Description: COAT-ARM Hastings District Council

 

Civic Administration Building

Lyndon Road East, Hastings

Phone:  (06) 871 5000

Fax:  (06) 871 5100

WWW.hastingsdc.govt.nz

 

 

 

 

Open

 

A G E N D A

 

 

Council MEETING

 

 

 

Meeting Date:

Thursday, 24 May 2018

Time:

1.00pm

Venue:

Council Chamber

Ground Floor

Civic Administration Building

Lyndon Road East

Hastings

 

Council Members

Chair: Mayor Hazlehurst

Councillors Barber, Dixon, Harvey, Heaps, Kerr, Lawson, Lyons, Nixon, O’Keefe, Poulain, Redstone, Schollum, Travers and Watkins

 

Officer Responsible

Chief Executive – Mr R McLeod

Council Secretary

Mrs  C Hunt (Extn 5634)

 


TRIM File No. CG-14-1-00762

 

 

HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL

 

COUNCIL MEETING

 

Thursday, 24 May 2018

 

VENUE:

Council Chamber

Ground Floor

Civic Administration Building

Lyndon Road East

Hastings

TIME:

1.00pm

 

A G E N D A

 

 

 

1.         Prayer

2.         Apologies & Leave of Absence

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

3.         Seal Register

4.         Conflict of Interest

Members need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as a Member of the Council and any private or other external interest they might have.  This note is provided as a reminder to Members to scan the agenda and assess their own private interests and identify where they may have a pecuniary or other conflict of interest, or where there may be perceptions of conflict of interest. 

If a Member feels they do have a conflict of interest, they should publicly declare that at the start of the relevant item of business and withdraw from participating in the meeting.  If a Member thinks they may have a conflict of interest, they can seek advice from the Chief Executive (preferably before the meeting). 

It is noted that while Members can seek advice and discuss these matters, the final decision as to whether a conflict exists rests with the member.

5.         Confirmation of Minutes

Minutes of the Council Meeting held Friday 4 May 2018.

(Previously circulated)

6.         Kaiwaka Road Hall Reserve - Council resolution to seek Minister of Conservation approval to granting a proposed easement over the reserve 5

7.         Delegations to Committees and Rural Community Board                            13

8.         Council appointments to Committees, Subcommittees, Joint Committees and External Organisations                                                                                           17

9.         2018 Meeting Calendar for Council and Committees                                      21

10.       Notice of Appointment of Independent Commissioners for Resource Consent Hearings                                                                                                                      25

11.       Health and Safety Quarterly Report                                                                     29

12.       Requests Received under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA)  Monthly Update                                                           41

13.       Chief Executive Recruitment Agency - Tender Process                                47

14.       Framework for Business Improvement Districts                                             53

15.       Additional Business Items

16.       Extraordinary Business Items 

17.       Recommendation to Exclude the Public from Items 18, 19 and 20             61

18.       Award of Tender - Chief Executive Recruitment Agency

19.       CON2018007 Urban and Plains Pavement and Corridor Management Contract

20.       Presbyterian Support East Coast offer to renew lease for office space in Heretaunga House

 

     


File Ref: 18/337

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 24 May 2018

FROM:                           Parks and Property Services Manager

Colin Hosford

SUBJECT:                    Kaiwaka Road Hall Reserve - Council resolution to seek Minister of Conservation approval to granting a proposed easement over the reserve        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Council on final consent to allow the proposed easement and to seek Ministerial approval.

1.2       This request arises from Council’s decision of 14th December 2017 to proceed with the statutory process for granting an easement.  With the closing of public submissions in February, Council now needs to grant final approval to grant the easement, subject to ministerial approval.

1.3       The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost–effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

1.4       The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is that by agreeing to an access easement, Council will be facilitating the development of Community Infrastructure for recreational, arts and cultural opportunity in the local Kaiwaka Road rural community.

1.5       This report concludes by recommending that Council agree to the proposed access easement over the Kaiwaka Road Hall Reserve, as there have been no submissions in opposition, and that it seek Ministerial consent to complete the granting of an access easement over the reserve.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       In 2016, the owners of the old Tareha School site, adjacent to the Kaiwaka Road Hall property, offered to gift Council, on behalf of the local community, the existing tennis court land, subject to the granting of an access easement over the Hall reserve.  See Attachment 1 scheme plan.

2.2       This proposal has been supported by the Rural Community Board, the hall committee and Council. 

2.3       As a reserve for a public hall, Council is required to adhere to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977, before granting an easement.  The statutory provisions include publicly advertising the intentions to grant the easement followed by the seeking of the consent of the Minister of Conservation.

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

3.1       Officers publicly notified the proposal in January with submissions closing in late February 2018.  No submissions were received.

3.2       Under the relevant Reserves Act provisions, the proposal now needs final Council approval prior to the request of ministerial approval, which will allow the proposed access easement to be registered.

4.0       OPTIONS

4.1       There are two options available to Council;

·    Option 1 – Refuse to grant the access easement

·    Option 2 – Agree to grant the access easement

5.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1       In terms of community engagement, the proposal itself has been driven by the local community.  All parties are in full support of both the gifting of the tennis court and the creation of the access easement.

5.2       The Rural Community Board is also in support of the proposals as they clearly see the acquisition of the tennis court as being of benefit to the local community.  They also have no issue with granting of the easement as it is not seen to create any impediments to hall activities.

5.3       As the land vested as a reserve, under the Reserves Act 1977, Council has followed the required procedures for the granting of an easement as set out in Section 48 of the Act.   As there have been no objections to the proposal, this process now requires final Council approval to seek the Minister of Conservation’s approval. 

5.4       The proposal does itself is relatively minor in nature and as such, does not challenge any of Council’s significance thresholds.

6.0       ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

6.1       The subdivision of the old school site has enabled the school tennis court to be gifted to Council and joined to the nearby community hall reserve.  The subdivision application includes the request that an easement be granted over the original hall site, to enable alternative access to the rear site that was originally the old school grounds.  Officers note that while the proposed scheme plan shows what appears to be a potential access leg to the rear site, the rugged topography of the land makes access impracticable.  Hence the request for the access easement over the hall reserve.

6.2       The proposal has strong rural community support and has little to no impact on the reserve itself.  The bulk of costs of the subdivision are being met by the private owner with a contribution by the surveyor as a support for the local community.  Officers have indicated that to help secure the tennis court for public use, Council may be amenable to making a small contribution towards legal costs to show its support for both the local community and to recognise the generous gift to the Kaiwaka Road community.

6.3       Council, at its meeting of 14 December 2017 agreed to the proposal, subject to it meeting the process requirements of the Reserves Act 1977. 

6.4       The proposal has been publicly notified and no submissions were received.

6.5       By adopting Option 1, Council would be taking a position that is clearly at odds with its local community and contrary to its earlier decision to support the proposal. 

6.6       The easement proposal does not diminish the ability of the public to access and use the reserve.  The strip in question is currently in the centre of the hall carpark and allows the carpark to continue operating without detrimental impact.

6.7       By adopting Option 2, Council will give final approval to the proposed easement, prior to seeking Ministerial approval.  Assuming the Minister agrees, the final outcome will enable the proposed subdivision to be completed.  This will result in the community taking ownership of an extended Kaiwaka Road Hall Reserve and the requested easements in place, all, without any detrimental impact on its community use.  The proposal comes at little cost to Council and more importantly is strongly supported by the local community and Rural Community Board.

6.8       If Council adopts Option 2, and gives final approval to the formation of the proposed easement, officers will carry out the final action of the process prescribed in Section 48 of the Reserve Act 1977, which is seeking ministerial consent to grant the easement.

7.0       PREFERRED OPTION AND REASONS

7.1       Option 2 is the preferred option. 

7.2       Council has supported the gifting of the old school tennis court to create a substantial and meaningful addition to the Kaiwaka Road Hall reserve.  The local rural community and Rural Community Board support the proposal as a worthwhile community asset.

7.3       Council has essentially agreed in principle to the granting of an access easement over the reserve, subject to following the relevant requirements of Section 48 of the Reserve Act 1977.  The proposal has been publicly notified and did not draw any objections during the submission period.  On this basis, Council can now seek the final approval of the Minister of Conservation to granting the access easement.

7.4       With Council’s adoption of Option 2, officers will seek ministerial approval and assuming it will be given, complete the subdivision of the site, subject to the proposed access easement and land gifting.

8.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the Parks and Property Services Manager titled Kaiwaka Road Hall Reserve - Council resolution to seek Minister of Conservation approval to granting a proposed easement over the reserve dated 24/05/2018 be received.

B)        That Council consents to the granting of an access easement over the Kaiwaka Hall Reserve, subject to the approval of the Minister of Conservation.

C)        That the Chief Executive be delegated authority to grant the access easement over the reserve to enable a subdivision, once Minister of Conservation approval is obtained.

With the reasons for this decision being that the objective of the decision will contribute to meeting the current and future needs of communities for local public services to meet recreational, arts and cultural needs in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by:

          Supporting the creation of an easement over reserve land, Council will enable a subdivision that gifts additional land to enhance the recreational opportunities at the Kaiwaka Road Hall Reserve, for the local community          to benefit from.

 

Attachments:

 

1

Kaiwaka Road Hall Reserve - Amended Scheme Plan

50357#0038

 

 

 


Kaiwaka Road Hall Reserve - Amended Scheme Plan

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


Kaiwaka Road Hall Reserve - Amended Scheme Plan

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


File Ref: 18/422

 

1.   

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 24 May 2018

FROM:                           Democratic Support Manager

Jackie Evans

SUBJECT:                    Delegations to Committees and Rural Community Board        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Council on the adoption of a set of delegations to Committees, the Hastings District Rural Community Board, Subcommittees and working parties.

1.2       The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost–effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances. This decision is principally administrative and relates to Council’s governance and decision-making arrangements in carrying out the purpose of local government.

1.3       This report concludes by recommending that the attached delegations register be adopted.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       A council’s committee structure is a subordinate decision-making structure established under the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 and more directly under the provisions of Schedule 7.

2.2       Essentially the use of a committee structure is to enable governance decision-making to occur in a timely and responsive manner so as to allow the business of the Council to operate efficiently and effectively while ensuring democracy principles are given appropriate cognisance.

2.3       The committee structures used by councils throughout New Zealand have many variations reflecting the “local” flavour and preferences of the communities the particular councils serve.

2.4       This report follows the Council decision to adopt a new more inclusive structure comprising 13 portfolio leaders and reducing the number of standing committees from 5 to 4. Following a Councillor only retreat in December it became apparent that the hierarchical governance structure which had been in operation for many years was no longer working well for the following reasons:-

·    Chairs bore a heavy burden of work

·    Information was not shared amongst all councillors

·    Some councillors were not fully engaged in the Council’s work

·    The perception of an ‘in the know‘ group from within the councillor body.

 

These barriers were getting in the way of collective decision making.

 

2.4       Following a Councillor retreat in January 2018 the Mayor presented a new draft governance structure and proposed a portfolio lead approach with 4 Standing Committees to create a more inclusive governance structure. The structure was approved by Council on 26 April 2018.  The delegations register has been amended to give effect to the new structure.

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

3.1       The structure is outlined and is given effect to and supported by the Committees and Rural Community Board Delegations Register set out in Schedule 1 (Attachment 1).

4.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND CONSULTATION

4.1       Having in place an appropriate subordinate decision-making structure is an important matter for the Council. It does not however trigger any of the thresholds within the Council's significance policy, consultation is therefore neither required nor appropriate.

5.0       ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (Including Financial Implications)

5.1       This is a political decision. An alternative does exist to a Committee Structure which would be for the Council itself to deal with all matters. In this case the Council would transact all the business that needs to be undertaken. It would obviously need to meet more frequently than has been the case however with the Committees in the past comprising all members this is effectively what has been happening.

5.2       If a decision for a council-only option were taken then the delegations set out in the schedule become unnecessary and meeting frequency would need to be further considered.  In addition an alternative method of portfolio management would likely need to be developed.

5.3       The proposed model will provide a structure that enables timely and responsive decision-making. It also provides for an allocation and spread of governance workload.  The delegations that are set out have been modified to reflect changes and improvements on the previous set of delegations and recommendations from the Mayor. Adoption of the delegations are to enable the Council to undertake its business in a cost-effective manner and within reasonable time frames in a manner that meets the objectives of the legislative framework within which Council operates.

6.0       PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

6.1       As stated, this is in essence a political decision. However, the preferred option is for the Council to adopt the delegations set out in the schedule.

 

7.0       Recommendations and Reasons

A)        That the report of the Democratic Support Manager titled Delegations to Committees and Rural Community Board dated 24/05/2018 be received.

B)        That the Portfolio Leads, Committee Structure and Principles contained in the circulated Schedule 1(CG-08-9-18-282) are adopted and,

C)        That the Powers, Duties and Functions set out in Schedule 1, Hastings District Council Committees and Rural Community Board Delegations Register from 1 June 2018 to October 2019 are delegated to the Committees, Subcommittees and Working Parties identified in the Schedule.

With the reasons for this decision being that the objective of the decision will contribute to fulfilling  of the Council obligations in the Local Government Act 2002 in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by:

i)          Ensuring the Council has in place appropriate delegations to enable timely decisions decision making.

 

 

Attachments:

 

1

Proposed 2018 Committee and Rural Community Board Delegations Register

CG-08-9-18-282

Separate Doc

 

 


File Ref: 18/97

 

2.   

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 24 May 2018

FROM:                           Democratic Support Manager

Jackie Evans

SUBJECT:                    Council appointments to Committees, Subcommittees, Joint Committees and External Organisations     

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to agree changes to the memberships on Council Committees, which includes Sub-committees and Joint Committees, and the Council appointments to external organisations.

1.2       This issue arises as a consequence of the recent by-elections in 2017 and 2018 and the election of Mayor Hazlehurst, Councillor Schollum and Councillor Lawson.

1.3       The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost–effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

1.4       The objective of this decision is to ensure that the Council can give effect to the purpose of Local Government as set out in section 10 of the Act and to ensure that it is able to meet its obligations under the Act or any other legislation, in the most effective and efficient manner.

1.5       This report concludes by recommending the changes to Council appointments as set out in the Schedule of Appointments (Attachment 1).

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       Following the retreat in December 2017, when councillors requested a more open and inclusive governance arrangements, the Mayor has held several workshops with councillors to determine governance arrangements for the remainder of the triennium.  As a result the Council agreed on 26 April 2018 to reduce the standing committees from 5 to 4 and create 13 portfolio leader roles with effect from 1 June 2018. The purpose of this review is to create a more inclusive councillor body focussed on achieving the strategic objectives set out in the Council’s Long Term Plan.

2.2       It is also necessary to review the existing Council appointments in order to reallocate roles previously held by the Deputy Mayor, prior to her election as Mayor, to align appointments to portfolio leader roles to spread the appointment workload more evenly across the councillor body and give the two new councillors opportunities to get involved.

2.3       The Role of the Mayor

2.4       According to the Local Government Act 2002 section 41A sub-section (3) which states:

A Mayor has the following powers:

(a) To appoint the deputy mayor

(b) To establish committees of the territorial authority:

(c)  To appoint the chairperson of each committee established under paragraph (b) and, for that purpose, a mayor-

i)          May make the appointment before the other members of the committee are determined; and

ii)         May appoint himself or herself.

Section 41A also provides that a mayor is a member of all committees of a local authority.

 

2.5       The Mayor has recommended the appointments to the portfolio leader roles and new Standing Committee chairs as follows:-

Committee

Chair

Community Development

Clr Dixon

Finance and Risk

Clr Travers

Strategic Planning and Partnerships

Clr Lyons

Works and Services

Cr Watkins

 

Portfolio Leader Roles

Councillor

Ambassador for Hastings

Clr O’Keefe

Community Engagement

Clr Schollum

Our Places

Clr Dixon

Our People

Clr Poulain/Clr Lawson

Our Economy

Clr Harvey

Safeguarding Our Money

Clr Travers

Long Term Financial Planning

Clr Kerr

Protecting Our Communities

Clr Lyons

Partnerships and uplifting our communities

Clr Barber

Our Water

Clr Watkins

Planning Our Assets for Tomorrow

Clr Redstone

Moving Around and Operations

Clr Nixon

Our Environment

Clr Heaps

 

2.6       At the Council Retreat councillors requested a more open and inclusive governance structure. Following the approval in principle to the new structure on 26 April 2018 for introduction on 1 June 2018 (subject to the Remuneration Authority Determination being received) all councillors were asked to consider what appointments they wish to continue to hold, and which ones they would be willing to relinquish. On 15 May 2018, a further workshop was held to jointly discuss the reallocation of appointments to committees, subcommittees, joint committees and external organisations. The schedule of appointments has been updated following this meeting and is attached for approval at this Council meeting (Attachment 1).

 

 

3.0       OPTIONS.

3.1       Although Her Worship the Mayor has the power to make certain appointments, as explained in paragraph 2.4 above, she has decided that while she is happy to put forward her recommendations as to these matters the final decision should remain with the Council.

3.2       The options available to the Council are:

1)   Adopt the recommendations put forward by Her Worship the Mayor, bearing in mind that full consultation with all councillors has taken place and the proposed appointments have been debated in workshop session. Arrangements can be reviewed or changed at any time.

2)   Adopt in part the recommendations put forward by Her Worship the Mayor with agreed changes to the committee structure and/or chairpersons or appointments to outside organisations.

3)   Reject the decisions and recommendations of Her Worship the Mayor with or without immediately adopting any alternatives.

4.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND CONSULTATION

4.1       The matter is not significant in terms of the Council’s policy nor is any consultation required.

5.0       ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (Including Financial Implications)

5.1       The Schedule attached reflects the outcome of the Mayor’s discussion with Councillors at the workshop held on 15 May 2018.

6.0       PREFERRED OPTION AND REASONS

6.1       The preferred option is option 1 as this recognises the process which Her Worship has gone through in collaboration with the elected members to identify the most appropriate structure and appointments.

 

7.0       Recommendations and Reasons

A)        That the report of the Democratic Support Manager titled Council appointments to Committees, Subcommittees, Joint Committees and External Organisations dated 24/05/2018 be received.

B)        The changes to appointments to Committees, Subcommittees and outside organisations, as outlined in the amended schedule of appointments be adopted.

With the reasons for this decision being that the it will enable the Council to give effect to the purposes of local government and to its responsibilities and obligations under the Local Government Act 2002 and any other legislation in the most effective and efficient manner.

 

Attachments:

 

1

Schedule of Council Appointments to Committees, Subcommittees

CG-08-9-18-280

Separate Doc

  


File Ref: 18/62

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 24 May 2018

FROM:                           Democratic Support Manager

Jackie Evans

SUBJECT:                    2018 Meeting Calendar for Council and Committees        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to place before the Council the proposed schedule of Council and Committee meetings for the 2018 calendar year.

1.2       This report recommends that the proposed Meeting Schedule from 1 June 2018 to December 2018 being Attachment 1 to this report be adopted.

1.0       BACKGROUND

1.1       The schedule provides a guide for the elected members and members of the public but it can and will be amended as circumstances change. There is also no general provision made for workshops which will arise from time to time. Where changes occur the current practices for advising members will be continued.

1.2       Although the Council adopts a schedule which covers the remaining six months of the year there is still the statutory requirement for meetings to be publicly notified on a monthly basis.

2.0       OPTIONS

2.1       The Council may either adopt the schedule as proposed or require the schedule to be amended.

 

3.0       RECOMMENDATION

A)        That the report of the Democratic Support Manager titled 2018 Meeting Calendar for Council and Committees dated 24/05/2018 be received.

B)        That the Meeting Schedule from 1 June to December 2018 Calendar as attached to this report be adopted

 

Attachments:

 

1

Proposed Calendar of meetings from 1 June to December 2018

CG-14-1-00761

  


Proposed Calendar of meetings from 1 June to December 2018

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


File Ref: 18/435

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 24 May 2018

FROM:                           Environmental Consents Manager

Murray  Arnold

SUBJECT:                    Notice of Appointment of Independent Commissioners for Resource Consent Hearings        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to advise the Council of the appointment of:

a)        Paul Cooney, an independent Hearings Commissioner, to hear and decide on a resource consent application lodged by Oceania Village Company Ltd to extend the existing retirement village (Gracelands) by the establishment of 50 independent villas at 730 and 734 Pakowhai Road;

b)        Bill Wasley, an independent Hearings Commissioner, to hear and decide on a resource consent application lodged by the Hastings District Council for the construction of the Clifton Revetment Wall, and access road.

1.2       Pursuant to Section 34A(1) of the Resource Management Act 1991, authority to appoint, pursuant to Section 100A and 34A(1) of the Act, Hearings Commissioner(s) to hear and decide an application has been delegated to the Chief Executive, the Group Manager: Planning and Regulatory Services, the Environmental Consents Manager, and the Environmental Policy Manager.  This delegation is subject to the requirements that appointed Hearings Commissioners shall hold a valid certificate of accreditation under section 39A of the Act, and that the exercise of this authority will be reported to the next available meeting of Council.

1.3       The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost–effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

1.4       The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is to allow Council to carry out its regulatory functions under the Resource Management Act in a manner that best meets the needs of the wider Hastings District community.

1.5       This report sets out the reasons for the exercise of delegated authority to appoint independent commissioner Paul Cooney to hear and decide on the applications for the extension of the Gracelands Retirement Village and Commissioner Bill Wasley to hear and decide on the application for the Clifton Revetment Wall and access road.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       Extension to Gracelands Retirement Village, Pakowhai Road

a)         Oceania Village Company Limited applied for resource consent to establish 50 independent living Villas as an extension to the existing Gracelands retirement village at 730 and 734 Pakowhai Road, Hastings.  The application was limited and 3 submissions were received. 

b)         Oceania Village Company Ltd wrote to Council after the close of submissions requesting that an independent commissioner be appointed to hear and decide the application.

c)         The RMA provides for an applicant to, within 5 working days of the close of submissions, request that an independent commissioner is appointed to hear and decide the application.

d)         The request from the applicant was received in excess of 5 working days after the close of submissions, and an extension of timeframes was granted for receipt of the request.

2.2       Clifton Revetment and Access Road

a)        Hastings District Council applied for resource consent to the Hastings District Council for the upgrade of an existing 80 metre long limestone revetment, construction of an additional 400 metre long limestone revetment and construction of a new access road between the carpark area at the end of Clifton Road and the Clifton Camp for vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists.

b)        Application was also made to the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council for resource consent for the works.

c)         The Hawke’s Bay Regional Council agreed to a joint hearing of the two applications, and as Council was the applicant also agreed to the appointment of an independent commissioner to hear and decide on the application. 

2.3       Authority to decide, pursuant to Section 102 of the Act, to hear any application jointly with any other Consent Authority in accordance with the procedure set out in Appendix A, and to decide any other matter of procedure, is delegated to the Group Manager: Planning and Regulatory Services, the Environmental Consents Manager, and the Team Leader Environmental Consents / Subdivision and the Environmental Policy Manager.

2.4       Paul Cooney and Bill Wasley hold valid certificates of accreditation under section 39A of the Act with the Chair endorsement. 

3.0       ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL) AND PREFERENCE

3.1       This matter has been delegated to staff who have exercised that delegation and are advising council of the appointment of Commissioners.  This report completes the requirement set out in the delegation that Council is informed of the appointment.  Further assessment of options is therefore not necessary for this report.

4.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

4.1       The issue of significance has been considered in terms of Council’s Significance Policy and in particular the thresholds and criteria contained within this policy. The decisions required in this report do not trigger any of the thresholds and are subject to Resource Management Act 1991 submissions and decision making processes. 

5.0       RECOMMENDATIONS

A)        That the report of the Environmental Consents Manager titled Notice of Notice of Appointment of Independent Commissioners for Resource Consent Hearings dated 24/05/2018 be received.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 


File Ref: 18/106

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 24 May 2018

FROM:                           Health and Safety Manager

Jennie Kuzman

SUBJECT:                    Health and Safety Quarterly Report        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to inform and update Council about Health and Safety at Hastings District Council.

 

1.2       The report provides information to enable Elected Members to undertake due diligence, by providing leading and lagging statistical information in relation to Health and Safety for the third quarter of the 2017/2018 financial year (covering the period 1 January to 31 March 2018).

 

2.0       BACKGROUND

 

2.1       The Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (HSWA) requires HSWA Officers (Elected members and the Chief Executive) to exercise due diligence by taking reasonable steps to understand the organisation’s operations and Health and Safety risks, and to ensure that they are managed so that Council meets its legal obligations.

 

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

 

3.1       The attached report for the third quarter of the 2017/2018 financial year (Attachment one) provides information on leading and lagging statistical information in relation to health and safety reporting for the period of 1 January to 31 March 2018.

 

3.2       This quarterly report also incorporates the monthly report information for the period 1-31 March 2018.

 

3.3       Good progress has been made this quarter with pleasing results in both leading and lagging indicators, including a downward trend in injury frequency rates.  Further detailed commentary has been provided within the attached report in relation to comparisons with the third quarter of the previous financial year.

4.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

4.1       This Report does not trigger Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy and no consultation is required.

 

 

5.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the Health and Safety Manager titled Health and Safety Quarterly Report dated 24/05/2018 be received.

 

Attachments:

 

1

Health and Safety Manager's Quarterly Report to Council - Quarter 3 - 1 January to 31 March 2018

HR-03-01-18-281

 

 

 


Health and Safety Manager's Quarterly Report to Council - Quarter 3 - 1 January to 31 March 2018

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


File Ref: 18/437

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 24 May 2018

FROM:                           Democratic Support Manager

Jackie Evans

SUBJECT:                    Requests Received under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA)  Monthly Update        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to inform the Council of the number of requests under the local Government official Information Act (LGOIMA) 1987 received in April and May.

1.2       This issue arises from the provision of accurate reporting information to enable effective governance

1.3       The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost–effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

1.4       The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is to ensure that the Council is meeting its legislative obligations

1.5       This report concludes by recommending that the report be noted.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       The LGOIMA allows people to request official information held by local government agencies. It contains rules for how such requests should be handled, and provides a right to complain to the Ombudsman in certain situations. The LGOIMA also has provisions governing the conduct of meetings.

Principle of Availability

2.2       The principle of availability underpins the whole of the LGOIMA. The Act explicitly states that:

The question whether any official information is to be made available … shall be determined, except where this Act otherwise expressly requires, in accordance with the purposes of this Act and the principle that the information shall be made available unless there is good reason for withholding it.

 

 

 

Purpose of the Act

2.3       The key purposes of the LGOIMA are to:

·    progressively increase the availability of official information held by agencies, and promote the open and public transaction of business at meetings, in order to:

o enable more effective public participation in decision making; and

o promote the accountability of members and officials;

          and so enhance respect for the law and promote good local        government; and

·    protect official information and the deliberations of local authorities to the extent consistent with the public interest and the preservation of personal privacy.

2.4       City, district and regional councils, council controlled organisations and community boards are subject to LGOIMA and official information means any information held by an agency subject to the LGOIMA.

2.5       It is not limited to documentary material, and includes material held in any format such as:

·     written documents, reports, memoranda, letters, notes, emails and draft documents;

·     non-written documentary information, such as material stored on or generated by computers, including databases, video or tape recordings;

·     information which is known to an agency, but which has not yet been recorded in writing or otherwise (including knowledge of a particular matter held by an officer, employee or member of an agency in their official capacity);

·     documents and manuals which set out the policies, principles, rules or guidelines for decision making by an agency;

·     the reasons for any decisions that have been made about a person.

2.6       It does not matter where the information originated, or where it is currently located, as long as it is held by the agency. For example, the information could have been created by a third party and sent to the agency. The information could be held in the memory of an employee of the agency.

What does a LGOIMA request look like?

2.7       There is no set way in which a request must be made. A LGOIMA request is made in any case when a person asks an agency for access to specified official information. In particular:

·     a request can be made in any form and communicated by any means, including orally;

·     the requester does not need to refer to the LGOIMA; and

·     the request can be made to any person in the agency.

2.8       The Council deals with in excess of 14,000 service requests on average each month from written requests, telephone calls and face to face contact. The LGOIMA requests dealt with in this report are specific requests for information logged under formal LGOIMA procedure, which sometimes require collation of information from different sources and/or an assessment about the release of the information requested.

Key Timeframes

2.9       An agency must make a decision and communicate it to the requester ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’ and no later than 20 working days after the day on which the request was received.

2.10    The agency’s primary legal obligation is to notify the requester of the decision on the request ‘as soon as reasonably practicable’ and without undue delay. The reference to 20 working days is not the de facto goal but the maximum unless it is extended appropriately in accordance with the Act. Failure to comply with time limit may be the subject of a complaint to the ombudsman.

2.11    The Act provides for timeframes and extensions as there is a recognition that organisations have their own work programmes and that official information requests should not unduly interfere with that programme.

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

3.1       Council has requested that official information requests be notified via a monthly report.

4.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the Democratic Support Manager titled Requests Received under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA)  Monthly Update dated 24/05/2018 be received.

B)        That the LGOIMA requests received in April 2018 as set out in Attachment 1 (IRB-2-01-18-1272) of the report in (A) above be noted.

 

Attachments:

 

1

Cumulative Monthly Report to Council - April 2018

IRB-2-01-18-1272

 

 

 

 


Cumulative Monthly Report to Council - April 2018

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


File Ref: 18/459

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 24 May 2018

FROM:                           Group Manager: Human Resources

Bronwyn Bayliss

Procurement Manager

Sharon O'Toole

SUBJECT:                    Chief Executive Recruitment Agency - Tender Process        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to inform the Council of the procurement strategy and approach used to engage an executive search and recruitment consultant to assist with the search and selection of a new Chief Executive (CE) for Hastings District Council.

1.2       The outcome of this procurement and subsequent Chief Executive recruitment process will have a significant impact on our organisation and our people.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       The resignation of the current Chief Executive has created a need to seek the services of an experienced executive search and recruitment agency to support the Mayor and Councillors in recruiting a new Chief Executive.

2.2       Under the Local Government Act 2002, the Mayor and Councillors are the Employer of the Chief Executive.

2.3       The incumbent Chief Executive has performed this role at Council for over ten years, his last day of work is 21 June 2018. An acting Chief Executive has been appointed for the interim period between the incumbent Chief Executive leaving and the new Chief Executive commencing employment. The Council is keen to minimise this interim period by engaging a new Chief Executive as near as is practically possible to the departure date of the incumbent Chief Executive.

3.0       PROJECT SCOPE

3.1       The recruitment agency will specialise in recruitment for executive level positions, preferably with experience in the public or local government sector.

3.2       The consultant of the successful agency will be involved in all facets of the recruitment and selection process including: identification of potential qualified candidates, applicant screening, short-listing candidates, assessments, interviewing, referencing, verification and selection.

4.0       PROCUREMENT METHODOLOGY

4.1       The Chief Executive position will impact significantly on our organisation and our people, the importance of this recruitment process to the Council warranted an open and contestable process to ensure Council could assess the capability of the market and engage the recruitment agency that will best meet Council’s requirements.

4.2       At the beginning of the project a team of stakeholder representatives was identified that would be able to devote time to the project and think openly about the strategy and required solution. The project team was comprised of the following:

 

Project Team Member

(non-evaluating)

Project Role

Council Role

Bronwyn Bayliss

Project Lead

Group Manager: Human Resources

Sharon O’Toole

Evaluation Chair

Procurement Manager

Murray Cowan

Technical Advice

HR Consultant (Standardise IT)

Brent Chamberlain

Financial Analysis

Manager Strategic Finance

Tender Evaluation Team

Project Role

Council Role

Mayor Sandra Hazlehurst

Evaluator

Mayor

Deputy Mayor Tania Kerr

Evaluator

Deputy Mayor

Councillor Geraldine Travers

Evaluator

Chair of Tenders Sub-Committee

Councillor Kevin Watkins

Evaluator

Deputy Chair Tenders Sub-Committee

Councillor George Lyons

Evaluator

Member of Tenders Sub-Committee

Councillor Simon Nixon

Evaluator

Member of Tenders Sub-Committee

Councillor Ann Redstone

Evaluator

Member of Tenders Sub-Committee

Table 1: Project Team

4.3       The Tender Evaluation Team (TET) was agreed by Council on 5th April and comprised of The Mayor, Deputy Mayor and the five Councillors appointed to the Tenders Subcommittee. An external Human Resources (HR) consultant (Murray Cowan) was engaged to provide independent expert advice and support to the evaluation team.

4.4       The core team were involved throughout the procurement, and were responsible for establishing and endorsing the specification of requirements, the evaluation methodology, and the evaluation of offers. This continuity strengthened the process and outcomes.

4.5       The tender documentation was reviewed and endorsed by Murray Cowan, a local human resources specialist with considerable executive recruitment experience. Mr Cowan’s feedback on the documentation was “very thorough process which is good to see. I liked the criteria and the weightings applied too – made good sense.”

4.6       The Request for Proposal was openly advertised on GETS, which is the New Zealand Government Electronic Tenders Service, it is a free web portal intended to promote New Zealand public sector contract opportunities. Use of the website is a mandatory requirement for the government and state sector, while this is not the case for councils it does mean that it is widely used across the public sector and is a useful source of information for suppliers seeking contract opportunities.

4.7       The non-price information which covers the service delivery, track record and capability of the supplier was to be assessed by the TET.

4.8       The price analysis was to be completed by Brent Chamberlain (Manager Strategic Finance).

5.0       ALTERNATIVE PROCUREMENT METHODOLOGIES CONSIDERED

5.1       Market analysis included a review of the All of Government Agreement (AoG) for Recruitment Services to assess whether this could meet the requirement(s) of this procurement activity. The AoG recruitment service is primarily for the engagement of contractors and is not suitable for the scope of this procurement activity.

 

6.0    TENDER EVALUATION

6.1       The Request for Proposal was issued 16 April 2018 and responses were required by 2nd May when the tender closed.

6.2       The evaluation criteria and weightings in Table 2 were used to evaluate the proposals. Compliance with the required (mandatory) requirements was a prerequisite to proposals being evaluated further.

Table 2: Attributes and weightings RFP

6.3       A pre-evaluation meeting was held on 3 May 2018 to discuss conflicts of interest, probity requirements and outline the evaluation process and the scoring scale and how this should be applied. At the end of the meeting the supplier non-price responses were distributed.

6.4       The TET then scored the responses individually, these individual scores were aggregated and averaged. The TET then met on 16 May 2018 to discuss the scoring, this was an opportunity to moderate the individual scores (if required).

6.5       Throughout the evaluation process the TET had the option to seek Mr. Cowan’s expertise, this was to help explain technical content, clarify specific human resources processes or decipher any jargon; Mr. Cowan did not provide advice on how to score.

6.6       The outcome of the evaluation process was that the evaluation team shortlisted to one supplier, and requested that the shortlisted supplier meet with the evaluation team in person, provide a presentation, and answers questions.

6.7       The objective of the presentation was to meet with the main contact person responsible for delivering the service and build on information provided through the tender process. The session was comprised of a presentation followed by a Question and Answer session. The questions were considered and agreed beforehand through a collaborative process whereby the TET highlighted specific areas of interest, the independent HR advisor (Murray Cowan) and Council’s Group Manager: Human Resources then drafted questions, which were reviewed and endorsed by the TET.

6.8       The TET reserved the right (if the presentation process generated concern around capability) to approach the second ranking consultant.

6.9       This report has been prepared for information purposes only, the formal decision on which recruitment agency to engage will be decided in the Public Excluded section of the meeting, this is to protect any commercially sensitive information that is required to be disclosed.

6.10    This report provides details of the procurement strategy and approach, further details about the procurement process can be found in the public excluded paper “Award of Tender – Chief Executive Recruitment Agency”.

7.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

7.1       While the value of this contract is not large, the importance of this recruitment process is significant for the organisation and justifies the robust process that has been outlined in this report. This process however, is not significant in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy and no consultation is required.

 

8.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the Group Manager: Human Resources titled Chief Executive Recruitment Agency - Tender Process dated 24/05/2018 be received.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 


File Ref: 18/426

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 24 May 2018

FROM:                           Chief Financial Officer

Bruce Allan

Strategic Projects Manager

Raoul Oosterkamp

Economic Development Manager

Lee Neville

SUBJECT:                    Framework for Business Improvement Districts        

 

 

 

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to seek guidance from the Council on outcomes from the process investigate frameworks for Business Improvement Districts (BIDs).

1.2       This  request arose  out of the 2017/18 Annual Plan consultation during which Council resolved to complete a review of the targeted rate to ensure that the structures in place will achieve the best outcomes for the Hastings Central Area. 

1.3       The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost–effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

1.4       The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is focused on ensuring that Council has in place a robust and fit-for-purpose policy and management framework focused on the marketing and revitalization of the Hastings Central Marketing Area in and efficient and cost effective manner.

1.5       This report concludes by recommending that Council:

1.5.1        That the targeted rate for the marketing and revitalization of the Hastings Central Marketing Area, including the addition of a reporting framework be retained.

1.5.2        That a Hastings District Council - BID Policy, Management and Reporting Framework be developed. 

1.5.3        That consultation be undertaken with stakeholders in the Hastings central business targeted rating area to confirm support, or otherwise, to transition to a BID Model. 

1.5.4        Pending 1.5.3, That Council work in partnership with Hastings City Business Association Board to establish a BID Transition Team to manage the shift to the new model. 

1.5.5        That the BID Transition Team will complete a review of the Business Improvement District model after 12 months.   

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       The Hastings City Marketing rate was introduced as a targeted rate in June 1994 and has not been reviewed to any great extent in 24 years.

2.2       This rate is collected under the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 for a specified purpose or service provision.  Rates can only be collected by Local Government. In Council’s Funding Impact Statement the Hastings City Marketing Rate it is noted: “the targeted rate shall fund the marketing programme aimed at revitalisation of the central business area of Hastings”. It is expected that the targeted rate will deliver outcomes in line with that explanation of the targeted rate.

2.3       As noted under 1.2, This  review request arose  out of the 2017/18 Annual Plan consultation where Council resolved to further explore the most cost effective delivery method to best achieve the outcomes identified for the Hastings City Marketing Rate and consult where necessary through 2017/18 -Council Report 7 June 2017. 

2.4       In October 2017 Council commissioned independent consultant Mr Waterhouse to complete a review of the Hastings Central Marketing Area.  The review concludes that marketing, promotion and revitalization of the city centre remains an essential function for the Hastings City Centre to remain competitive, progress and develop. However, greater effectiveness and outcomes can be achieved through the management of this program under a different structure incorporating a robust reporting regime back to Council including an assessment of the best way of delivering these outcomes.

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

3.1       In April 2018, Officers liaised with BID representatives from Palmerston North, Tawa, Kilbirnie and Hamilton.  The purpose being to obtain a better understanding as the mechanics behind, and driver for, establishing a BID. 

3.2       A BID is a partnership between a local authority and a defined local business community to develop projects and services that benefit the trading environment and which align with the local authority’s objectives. A BID is supported by a targeted rate, levied on and collected from non-residential properties within the defined boundary. (Source Wellington City Council BID Policy 2013).

3.3       A BID Programme is a partnership between a local authority and the local business community to promote the profile of a particular commercial district or business centre. They are financially supported by the levying of a targeted rate collected from all non-residential properties within the defined boundary. (Source Hamilton City Council BID Policy 2012).

3.4       BIDs enable local business groups, which have a clear mandate from their communities, to develop a range of services that complement existing Council services and improvements.

3.5       Establishing a BID does not mean suburbs will look after their own repaving or street cleaning, the Council continues to provide its normal services covered by general rates.

3.6       The observations from these discussions are detailed below:

3.6.1        Any transition to a BID Model needs to be supported by the affected community.  The level of support required to ascertain any transition will need to be clearly defined as part of a BID Policy Framework and associated guideline documentation.  

3.6.2        A suitable policy framework needs to be established to govern the establishment and management of all Business Improvement Districts.

3.6.3        The local authority “generally” funds the process to establish the Business Improvement District including the Business Plan. 

3.6.4        The management of BIDs may be outsourced to specialist external consultants and is done for smaller BIDs like that of Kilbirnie and Tawa.  Outsourcing may reduce overhead cost impacts on the targeted rate collected, allowing the Business Improvement District Management Agency (often a Business Association) to direct the majority of a small targeted rating fund towards achieving outcomes.  Outsourcing does create challenges and complexities over and above a traditional resource / delivery model and as such would need to be carefully considered on a case by case basis.

3.6.5        The BID Management Agency and governance members thereof, are appointed by the stakeholders within the rating area.  In the event that two BID Management Agencies were competing to manage a single BID area, BID area stakeholders would need to select one BID management agency.  If support exists to establish a specific sub BID within an overarching BID area, stakeholders would pay two specific rates. 

3.6.6        There must be a clear and measurable alignment between the strategic objectives of the BID Management Agency and Council’s Long-term Plan strategic objectives.  In Hamilton, the Council considered withholding the distribution of the Business Improvement District targeted rate to the Business Association for a period of time because of a lack of alignment between the objectives of the Business Improvement District Management Agency and Council. 

3.6.7        A single point of contact between the BID Management Agency and Council is common. 

3.6.8        The BID Management Agency Governance Board often has a strategic focus.  Governance Board members are often appointed on the basis of strategic experience, business acumen and specialist skills.  Members of the Governance Board do not necessarily need to reside within the targeted rating area. 

3.6.9        Councillor representation on the Governance Board varies. 

3.6.10      BIDs benefit from being reviewed every 3 to 5 years.

3.7       Workshops reporting back on the findings of the BID process were held with the Hastings City Business Association Board on 16 May 2018 and subsequently the Council on 22 May 2018.  

3.8       At the conclusion of the 16 May 2018 workshop, the Hastings City Business Association Board agreed in principle to support progressing the BID model in accordance with the recommendations contained within this report. 

4.0       OPTIONS

4.1       The options available to Council are as follows:

4.1.1   Option 1:  The targeted rating mechanism remains in place unchanged with sub-options for the delivery of the outcomes expected from the targeted rates collected:

Option 1a: Modified status quo with the HCBA delivering the outcomes expected from the targeted rate with clear KPI’s and outcomes defined in an agreement for service.

Option 1b:  Transition to a BID Policy and Management Framework to support the targeted rate

Option 1c:  Request that officers investigate other options.

4.1.2   Option 2:     That a complete review of the Hastings City Marketing Rate be undertaken.

5.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1       Any changes to a rate must be consulted upon with the community impacted.  While Officers are not recommending a change to the quantum or purpose of the rate for the 2018/19 year, the establishment of a suitable Policy Framework focused on the establishment and management of BIDs will warrant consultation. 

5.2       Pending support from Council, Officers will consult with stakeholders in the targeted rating area to confirm support, or otherwise, for a BID model to be applied to property owners within the Hastings Central Marketing Area. 

5.3       Following confirmation of support, Council in partnership with the Hastings City Business Association Board, will establish a BID Transition Team to manage the shift to the new model, including any further consultation.

6.0       ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

6.1       Option 1 – Targeted rating mechanism remains in place unchanged

6.1.1   Option 1 is the preferred option. While the current targeted rate collection and delivery mechanism is operational, the lack of a transparent policy and management framework creates challenges. 

6.1.2   One of the drivers for this BID investigation process was the varying perception of the value of the targeted rate by stakeholders raised via the Draft 2017/18 Annual Plan.

6.1.3   On this basis, retention of the current target rate collection and delivery mechanism, in the absence of a transparent policy and management framework is not recommended. 

6.2       Option 1a: Modified status quo with the HCBA delivering the outcomes expected from the targeted rate with clear KPI’s and outcomes defined in an agreement for service.

6.2.1   It was identified in Mr Waterhouse’s review that there was still a need to market and promote the Hastings City Centre and that one of the key success factors that was currently missing was clear KPI’s and outcome expectation for the HCBA.

6.2.2   While this option goes some way to addressing some of the shortcomings of the current arrangements, it could be further strengthened if a more robust policy and framework was introduced to support the delivery of the actions required to deliver on the outcomes expected from the targeted rate.

6.3       Option 1b:  Transition to a BID Policy and Management Framework to support the targeted rate

6.3.1   The preferred option is to transition to a transparent policy and management framework, under a BID model, supported by a targeted rate, levied on and collected from non-residential properties within the defined boundary, for a defined local business community to develop projects and services that benefit the trading environment and which align with the Council’s objectives. 

6.3.2   The implementation of transparent policy and management framework structures and mechanisms will ensure that the performance of the entity delivering the outcomes of the targeted rate is monitored and reported on to Council. 

6.3.3   Council in partnership with Hastings City Business Association Board, will establish a BID Transition Team to manage the shift to the new model. The Transition Team will help to facilitate the efficient and effective transition to the new model in a transparent and collaborative manner. 

6.3.4   Instance of non-performance against pre-established KPI’s will be assessed at set frequencies, and where necessary remedial action can be taken. 

6.3.5   The development of a transparent policy and management framework, under a BID model, also provides a consistent framework for other targeted rating areas to transition into if supported, and new areas to be considered. 

6.4       Option 1c:  Request that officers investigate other options

6.4.1   While alternatives to a BID model are possible, justification to transition to a BID model for the Hastings central business area rate is evidenced by many successful national examples that have been in effect for a number of years. 

6.4.2   On this basis transitioning towards a BID model has less risk when compared to transitioning to a new untested model. 

6.5       Option 2: That a complete review of the Hastings City Marketing Rate be undertaken.

6.5.1   The review work already undertaken clearly notes that there is still a strong need to have a Hastings City Marketing Rate for the purpose of funding the marketing programme aimed at revitalisation of the central business area of Hastings. It is not necessarily the rate itself that is being questioned, but the desire to achieve the best outcomes from the funding opportunities that the rate creates. Therefore undertaking any further reviews on the targeted rate at this stage is not recommended. However Council in partnership with the BID Management Agency may want to reconsider who the targeted rate is collected from and the quantum of the rate at some stage in the future should Council see that such a review had merit.

7.0       PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

7.1       The preferred option is to transition to a transparent policy and management framework, under a BID model, supported by a targeted rate, levied on and collected from non-residential properties within the defined boundary, for a defined local business community to develop projects and services that benefit all the trading activities and general operating environment and which align with the Council’s objectives.

 

8.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)     That the report of the Chief Financial Officer titled Framework for Business Improvement Districts dated 24/05/2018 be received.

B)     That the targeted rate for the marketing and revitalization of the Hastings Central Marketing Area, including the addition of a reporting framework be retained.

C)     That a Hastings District Council - BID Policy, Management and Reporting Framework be developed. 

D)     That consultation be undertaken with stakeholders in the Hastings central business targeted rating area to confirm support, or otherwise, to transition to a BID Model. 

E)     Pending D), That Council work in partnership with Hastings City Business Association Board to establish a BID Transition Team to manage the shift to the new model. 

F)      That the BID Transition Team will complete a review of the Business Improvement District model after 12 months.

With the reasons for this decision being that the objective of the decision will contribute to meeting the current and future needs of communities for (local public services in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by:

·    Achieving the outcomes for a vibrant and productive Hastings City Centre.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

           


TRIM File No. CG-14-1-00762

 

 

 

HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL

 

Council MEETING

 

Thursday, 24 May 2018

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

 

SECTION 48, LOCAL GOVERNMENT OFFICIAL INFORMATION AND MEETINGS ACT 1987

 

THAT the public now be excluded from the following part of the meeting, namely:

 

18.       Award of Tender - Chief Executive Recruitment Agency – To be circulated separately

19.       CON2018007 Urban and Plains Pavement and Corridor Management Contract

20.       Presbyterian Support East Coast offer to renew lease for office space in Heretaunga House

 

The general subject of the matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this Resolution in relation to the matter and the specific grounds under Section 48 (1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this Resolution is as follows:

 

 

GENERAL SUBJECT OF EACH MATTER TO BE CONSIDERED

 

 

REASON FOR PASSING THIS RESOLUTION IN RELATION TO EACH MATTER, AND

PARTICULAR INTERESTS PROTECTED

 

 

GROUND(S) UNDER SECTION 48(1) FOR THE PASSING OF EACH RESOLUTION

 

 

 

 

18.       Award of Tender - Chief Executive Recruitment Agency

             To be circulated separately

 

Section 7 (2) (i)

The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

To enable Council to undertake negotiations.

Section 48(1)(a)(i)

Where the Local Authority is named or specified in the First Schedule to this Act under Section 6 or 7 (except Section 7(2)(f)(i)) of this Act.

19.       CON2018007 Urban and Plains Pavement and Corridor Management Contract

Section 7 (2) (h)

The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

To enable Council to undertake negotiations.

Section 48(1)(a)(i)

Where the Local Authority is named or specified in the First Schedule to this Act under Section 6 or 7 (except Section 7(2)(f)(i)) of this Act.

20.       Presbyterian Support East Coast offer to renew lease for office space in Heretaunga House

Section 7 (2) (i)

The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

The paper contains deatils regarding negotiations to lease Council owned office space.

Section 48(1)(a)(i)

Where the Local Authority is named or specified in the First Schedule to this Act under Section 6 or 7 (except Section 7(2)(f)(i)) of this Act.