Membership of FDANZ is not mandatory and you do not have to belong to FDANZ in order to practice as a funeral director. There are a number of proposals to improve management of the funeral sector. This includes:  Introduction of infringement offences for things like inappropriate body storage, improper embalming, treating a body disrespectfully etc., where criminal prosecution and imprisonment is currently the only enforcement option.  Providing interpretation for some terms used in the legislation that are not clearly defined (e.g. ‘a reasonable time’ relating to how soon a body must be disposed).  Record keeping requirements for funeral directors and offences for failing to do so.  Improving transparency about funeral costs.  Improving the regulation of the funeral services sector.

As far as regulating funeral directors and related trades and professions is concerned, options include:

1. Maintaining the status quo

2. Removing the need to register with local authorities

3. Introducing a central register to be managed by the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths and Marriages with re-registration required every three years. There would however still be no mandatory training or membership requirements beyond registration.

4. Introducing a central register to be managed by the Registrar-General of Births, Deaths and Marriages with re-registration required every three years. Applicants would however need to demonstrate that they meet certain requirements. These include having no serious criminal convictions or dishonesty offences and holding a relevant qualification or passing an examination. The Registrar-General would have powers to investigate, prosecute and remove people from the register.

Centralisation of the registration process will remove the administrative burden from local councils to maintain a register that, it appears, anyone can be added to, and nobody can be removed from. It will also save funeral directors the expense of having to register in multiple districts. Presumably the centralised register will be publically available for consumers to check in the same way as plumbers, gasfitters, electricians or licenced building practitioners. Option 4 is most likely to protect consumers from exploitation by unscrupulous funeral directors and related trades and professions.

Cemetery management The Burial and Cremation Act 1964 retained many of the provisions of the Cemeteries Act 1882. The Act currently deals with the following distinctive types of burial land:

Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and Related Legislation Page 29

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

 Cemeteries Provided by local authorities with several statutory management responsibilities and restrictions;

 Trustee Cemeteries Provided by community groups and managed by Trustees with similar responsibilities and restrictions as local authority cemeteries;

 Denominational Burial Grounds Established by a religious denomination. Traditionally, smaller, rural churchyards. Some statutory responsibilities and restrictions.

 Private Burial Grounds Established by groups other than religious denominations e.g. families but otherwise similar in character and requirements.

 Private Burial Places To legalise historic places where individuals were buried prior to the commencement of the Act. No responsible manager identified and no statutory duties or responsibilities.

 Special Places For individual cases of ‘exceptional circumstances’ e.g. the unknown soldier at the National War Memorial. No responsible manager identified and no statutory duties or responsibilities.

 Closed Cemeteries Formally closed by the Minister by Gazette Notice. No more burials allowed. Cannot be sold or disposed of. Whoever managed it prior to closure is deemed to be the responsible manager. Must be maintained ‘in good condition’. Manager may apply to the Minister to remove monuments and tablets etc. and plant trees though in reality many of these tend to also be Archaeological Sites under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 which prohibits any development without Heritage NZ approval. Currently, Councils may not repair hazardous monuments at archaeological sites without first applying to Heritage New Zealand.

 Closed Burial Grounds Similar to closed cemeteries. The manager prior to closure is considered the manager after closure but the Minister can also appoint anyone else to control and manage it (including the local council).

Council is currently primarily concerned with providing and maintaining Cemeteries. The Review questions the need for all the above categories as any area where deceased people are buried requires some form of consistent management and protection, regardless of its formal legal status. An option proposes to reduce the number of categories of burial areas and to treat them consistently in terms of management obligations and restrictions. New Zealanders have increasingly diverse ethnic, cultural and religious needs in relation to burial. The Review has proposed to broaden provisions that currently refer to ‘religious denominations’ to include groups who share cultural or social beliefs that are not necessarily of a religious nature

Page 30 Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and Related Legislation

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

e.g. people who want eco-burials may not necessarily share religious beliefs. An obligation for local authority cemeteries to consider applications for separate sections for any group of people with common burial needs, as well as the provisions made for new community cemeteries or denominational burial grounds is one of the options under consideration. The obligation would be to ‘consider’ rather than to ‘provide’. Councils would be able to consult their communities to guide what is provided in the District. A Cemetery Policy would need to be developed by councils subject to public consultation. The Review also presents an option that would loosen up requirements for the establishment of independent cemeteries and burial on private land. This includes an option of allowing burial on private land of up to five people without requiring resource consent. The current law has not been updated to reflect the Resource Management Act 1991 or Local Government Act 2002. The development of new cemeteries invariably trigger the need for resource consent under the RMA. Many of the things that the Burial and Cremation Act specifically allow councils to do may also be done under the Local Government Act. The Burial and Cremation Act grants extensive powers to the Minister without any guidance on what factors the Minister must consider when exercising those powers. The same applies to some of the decision-making powers given to local authorities. For example, Council may determine whether it will provide a separate area within its cemetery for the burial of adherents of a particular denomination, but the Act does not establish guiding criteria for how that decision should be made. There is also ambiguity about who is responsible for maintaining headstones, monuments etc. The review proposes addressing this by clarifying the power of cemetery managers to maintain graves, despite any concurrent power or duty of maintenance falling on other people, including the relatives of the deceased. It also proposes an exception to the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act so that cemetery managers need not get approval from Heritage NZ to work on a gravesite that is a safety hazard. An obligation on local authorities to assume responsibility for failing non-local authority cemeteries, or where a designated cemetery manager renounces their role is one of the proposed options. This would have a major impact on Council’s operational and maintenance expenditure. It does not appear to promote good management by independent operators if Council is guaranteed to pick up the pieces if the venture fails.

Regulatory functions Disinternments are currently approved by the MoH. One of the options proposed is that local authorities would be responsible for the approving disinternments of single graves at Council cemeteries as well as both single and multiple disinternments at burial areas on private land. The Environment Court would however be responsible for multiple disinterments at Council cemeteries. This additional role would place additional burdens on Council resources. Other additional duties proposed for local authorities include: • Duty to provide facilities for the disposal of bodies, rather than cemeteries specifically. • Duty of inspection and oversight, limited to an obligation to enter and inspect cemeteries to determine whether the requirements of the statute are being met, in response to information or complaints received. • Duty to consider applications from non-local authority cemeteries for permission to remove monuments or tablets from a cemetery. • Power to approve new independent cemeteries. • Power to approve burial on private land.

Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and Related Legislation Page 31

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

The additional duties listed above would place additional strain on regulatory teams within Council. Smaller Councils are unlikely to have the expertise in house to deal with some of these requests and it may not be cost effective to develop and maintain such expertise if it may only be required infrequently.

Mōrearea | Risk

Some of the prosed options reduce risks associated with death certification, the funeral sector, and uncertainty in the intent of the legislation.

The main risks to Council appear to be the potential for additional duties and responsibilities including the potential transfer of some duties from the MoH to local Councils. The review does not explain how these additional duties are to be funded and Councils have limited funding sources.

Ngā Whiringa | Options 1. Council can make a submission. 2. Council can decline to make a submission.

Ngā Pāpāhonga me ngā Wātaka | Communications and timeframes The deadline for submission is 31 October 2020.

Te Tākoha ki ngā Hua mō te Hapori me te here ki te whakakitenga o te Kaunihera | Contribution to Community Outcomes and consistency with Council Vision  Healthy Communities  Connected Infrastructure  Vibrant Cultural Values

Pānga ki te pūtea, me te puna pūtea | Financial Cost and Funding Source Staff time only. Funded from existing budget.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. 2020 Draft Submission on Review of Burial and Cremation Act and Related Legislation - October 2020 B. 2015 Submission by Matamata-Piako District Council on the Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 (as approved by Council on 11 December 2013)

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Mark Naudé Parks and Facilities Planner

Approved by Susanne Kampshof Asset Manager Strategy and Policy Manaia Te Wiata Group Manager Business Support Item 7.9 was taken out of order and considered after item 8.3 – Chief Executive Officer’s Report

Page 32 Review of the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and Related Legislation

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Matamata Cemetery Wall Update - Matamata Lions Group

CM No.: 2356418

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

Matamata Lions Group representative, Robyn DeMasi, in attendance to provide update to Council on progress with Matamata Cemetery wall replacement.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The information be received.

Moved by: Cr A Wilcock Seconded by: Mayor A Tanner KUA MANA | CARRIED

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments There are no attachments for this report.

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Stephanie Glasgow Committee Secretary and Corporate Administration Officer

Approved by Michelle Staines-Hawthorne Corporate Strategy Manager Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer Item 7.10 taken out of order and considered after 7.12 – Recovery Working Party Minutes

Matamata Cemetery Wall Update - Matamata Lions Group Page 33

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Approval for Shared Pathway

CM No.: 2239783

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

Council amended the Land Transport By-law 2001 in 2019 to allow it to designate shared pathways ie to allow cyclists on footpaths.

It was intended that this would apply firstly to the Hauraki Rail Trail extension from Te Aroha to Matamata.

Trail construction is largely complete. Council is now requested to designate the trail including specified urban areas of Matamata and Te Aroha as shared pathway.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The report be received.

2. The Committee declare the Hauraki Rail Trail extension from Te Aroha to Matamata as a shared pathway in the rural area and as identified in Appendix A and B for the urban areas of Matamata and Te Aroha.

Moved by: Cr A Wilcock Seconded by: Cr C Casey KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background Council amended the Land Transport Bylaw 2008 in 2019 to include a section on allowing for shared pathways to be operated within the district. Council is now able to create shared pathways or designate existing paths into shared pathways in the district under s145 of the Local Government Act. For a shared path used by cycles, a road controlling authority: (a) Must install an appropriate sign or combination of signs, defining the class or classes of path users that complies with Schedule 1. (i) At the start of the shared path; and (ii) After each roadway or any other pathways with which it intersects; and (iii) At the end of the shared path; and

(b) May install signs at other intervals along the shared path.

The main purpose for introducing this into the bylaw is because of the Hauraki Rail Trail extension. In the rural area it will mainly be used by cyclists but we do not want it to be restricted to cyclists only and are wanting to allow for pedestrians to use the path as well. This also applies vis versa in the urban environment where some of the existing concrete footpaths are being widened to allow for cyclists and pedestrians.

Page 34 Approval for Shared Pathway

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Shared pathways require appropriate signage and road markings, and need to be designed as per the appropriate design guidelines. They can then provide a safe travel option for all its user, especially for cyclists that no longer need to share the road with vehicles.

The proposal is to designate the cycleway outside the domain in Te Aroha and the entire trail from the urban/rural limit in Te Aroha to the start of the Central Business District in Matamata as a shared pathway.

It must be noted that the Land Transport Act specifies the requirements around helmets and restrictions of riding a bike on the footpath, it only applies to the road reserve and does generally not apply to Council land or classified parks. For consistency and transparency, it will be recommended in future that shared pathways located on parks and open spaces will be included under the provisions of the By-law.

Ngā Take/Kōrerorero | Issues/Discussion

Safety and design of Shared pathways

The normal width of our footpaths do not meet the design criteria for a shared pathway as there is inadequate width to share the space safely. Most footpaths in our district are only 1.2m to 1.5m in width and therefore are not suitable to be classified as shared pathways.

The Hauraki Rail Trail is generally 2.5m in width, which allows for two way movements of cyclists and/or pedestrians. Appropriate signage will also be installed to advise users of its intended use.

Mōrearea | Risk

There are three ways that the different users of a shared path can be accommodated:

 No formal separation or segregation of modes – users ‘sort themselves out’. This may include suggested behavioural messages (eg ‘warn when approaching’)

 Directional separation – generally by non-physical methods, eg a painted centreline, arrows, and behavioural messages (eg ‘keep left’)  Segregation of modes – by non-physical methods, eg a painted centreline and pedestrian / cycle symbols, which allow for occasional ‘digressions’ where people use the other path. Note that stricter separation would result in a cycle only path adjacent to a footpath).

Approval for Shared Pathway Page 35

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

At this stage it is not proposed to provide any segregation of modes or directional separation on the shared pathway.

Within the rural area the predominant use will be by cyclists but we do not want to restrict pedestrians of using it as well. It would be un-economical to create two separate paths or even provide directional separation.

Within part the urban area of Te Aroha where there is a wider berm along Whitaker Street, a separate cycleway path has been installed in addition to the current footpath. Along the Domain there is not enough road reserve available to apply this and the current footpath is adequate width to cater for both uses.

The Tower Road walkway which is quite a busy walkway already has been widened to cater for cyclists as well.

Within the Matamata Township the current footpath has been widened where required to allow for adequate width for the shared use.

The disadvantages of having a shared pathway is that the conflict between cyclists and pedestrians can become an issue where there is a significant volume of cyclist and pedestrian use.

The level of service for cycling can be poor where interference by other path users results in slower speeds. The presence of people cycling can also reduce the level of service for pedestrians who feel unnerved when cyclists overtake or pass them. Poor sightlines along the path can also lead to unexpected conflicts.

This is not the case for the Hauraki Rail Trail.

Ngā Whiringa | Options Council has already made the decision to amend the bylaw and set up the framework for assigning shared pathways in the district.

It now has the following options to consider: 1. Declare the Hauraki Rail Trail extension from Te Aroha to Matamata as a shared pathway in the rural area and as identified in Appendix for Matamata and Te Aroha. 2. Do not declare any pathways as shared use in our district.

Council has identified it wants to provide additional shared pathways within the urban area where it is appropriate. Current work is underway to look at priorities of footpath widening and an updated schedule will be provided to council to seek approval to assign further shared pathways going forward.

Ngā take ā-ture, ā-Kaupapahere hoki | Legal and policy considerations Council’s current Land Transport Bylaw 2008 includes a section on allowing for shared pathways to be operated within the district. Council is now able to create shared pathways or designate existing paths into shared pathways in the district under s145 of the Local Government Act.

Page 36 Approval for Shared Pathway

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Ngā Pāpāhonga me ngā Wātaka | Communications and timeframes The Hauraki Rail Trail is almost completed so it is proposed to install the required signage as soon as practicable.

It is envisaged that some communication will be completed with the community on future planning for other shared pathways within some of our urban network.

Ngā take ā-Ihinga | Consent issues There are no consent issues.

Te Tākoha ki ngā Hua mō te Hapori me te here ki te whakakitenga o te Kaunihera | Contribution to Community Outcomes and consistency with Council Vision  Healthy Communities  Connected Infrastructure

Pānga ki te pūtea, me te puna pūtea | Financial Cost and Funding Source

There will be some additional renewal and maintenance cost to allow for the management of the signs. This has been allowed for in the ongoing maintenance budgets.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. Matamata Shared Pathway Route. B. Te Aroha Shared Pathway Route

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Susanne Kampshof Asset Manager Strategy and Policy

Approved by Manaia Te Wiata Group Manager Business Support Item 7.11 taken out of order and considered before item 7.10 – Matamata Cemetery Wall Update – Matamata Lions Group and after 7.8 – Demolition/Removal of Buildings at end of Economic Life

Approval for Shared Pathway Page 37

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Recovery Working Party Minutes

CM No.: 2355974

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

The COVID 19 pandemic and lock down will have a profound ongoing effect on the Community wellbeing in every sense. In the post COVID lock down situation the effectiveness and speed of recovery will be dependent on many factors – some within Council’s control and others not. To ensure that the Matamata-Piako District Community has the best opportunity of recovery, Council and the Chief Executive have agreed to establish a Recovery Working Party (RWP). The RWP made up of the Mayor and three elected members, supported by staff, will work alongside the official Civil Defence initiatives and assess and respond to a range of initiatives and opportunities to assist in the recovery of our Community Wellbeing. At the Council meeting 8 July 2020, Council approved a policy framework and process for grant application from the COVID recovery fund. Council also resolved that the Recovery Working Party shall have the delegated authority to assess and make funding decisions on such applications up to $20,000 per application.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The information be received.

2. The Committee provided comments to the Recovery Working Party.

Moved by: Deputy Mayor N Goodger Seconded by: Cr C Casey KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background Council has established a Recovery Working Party to support the recovery of our Community from the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown. The purpose of the Working Party is;  Identify, promote and assess opportunities to support the National, Regional and Local Recovery strategies to improve the Social, Cultural , Economic and Environmental wellbeing of the Matamata-Piako District community, post COVID-19 lock down  Make recommendations to Council and/or its committees  Work collaboratively with external partners and stakeholders At its meeting 27 May 2020, Council resolved to establish a COVID Response Fund of up to $2M from reserve funds to support our communities’ recovery across the district. A part of this funding has been earmarked to cultural and socio-economic relief for our community as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. At its meeting 8 July 2020 Council approved a policy framework and process for allocating funding through a contestable grant, with delegated authority to the Recovery Working Party to make funding decisions of a value up to $20,000 per application.

Page 38 Recovery Working Party Minutes

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

The Working Party met in the Te Aroha Council office Wednesday 16 September 2020, to consider applications for COVID funding received since the previous meeting. The Working Party also considered various options for a Tourism Campaign. The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the work of the working party, with the minutes attached for members information.

The Working Party considered application for COVID funding received since the previous meeting. The minutes are attached for members’ information.

Ngā take ā-ture, ā-Kaupapahere hoki | Legal and policy considerations Funding applications were assessed against the COVID Response Community Funding Policy.

Te Tākoha ki ngā Hua mō te Hapori me te here ki te whakakitenga o te Kaunihera | Contribution to Community Outcomes and consistency with Council Vision Theme: Economic Opportunities Community Outcome: We provide leadership and advocacy is provided to enable our communities to grow.

Pānga ki te pūtea, me te puna pūtea | Financial Cost and Funding Source There is no financial costs associated with the operations of the Working Party. Funding of specific initiatives will be from existing budgets, and within Council’s Policy on Delegated Authority.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. Minutes of Meeting 16 September 2020 B. Minutes of Meeting 7 October 2020

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Sandra Harris Senior Policy Planner

Approved by Michelle Staines-Hawthorne Corporate Strategy Manager Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer Item taken out of order and considered after item 7.11 – Approval for Shared Pathway

Recovery Working Party Minutes Page 39

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Dog Control Annual Report 2019/20

CM No.: 2252474

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

The Dog Control Act 1996 requires a territorial authority to report annually on its dog control operations. The attached report includes all the information required under section 10A(2) of the Act for the 2019/20 financial year.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The Annual Dog Control Report for 2019/20 be adopted and publicly notified.

Moved by: Deputy Mayor N Goodger Seconded by: Cr C Casey KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background Section 1oA of the Dog Control Act 1996 requires a territorial authority to report annually on the administration of:

a) Its dog control policy adopted under section 10, and b) Its dog control practices.

The Act sets out the information that must be included in the report and further requires the authority to give public notice of where the report can be obtained. The attached report includes all of the required information as well as other information about the animal control operation that may be of interest to the public. A copy of the report will be placed on Council’s website and will be available at each office.

A copy of the report must also be sent to the secretary for Local Government within one month of it being adopted by Council.

Ngā Whiringa | Options 1 That the report be adopted and publically notified 2 That the report be further considered or amended before being adopted and publically notified.

Ngā take ā-ture, ā-Kaupapahere hoki | Legal and policy considerations This report is required by section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996.

Ngā Pāpāhonga me ngā Wātaka | Communications and timeframes The Act requires public notice to be given of where the report can be reviewed or obtained.

Page 40 Dog Control Annual Report 2019/20

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Pānga ki te pūtea, me te puna pūtea | Financial Cost and Funding Source This report has no financial impacts.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. Dog Control Policy and Practices 2019/20

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Dennis Bellamy Group Manager Community Development

Approved by Dennis Bellamy Group Manager Community Development Item 7.13 taken out of order and considered after item 7.10 – Matamata Cemetery Wall Update – Matamata Lions Group

Cr D Arnold exited the meeting at 11:33am .Cr D Arnold returned to the meeting at 11:43am .

Dog Control Annual Report 2019/20 Page 41

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

8 Information Reports Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Joint Committee - Meeting 7 September 2020

CM No.: 2361146

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Joint Committee minutes from meeting of 7 September 2020 are attached to the agenda

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The information be received.

Moved by: Cr J Sainsbury Seconded by: Cr D Arnold KUA MANA | CARRIED

Horopaki | Background Under the Local Government Act 2002 s12(1)(a) every regional council and every territorial authority within that region must unite to establish a Civil Defence Emergency Management Group for the purposes of this Act as a joint standing committee under clause 30(1)(b) of Schedule 7. Councillor Kevin Tappin is Council’s appointee to the Joint Committee.

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. Open Minutes WCDEM 7 September 2020

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Vicky Cowley Emergency Management Officer

Approved by Dennis Bellamy Group Manager Community Development

Page 42 Waikato Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group Joint Committee - Meeting 7 September 2020

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Safety and Wellness Report

CM No.: 2359903

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

The quarterly Safety & Wellness report for July to September 2020 is attached to the agenda. Kate Stevens, Safety & Wellness Team Leader will be in attendance to discuss the report with the committee.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The information be received.

Moved by: Cr A Wilcock Seconded by: Cr S Whiting KUA MANA | CARRIED

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. Quarterly Safety and Wellness Report July to Sept 2020

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Kate Stevens Health & Safety Facilitator

Approved by Kelly Reith Human Resources Manager Dennis Bellamy Group Manager Community Development

Safety and Wellness Report Page 43

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

Chief Executive Officer's Report

CM No.: 2361158

Rāpopotonga Matua | Executive Summary

The Chief Executive Officer’s report for the period ending September 2020, is attached to the agenda.

COMMITTEE RESOLUTION

That: 1. The information be received.

Moved by: Cr J Sainsbury Seconded by: Cr B Dewhurst KUA MANA | CARRIED

Ngā Tāpiritanga | Attachments A. Final CEO Report for September 2020 B. MPDC Dashboard Quarter 1 2020-2021 C. Council Consents Received September 2020

Ngā waitohu | Signatories Author(s) Debbie Burge Executive Assistant to the Mayor

Approved by Don McLeod Chief Executive Officer

Item 8.3 – Chief Executive Officer’s Report was taken out of order and addressed after item 7.6 – Appointment of Alternate Representative for Ngāti Rahiri-Tumutumu

Page 44 Chief Executive Officer's Report

Komiti o te Kaporeihana me ngā Whakahaere | Corporate and Operations Committee 28 October 2020

12.03 pm The Chairperson thanked Members for their attendance and attention to business and declared the meeting closed.

CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD OF THE MEETING OF KOMITI O TE KAPOREIHANA ME NGĀ WHAKAHAERE | CORPORATE AND OPERATIONS COMMITTEE HELD ON 28 OCTOBER 2020.

DATE:......

CHAIRPERSON:......

Chief Executive Officer's Report Page 45