COUNCIL Te Kaunihera

Extraordinary Meeting

C20-13 Thursday, 29 October 2020 Trust Power Arena, Stadium Lounge 81 Truman Lane, Mount Maunganui 10.00am

Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

Council

Membership Chairperson Mayor Garry Webber Deputy Chairperson Deputy Mayor John Scrimgeour Members Cr Grant Dally Cr Mark Dean Cr James Denyer Cr Murray Grainger Cr Anne Henry Cr Christina Humphreys Cr Monique Lints Cr Kevin Marsh Cr Margaret Murray-Benge Cr Don Thwaites Quorum 6 Frequency Six weekly

Role:

To ensure the effective and efficient governance and leadership of the District.

Power to Act:

 To exercise all non-delegable functions and powers of the Council including, but not limited to: - The power to make a rate; - The power to make a bylaw; - The power to borrow money, purchase, or dispose of assets, other than in accordance with the Long Term Plan; - The power to adopt a Long Term Plan, Annual Plan or Annual Report; - The power to appoint a chief executive; - The power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under the Local Government Act 2002 in association with the long-term plan or developed for the purpose of the local governance statement; - The power to adopt a remuneration and employment policy; - The power to approve a proposed policy statement or plan under clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991; - The power to make a final decision on a recommendation from the Ombudsman where it is proposed that Council not accept the recommendation.

 To exercise all functions, powers and duties of the Council that have not been delegated, including the power to compulsorily acquire land under the Public Works Act 1981.  To make decisions which are required by legislation to be made by resolution of the local authority.  To authorise all expenditure not delegated to officers, Committees or other subordinate decision-making bodies of Council, or included in Council’s Long Term Plan or Annual Plan.  To make appointments of members to Council Controlled Organisation Boards of Directors/Trustees and representatives of Council to external organisations;  To consider and make decisions regarding any matters relating to Council Controlled Organisations, including recommendations for modifications to CCO or other entities’ accountability documents (i.e. Letter of Expectation, Statement of Intent) recommended by the Policy Committee or any matters referred from the Performance and Monitoring Committee.

Page 2 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

 To approve joint agreements and contractual arrangements between Western District Council and Tauranga City Council or any other entity.  To consider applications to the Community Matching Fund (including accumulated Ecological Financial Contributions).  To consider applications to the Facilities in the Community Grant Fund.

Procedural matters:

 Approval of elected member training/conference attendance.

Mayor’s Delegation:

Should there be insufficient time for Council to consider approval of elected member training/conference attendance, the Mayor (or Deputy Mayor in the Mayor’s absence) is delegated authority to grant approval and report the decision back to the next scheduled meeting of Council.

Should there be insufficient time for Council to consider approval of a final submission to an external body, the Mayor (or Deputy Mayor in the Mayor's absence) is delegated authority to sign the submission on behalf of Council, provided the final submission is reported to the next scheduled meeting of Council or relevant Committee.

Power to sub-delegate:

Council may delegate any of its functions, duties or powers to a subcommittee, working group or other subordinate decision-making body, subject to the restrictions on its delegations and any limitation imposed by Council.

Page 3 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

Notice is hereby given that an Extraordinary Meeting of Council will be held in the Trust Power Arena, Stadium Lounge, 81 Truman Lane, Mount Maunganui on: Thursday, 29 October 2020 at 10.00am

Order Of Business

1 Present ...... 5 2 In Attendance ...... 5 3 Apologies ...... 5 4 Consideration of Late Items ...... 5 5 Declarations of Interest ...... 5 6 Public Excluded Items ...... 5 7 Public Forum ...... 5 8 Reports ...... 6 8.1 Proposal to transfer Panepane Purakau ...... 6

Page 4 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

1 PRESENT

2 IN ATTENDANCE

3 APOLOGIES

4 CONSIDERATION OF LATE ITEMS

5 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

6 PUBLIC EXCLUDED ITEMS

7 PUBLIC FORUM

Page 5 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

8 REPORTS

8.1 PROPOSAL TO TRANSFER PANEPANE PURAKAU File Number: A3892201 Author: Chris Nepia, Māori Relationships and Engagement Advisor Authoriser: Rachael Davie, Group Manager Policy Planning And Regulatory Services

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1. On 28 July 2020, Council’s Policy Committee resolved to progress public consultation, in accordance with sections 83 and 87 of the Local Government Act 2002 on a Statement of Proposal (‘the Proposal”) for the return of Panepane/Purakau to the hapū of . 2. This report summarises the views on the Proposal presented to Council through the consultation process and outlines the further options identified though that process. 3. Council must now give careful consideration to the views presented to it through the consultation on the Proposal and assess the advantages and disadvantages of each option identified in this report. 4. Council must then decide whether or not to adopt the Proposal. 5. Should Council resolve not to adopt the Proposal because it prefers another option, then that will need to be developed further and will be subject to a separate statutory consultation process.

RECOMMENDATION 1. That the report of the Kaiārahi Whakapiri (Māori Relationships and Engagement Advisor) dated 29 October 2020 and titled ‘Proposal to Transfer of Panepane/Purakau’ be received; 2. That the report relates to an issue that is considered to be of high significance in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy; 3. That, having considered the views presented to it, and having assessed the advantages and disadvantages of the options identified in this report, Council resolves to adopt the Statement of Proposal consulted on as detailed in Option A of this report; OR 4. That, having considered the views presented to it, and having assessed the advantages and disadvantages of the options identified in this report, Council resolves not to adopt the Statement of Proposal consulted on.

BACKGROUND Panepane land 6. Panepane/Purakau consists of approximately 178 hectares of land at Matakana Island spread across two legal titles. It is currently owned by Western Bay of Plenty District Council and is used for forestry purposes. The Port of Tauranga has navigational aids located on the land. The five hapū of Matakana Island have long desired for ownership of Panepane/Purakau to be returned to them, which they reinforced at a presentation to a meeting of the Tauranga Moana and Te Arawa ki Takutai Partnership Forum on 10 February 2020. Panepane history 7. Prior to the mid 1800s, Panepane and Purakau were held by the hapū of Matakana Island in accordance with tikanga Māori (Māori custom). Māori custom had no concept of land ownership that could be equated to the western concept of legal title, instead land held by iwi

Item 8.1 Page 6 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

or hapū was used and cared for to the exclusion of others. This created a relationship of kaitiakitanga (stewardship) that iwi and hapū had with land which encompassed rights and privileges but also obligations. Panepane and Purakau are significant to the hapū of Matakana Island because of this history. Following the battles of Gate Pa and Te Ranga in 1864 the government of the time proclaimed Tauranga a confiscated district, Panepane and Purakau were included in this proclamation which in effect meant that the hapū of Matakana Island no longer held this land in accordance with Māori custom even though they continue to uphold their kaitiakitanga obligations to this day. 8. Legislation that was passed around the same time that the area of Tauranga was proclaimed a confiscation district required legal title of land there to be determined. This led to the surveying and vesting of large parcels of land in Tauranga, including Panepane and Purakau, to individuals. Title to Panepane was vested in the ownership of five Māori owners by Order in Council dated 1871, and in 1912 ownership of Purakau was vested in twelve Māori owners. In effect, confiscation brought about the end to the customary way that the hapū of Matakana held Panepane and Purakau which was further compounded by granting legal title to a handful of Māori owners. Public Works Act 9. Following all of the historical land dealings involving Panepane and Purakau, the two pieces of land were compulsorily acquired in 1923 by the Tauranga Harbour Board for harbour purposes under the Public Works Act 1908. The land parcels were acquired to provide navigational aids for ships entering the harbour and to prevent erosion at Matakana Island. Compensation of £1 per acre was paid for Panepane and 10 shillings per acre was paid for Purakau. The Public Works Act acquisitions of the time have been criticised by the Waitangi Tribunal in its Tauranga Moana report which observed that – For successive New Zealand governments, the transformative power of public works was an article of faith. They energetically expanded their powers of compulsory acquisition across an increasingly diverse range of works, believing that central government should be the planner and undertaker of major infrastructure works. The same powers were extended to local government in order to provide local amenities. This changed after 1981. However, by this time substantial amounts of land had been taken from Tauranga Māori for public works, and some of their most iconic sites, urupā, marae, and food-gathering places were damaged or otherwise adversely affected. Often the acquisitions occurred without the consent of the owners, and sometimes even without their knowledge. 10. The Tauranga Harbour Board continued to own Panepane and Purakau until local government reform in 1989 saw harbour boards disestablished. As a result, ownership of Panepane and Purakau were vested in the Western Bay of Plenty District Council (Council). 11. Council inherited the land at no cost and has been a good steward of the land over the years. It considers that Tangata Whenua will be good kaitiaki (guardians/stewards) of the land with the hapū representatives expressing a desire to replant the land in native trees. They live and work on Matakana Island, their ancestral home where their Marae are based. 12. Council acknowledges that Panepane and Purakau are historically significant to the hapū of Matakana Island and since 2015 has progressed the development of options for the return of ownership of the land to the hapū of Matakana Island. 2015 Council resolution 13. In June 2015 a discussion paper was presented to a workshop of Council’s Policy and Strategy Committee with some options for Council to consider around the return of ownership of Panepane/Purakau to the hapū of Matakana Island. Subsequent to this workshop, Council considered the issue again in December 2015 and resolved as follows – 1. That the Group Manager Policy, Planning & Regulatory Services’ report dated 4 December 2015 and titled Panepane/Purakau be received. 2. That the report relates to an issue, being the transfer of land (Panepane/Purakau), that is considered to be of medium to high significance in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Item 8.1 Page 7 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

3. That the transfer of Panepane/Purakau involves a process of engagement and decision making and at this stage Council is not making a decision to transfer the land. 4. That Council initiate work towards promoting a Local Act of Parliament that would provide for the transfer of ownership of Panepane/Purakau to an entity representative of relevant tangata whenua subject to certain principles including the ability of Council to administer the land as a local purpose reserve, in partnership with tangata whenua, and retention of access to harbour navigational aids and certain identified parts of the land. 5. That the resolution only be transferred into the open section of the meeting and that the Matakana Island Hapū be advised of the decision forthwith. 6. That following the Development of a Comprehensive Community Engagement Plan this decision be communicated to the wider public. Post 2015 discussions 14. In early 2016 the parties (Council staff and representatives of each of the five hapū of Matakana Island) came together as the Panepane Project Group to begin the work of progressing Council’s December 2015 resolution. The Panepane Project Group have met a number of times and as a result of those meetings some changes have been made to the proposed approach of returning ownership of Panepane. 2020 decisions 15. A presentation regarding the return of ownership of Panepane/Purakau was made by representatives of the five hapū of Matakana Island to a meeting of the Tauranga Moana and Te Arawa ki Takutai Partnership Forum on 10 February 2020. At that meeting it was resolved that the Tauranga Moana and Te Arawa ki Takutai Partnership Forum recommend to the Policy Committee that it commence the process to effect the transfer of Panepane/Purakau as broadly outlined in the Council resolution dated 17 December 2015. 16. On July 28 2020 the Policy Committee received a report that made recommendations to progress the proposed return of Panepane/Purakau. At that meeting the Policy Committee resolved to adopt, for public consultation, the Statement of Proposal that reflected Option A of that report. 17. The Statement of Proposal is reproduced below: Legal description: Lot 13 Parish (Panepane) and Lot 11B Katikati Parish (Purakau). Recipient of the land: A Trust has been established to receive and own Panepane/Purakau for the benefit of the five Hapū of Matakana Island. Those Hapū are Ngai Tuwhiwhia, Te Ngare, Ngai Tamawhariua, Te Whanau a Tauwhao, and Ngati Tauaiti. The five hapū all affiliate to Ngai Te Rangi iwi. Trust’s purpose: The purpose of the Trust is to represent the collective interests of the five Hapū. Its purpose, objects and powers are broad enough to include receiving the land and to protect, preserve and enhance it as a taonga for the benefit of the descendants (uri by whakapapa) of any of the five Hapū. Once the land has been transferred it will be up to the trustees, representing each of the five hapū, to manage it for the benefit of the Hapū in accordance with the terms of the Trust. No cost: The Hapū will not pay for the land. It will be gifted in recognition that Panepane/Purakau is ancestral land of the hapū which was compulsorily acquired by the Crown and inherited by the Council at no cost as part of Local Government restructuring in 1989.

Item 8.1 Page 8 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

Forestry: The land will be transferred together with a planted forest. The Council will retain ownership of the mature pine forest and harvest that area once before replanting it for the Hapū at which time Council’s rights and obligations in the forest will cease. There will be no cost for the forest asset that is transferred. However, the Hapū will be responsible to pay for any liabilities under the Emissions Trading Scheme if they remove trees and fail to replant them. Land area: The area proposed to be transferred is approximately 172 hectares and will remain in two titles (of 89.7 ha and 82.5 ha), which have historical significance for the hapū. The proposed area to be returned is shown in the map and draft survey plan at Attachment One. Public access: Prior to the transfer, the following legal processes will occur:  An “accretion and erosion claim” will be made to LINZ to correct the legal title boundary to align with the physical land boundary. Over many years the Land has accreted (grown) or eroded through natural processes such that the physical land has changed from the 1923 legal title;  Council will apply for a boundary adjustment subdivision to create a public reserve (approximately 7 ha) around the existing wharf and barge landing point area. This area will be vested as a local purpose reserve under the Reserves Act. It will be managed in partnership with the hapū pursuant to a Joint Management Agreement which will set out the roles and responsibilities of the parties. The proposed reserve area is shown in the map and draft survey plan at Attachment Two;  As part of the subdivision, a 20 metre wide esplanade strip will be created from the new reserve all the way around the coastal margin to the Western boundary of the land. This is shown in the map and draft survey plan at Attachment Three. This will provide for continued public access to and along the coast. This is a form of easement which is measured from the line of mean high water springs and therefore will always remain 20 metres wide even if the land erodes or accretes over time. The land underlying the esplanade strip will be owned by the hapū but the public will have rights of access over it. The esplanade strip will make provision for appropriate works and structures (such as public toilets) to be constructed in the future if required and for Council’s bylaws to apply if requested by the hapū. Port access An easement will be granted to the Port of Tauranga preserving its right to locate, access and operate/maintain harbour markers which are currently located on Panepane/Purakau. The easement area will include provision for a public toilet in that vicinity if required in the future. Public consultation 18. Public consultation on the Statement of Proposal took place between 29 July 2020 and 31 August 2020 in accordance with the Special Consultative Procedure under the Local Government Act 2002. Members of the public who were interested in the Proposal were able to present their views on the Proposal to Council in a range of ways, including – a) By way of written feedback through Council’s Have Your Say website; b) By way of spoken interaction through five public open days held at Opureora Marae, Ōmokoroa Boat Club, War Memorial Hall, Tauranga Yacht and Power Boat Club and Pātuki Manawa Katikati. Through the Have Your Say Website submitters were asked – “do you agree with the proposed return of ownership of Panepane/Purakau, Matakana Island from Western Bay of Plenty District Council to the representative hapū of Matakana Island?” and were provided with the Statement of Proposal. Council received 7381 valid submissions, of which 7121 (96%) agreed

Item 8.1 Page 9 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

with the proposed return of ownership of Panepane as detailed in the Statement of Proposal. Of the submissions received, 260 (4%) did not agree with the proposed return of ownership of Panepane as detailed in the Statement of Proposal. 19. Of the 7381 submissions, 38% were received from people resident within the Western Bay of Plenty sub-region, 46% from people resident in New Zealand (outside of the Western Bay), and 8% from people overseas. 20. A total of 337 people attended the open days described above.

SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT 21. The Local Government Act 2002 requires a formal assessment of the significance of matters and the decision in this report against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy in order to guide decisions on approaches to engagement and the degree of options analysis appropriate in the circumstances. In making this formal assessment it is acknowledged that all reports have a high degree of importance to those interested in and affected by Council decisions. 22. In the July 28 report to Council’s Policy Committee it was acknowledged that the proposed return of ownership of Panepane/Purakau to the hapū of Matakana Island is a matter of high significance and required engagement, consultation and communication. 23. Consultation and communication on the proposed transfer of ownership of Panepane/Purakau has been comprehensive as detailed in paragraphs 18-20 above.

ENGAGEMENT, CONSULTATION AND COMMUNICATION 24.

Interested/Affected Completed/Planned Parties Engagement/Consultation/Communication

Representatives of each of the five hapū of Matakana Island Tangata Whenua have been involved in a project team established to progress work on the proposed return of Panepane/Purakau to the hapū of Matakana Island. Separate engagement has also been undertaken with a group of descendants of the individual Māori who owned the land when it was taken under the Public Works Act

Engagement consultation and communication on the Complete General Public proposed transfer of ownership of Panepane/Purakau has been comprehensive as detailed in paragraphs 18-20 of this report.

FURTHER OPTIONS ASSESSMENT 25. The following section of this report outlines the options previously considered by Council in the report considered by Council on 28 July 2020 before adopting the Statement of Proposal, together with additional options raised through the consultation process. Some of the new options identified are iterations of other options, and might be more properly expressed as sub- options, but are separately identified and assessed below for completeness. The assessment of advantages and disadvantages generally involves a comparison with the status quo (Council retaining all of Panepane/Purakau) rather than a relative assessment between the various options or sub-options although a relative assessment has also been undertaken where appropriate.

Item 8.1 Page 10 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

Option A

Option A is to transfer ownership of Panepane/Purakau as outlined in the Statement of Proposal consulted on and set out in paragraph 17 of this report.

Advantages Disadvantages  Significantly strengthens and improves • Council would no longer own a significant the relationship between Council and strategic asset (apart from the retained the hapū of Matakana Island as the public reserve); proposal addresses their long held • This option would not reflect the preference desire to have a significant piece of of a small number of submitters seeking to ancestral land returned to them and have the land returned to the descendant mitigate the impacts of confiscation and owners; land acquisition under the Public Works • This option would not reflect the preference Act; of a small number of submitters seeking to have all of the land at Panepane/Purakau  Would enable Tangata Whenua to transferred to Tangata Whenua; collectively own the land and exercise collective responsibility over it (fulfilling • Risk associated with the hapū rather than concepts of Kaitiakitanga, Council managing the afforestation or Rangatiratanga and Manaakitanga). planting of the land to control erosion. This risk is considered to be very low given:  Improves Council’s relationships with • The ETS liabilities that would arise if the Tangata Whenua across the Western trees are harvested and not replanted; Bay of Plenty district who support the • The very limited ability to develop the proposal; land under the regional and district  Compared to the option involving a full planning framework (the land is a transfer of the land, a public reserve will designated Outstanding Natural be created to enable public access to Feature and Landscape); the wharf and barge landing to be • The very limited practical ability to use retained and access to the coastline of the land for purposes other than forestry Panepane to continue in perpetuity; or passive uses, given the harsh climate and erosion prone land;  Allows for the ongoing use and • The commitment expressly given by the maintenance of the navigational aids hapū as kaitiaki to ensure the land by the Port of Tauranga; remains planted.  Compared to the option of a 50/50 share of the harvest, Council would retain the income from harvesting a significant portion of the trees on the land at Panepane;  95% of respondents through the consultation approach supported this option;  This option would enable the Māori land Court to determine final ownership of the land and conditions of transfer  The “harbour works” purposes for which the land was acquired and is currently held (access to navigation aids and erosion control through planting to maintain harbour access) would

Item 8.1 Page 11 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

continue to be provided for under the proposal

 Legal and other expert costs to give effect to the transfer of land to the hapū of Matakana Island; Costs (including present and future costs, direct, indirect and contingent costs).  Ongoing costs associated with the joint management arrangements of the reserve area to be retained and the esplanade strip. Option B

This option would see ownership of Panepane/Purakau transferred to the descendants of the owners from whom the land was acquired under the Public Works Act.

Advantages Disadvantages  Panepane/Purakau would be returned • Broader hapū members of the five hapū of to the descendants of the 12 owners of Matakana Island will not benefit from the Panepane and 5 owners of Purakau return of this land which would be in private from whom the land was acquired under ownership. This is expected to impact the Public Works Act, reflecting the negatively on Council’s relationship with preference of the submitters who those five hapū who Council have worked support this option. closely with on a number of issues in the past including progressing an Environment

Court process to have Matakana Island declared an Outstanding Natural Feature and Landscape; • This option is supported by less than 1% of submitters; • It is unclear whether these descendants can establish a statutory right to be offered the land back under the Public Works Act and / or what the terms of the transfer of ownership would be. This option would require further development, engagement and consultation.  Legal and other expert costs to give effect to Costs (including present and future costs, the transfer of land to the descendent direct, indirect and contingent costs). owners

Option C

Return all of Panepane/Purakau without a reserve

Advantages Disadvantages • Addresses the wishes of those • The public would not have guaranteed submitters who have requested that access to the wharf and barge area; Council return all of Panepane/Purakau • It is unclear whether public access to the to Tangata Whenua. coast or Port access to the navigation aids  Returns to the hapū of Matakana Island would be provided under this option. This all of the ancestral land known as option would require further development, Panepane/Purakau and allows them to engagement and consultation;

Item 8.1 Page 12 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

fully exercise concepts of Kaitiakitanga, • Less than 1% of all submitters support this Rangatiratanga and Manaakitanga option. over that land.  Legal and other expert costs to give effect to Costs (including present and future costs, the transfer of land to the hapū of Matakana direct, indirect and contingent costs). Island.

Option D

Option A, but create a larger esplanade strip of 50m

Advantages Disadvantages • All of the advantages of Option A, with • More of the Hapū land would be accessible the additional advantage of a larger to the public which is not supported by the public area available to be used as part Hapū; of an expanded esplanade strip. • A larger esplanade strip may encroach into  The larger area would be of benefit to the area of Panepane/Purakau that is a preserve the ecology and dynamic working forest therefore creating public environment of Panepane/Purakau. health and safety concerns; • Only 2 submissions suggest this option.  Legal and other expert costs to give effect to the transfer of land to the hapū of Matakana Island. Costs (including present and future costs, direct, indirect and contingent costs).  Ongoing costs associated with the joint management arrangements of the reserve area to be retained and the esplanade strip

Option E

Option A, but return with a 50/50 share of the first harvest and carbon credits

Advantages Disadvantages • All of the advantages of Option A, with • Council would lose part of the income and stronger relationships with hapū being carbon credits derived from the first harvest; created through sharing resources • Sharing the profits from the first harvest (including financial resources from the would reduce the budget available for harvest). Council to re-invest into necessary  Could possibly assist the hapū with infrastructure within the public reserve or on replanting the harvested area in native the esplanade strip. species (rather than exotic), which • Only two submitters suggested this option would achieve other environmental, cultural and ecological outcomes.  Legal and other expert costs to give effect to the transfer of land to the hapū of Matakana Island; Costs (including present and future costs,  Ongoing costs associated with the joint direct, indirect and contingent costs). management arrangements of the reserve area to be retained and the esplanade strip;  Potential costs associated with sharing resources relating to harvest.

Item 8.1 Page 13 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

Option F

Maintain the status quo (Council retains all of Panepane/Purakau)

Advantages Disadvantages  Council retains a strategic asset • Neither the five hapū of Matakana Island, nor the descendant owners, will have the

land returned for their own use and benefit and to enable them to exercise kaitiakitanga. This will likely impact negatively on Council’s relationship with both parties and with Tangata Whenua more generally who support the transfer back to Tangata Whenua; • Less than 3% of respondents support this option;  Ongoing costs associated with management Costs (including present and future costs, of the land to be retained. direct, indirect and contingent costs).

Option G

Option A, but require the hapū to pay market value for Panepane/Purakau

Advantages Disadvantages  All of the advantages of Option A, as  If the hapū do not have the means to well as Council receiving funds from the purchase Panepane/Purakau at market sale of Panepane/Purakau. value, they will not have the land for their own use and benefit and the ability to exercise kaitiakitanga. This will likely impact negatively on Council’s relationship with the hapū and with Tangata Whenua more generally who support the transfer back to Tangata Whenua;  Less than 1% of respondents support this option;  Legal and other expert costs (including valuation costs) to give effect to the transfer of land to the hapū of Matakana Costs (including present and future costs, Island; direct, indirect and contingent costs).  Ongoing costs associated with the joint management arrangements of the reserve area to be retained and the esplanade strip.

Option H

Return Panepane/Purakau to Ngai Tamarāwaho Advantages Disadvantages  Ngai Tamarāwaho would obtain the  Neither the five hapū of Matakana Island, benefit of ownership of nor the descendant owners, will have the Panepane/Purakau land returned for their own use and benefit and to enable them to exercise kaitiakitanga. This will likely impact

Item 8.1 Page 14 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

negatively on Council’s relationship with both parties and between the hapū of Matakana Island and Ngai Tamarāwaho. • Only 1 submission suggested this option. This option would require further development, engagement and consultation.  Legal and other expert costs (including Costs (including present and future costs, valuation costs) to give effect to the direct, indirect and contingent costs). transfer of land to Ngai Tamarāwaho.

STATUTORY COMPLIANCE 26. The recommendations of this report are consistent with the Local Government Act 2002 requirements for consultation and decision making on significant matters.

FUNDING/BUDGET IMPLICATIONS 27. Budget Funding Relevant Detail Information

Legal costs All associated legal costs can be met from the existing budgets related to the use and maintenance of the land at Panepane/Purakau.

ATTACHMENTS 1. Attachment 1 - Proposed land to be returned ⇩ 2. Attachment 2 - Proposed land to be retained by Council for a local purpose reserve ⇩

3. Attachment 3 - Proposed 20m wide esplanade strip ⇩

Item 8.1 Page 15 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

Item 8.1 - Attachment 1 Page 16 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

Item 8.1 - Attachment 2 Page 17 Extraordinary Council Meeting Agenda 29 October 2020

Item 8.1 - Attachment 3 Page 18