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, 28 March 2019

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 N Bickle

Council Secretary

Mrs  C Hunt (Extn 5634)

 


TRIM File No. CG-14-1-01214

 

HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL

 

COUNCIL MEETING

 

Thursday, 28 March 2019

 

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 General Counsel or the Democratic Support Manager (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 Tuesday 12 March 2019 (Cornwall Park Reserve Management Plan).

(Previously circulated)

6.         Kimi Ora Community School Open Space Development                                 5

7.         Presentation - Antoinette Hapuka-Lambert                                                       11

8.         Review of Māori Participation in Council Decision Making                           13

9.         Cape Kidnappers - Interim Health & Safety Control Measures                    25

10.       Plastic Recycling                                                                                                      31

11.       Adoption of Draft Annual Plan 2019/20, Draft Development Contributions Policy and Consultation Document                                                                     45

12.       Business Improvement District Poll Results                                                     49

13.       Opera House Precinct Update - March 2019                                                     53

14.       Parking Controls                                                                                                       63

15.       Greater Heretaunga Plains Freshwater Management - TANK Process and Draft Plan Change                                                                                                              73

16.       Chief Executive's Consolidated Report - March 2019                                  123

17.       2019 Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting, Conference  and Remit Process                                                                                                 137

18.       Updated 2019 Meeting Schedule Changes                                                     155

19.       Requests Received under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA) Monthly Update                                                          159

20.       Summary of Recommendations of the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee meeting held on 22 March 2019                                   163

21.       Additional Business Items

22.       Extraordinary Business Items 

23.       Recommendation to Exclude the Public from Items 24, 25, 26 and 27    165

24.       CBD Development Proposal

25.       Hawke's Bay Food Innovation Hub

26.       Summary of Recommendations of the Hastings District Rural Community Board held on 4 March 2019

27.       Summary of Recommendations of the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee meeting held 22 March 2019 while the Public were Excluded

 

     


File Ref: 19/305

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Group Manager: Community Facilities & Programmes

Alison Banks

SUBJECT:                    Kimi Ora Community School Open Space Development        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       This report contributes to the Council’s strategic and community outcomes by providing local infrastructure by creating places for arts, culture and learning.

1.2       The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Council to support the Kimi Ora Community Schools, Te Puna Taiao project to full detail design and completion of a Feasibility Study.

1.3       This request arises from Kimi Ora Community School identifying several funding opportunities for the capital build part of the project but to get to application phase a full detailed construction plans/design is required.

1.4       Students from Kimi Ora Community School will be presenting Te Puna Taiao – creating spaces that thrive to Council over lunch (12pm to 1pm) and then presenting to the full Council meeting.

1.5       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.

1.6       This report concludes by recommending that Council supports Kimi Ora Community School and fund the development of the facility design from concept to detailed construction plans and the feasibility study.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       Kimi Ora Community School in Flaxmere West, Hastings will be shortly starting the $6.5m rebuild of the entire school due to be completed in February 2020.

2.2       Planning is well underway for the Waingakau Village development on neighbouring land, and the school community have seen an amazing opportunity to build something beautiful and transformative for the whole community for generations to come. 

2.3       Te Puna Taiao – creating spaces that thrive aims to transform the school’s grounds to become a true community taonga that is used extensively by kura during the school day and by the Flaxmere West and wider Hastings communities after school hours, weekends and during holiday periods.

2.4       The schools community want to create a beautiful greenspace area that people can bring their whānau for free to enjoy the many benefits of the carefully designed play, learning and garden spaces. The vision is to create a multi-use outdoor, whole of whānau-friendly recreational facility.

2.5       With Te Puna Taiao, the school community needed to completely re-think and re-design the school’s outdoor spaces from what they are now and outlined the following:

 

We want to change this  

To this:

Largely flat open fields and concreted surfaces

Diverse use spaces and separated spaces, with, hills pathways and varied vegetation

All classrooms indoors      

Outdoor classroom/s

Plastic play equipment all rigid and fixed 

Loose parts to inspire creative play

Vegetable gardens and other basic gardens

A range of gardens; traditional use, fruit, scented, flowering, etc with kids and community members leading all aspects of their care

Little to invoke the senses

Sensory areas, including musical areas, water play areas, beautiful gardens

Little to connect with Te Ao Māori and Pasifika    

Clear connections and references to Te Ao Māori and Te Ao Pasifika throughout the design, and opportunities to learn important tikanga and kawa

 

2.6       On Thursday 14 March 2019 students held a hui and presented their project with a focus on improving the hauora (mental and physical health) of tamariki and community and setting them up with the skills they need for the future.

2.7       A particular focus was on ensuring tamariki and whānau Māori and Pasifika are given a more culturally-enriched space to foster mana whenua and resilience. Also to allow each person to participate fully and reach their full potential in an environment that caters to the diverse range of needs. It will be an investment for social wellbeing.

2.8       Oversight of the project as a whole will be carried out by the School’s principal, Matt O’Dowda, and the School’s Board of Trustees.

2.9       The Principal and Board have a strong and collaborative working relationship and provide excellent governance and strong financial management of the school. They have a shared vision about creating a multi-use community facility on the site of the school grounds for the benefit of the whole community. They are committed to working together with our community to make the project a reality.

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

3.1       Over the past few months Kimi Ora Community School has been undertaking significant engagement with the community to assess the need for and support of this project, and the feedback has been both universal and loud. The community has clearly articulated that this project is vital and is now working hard to make it happen with key partners.

3.2       A key partner and a close neighbour, Te Aranga Marae is fully supportive of the project and is looking to create even stronger physical links to the school and community. The school perform all powhiri for the marae and spend a lot of time there learning and supporting the kaupapa.

3.3       Another key partner Ngāti Kahungungu, has offered to help shape the curriculum around the stories told through the outdoor spaces. The opportunity to profoundly affect culture, language and identity is a shared kaupapa. The project will tie children back to the things that are truly important to the wider community; culture, language and identity.

3.4       Te Taiwhenua is responsible for the wider Waingakau Village project. The close interrelationship of both projects is of upmost importance as they will complement each other and strengthen the community.

3.5       Te Puna Taiao Charitable Trust is supporting the project by capturing community aspirations, project planning, community engagement, communications, securing funding and design considerations.

3.6       4Sight Consulting, led by Renee Davis and Claudia Boyo has been identified as the preferred provider in the development of the design. The Project Team is confident that this team will work to really understand the stories of our whenua and people to create a blueprint that elevates the school and community.

3.7       The project team has identified several funds that align with the project and  intend to apply for funding for capital build of the project (implementing the open space design) and is confident that the proposal could attract financial support.

3.8       However, to get to application phase the project team need to provide two key scoping related aspects/documents of the project, namely:

 

·    Facility design - $76,000 + GST (this includes all design, from concept through to detailed construction plans)

·    Feasibility Study – approx $20,000 + GST

 

3.9       The project is on Ministry of Education land and $6.5m has been committed for the rebuild of the entire school, however this does not and will not extend to fund such a creative, innovative learning play environment.

4.0       OPTIONS

4.1       To commit the requested funding of $96,000plus GST to invest in a feasibility study and full architectural design for the Te Puna Taiao project.

4.2       Not to support the initiative.

5.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1       This matter is not significant when considered in line with Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

6.0       ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

6.1       Option 1 - investing for the Social Wellbeing of the community puts people at the heart of everything we do. It is inclusive, and treats everyone with dignity and respect. The students and school community of Kimi Ora Community School have identified and are working towards a solution that will:

·    ensure tamariki and whānau Māori and Pasifika are given a more culturally-enriched space to foster mana whenua and resilience.

·    improving the hauora (mental and physical health) of tamariki and community and setting them up with the skills they need for the future.

·    creating a carefully designed a whānau-friendly, recreational facility with multi-use outdoor space for learning, play relaxation.

6.2       This project is an excellent example of a community lead approach that puts people at the heart of the approach. It ensures the views of the school community (Māori and Pacifica), and tamariki are meaningfully included with a focus that the community will thrive.

6.3       Option 2 - not committing any funding to this project will put the delivery of this project at risk. While there is some sentiment that investing Council funds on Ministry of Education land is not appropriate, in this situation the school has very little funding options and the benefits that the Te Puna Taiao project will provide are wider than the school community.

6.4       Funding Options

6.5       While there is $250,000 allocated to a Flaxmere West Community facility, it is loan funding and therefore not an appropriate source of funds to cover the costs associated with the design and feasibility study.

6.6       There is the Flaxmere Land Development Reserve which currently has a balance of $2.4m. Council has previously resolved that this reserve be available for land development opportunities in Rating Area One. However, in practice this has been constrained to Flaxmere. While the purpose of this reserve does not necessarily support this request for funding, Council can determine to allocate funds from this reserve if it considers the outcomes that will come from this investment are appropriate.

6.7       The preferred funding option is that this expenditure be treated as unbudgeted expenditure in the Community Assistance activity of Council with the Flaxmere Land Development Reserve used as a fund of last resorts should the Community Facilities and Programmes Group not have sufficient budget at year end to accommodate this expenditure.

7.0       PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

7.1       Implementation of the Te Puna Taiao project will be an important contribution to improving access and participation for Flaxmere West communities. It will help people to foster connections that add to their feeling on safety and connectedness and make Flaxmere West a better place to live. The school community want to work with the Hastings District Council to make this happen.

7.2       Kimi Ora Community School is a decile “one A” school where the lowest rating attracts extra funding. However, the community school is a free school to those students who attend. This means any extra government funding supports the students by supplying books, stationary and other schools supplies, sports equipment, meals and teacher aids to name but a few.

7.3       As an organisation we are well aware of the complexity of the lives of our tamariki and whanau living in Flaxmere West.  Supporting Kimi Ora Community School may be the catalyst and an enabler to build an inclusive, equitable and prosperous community.

7.4       For the school to try and attract the required funding by other means would take a lot of work and a lot of time, leaving the school looking unfinished when the (new class rooms) redevelopment works are completed.

7.5       For Council to invest $96,000 to support the Kimi Ora Community School to get this significant project across the line will not only have a significant financial value but also a momentous social value.

 

8.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the Group Manager: Community Facilities & Programmes titled Kimi Ora Community School Open Space Development dated 28/03/2019 be received.

B)        That Council supports Kimi Ora Community School and fund $96,000 (excluding GST) for the development of the facility design from concept to detailed construction plans and the feasibility study.

C)        That $96,000 (excluding GST) be made available as unbudgeted expenditure with the Flaxmere Land Development Reserve to be used as a fund of last resort should insufficient budget be available through the Community Facilities and Programmes Group of activities at year end.

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 good quality local infrastructure by providing an opportunity to create a place and space for arts, culture and learning in West Flaxmere.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 


File Ref: 19/74

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Project Advisor

Annette Hilton

SUBJECT:                    Presentation - Antoinette Hapuka-Lambert        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       Leadership development programme is an intentional, long term, intergenerational approach to develop the leadership capacity of young Māori in communities throughout New Zealand.  This programme involves local Mayors selecting  selecting a young Māori from the district to mentor on a one-to-one basis to encourage and enhance leadership skills.

1.2       It is envisaged the young person will be mentored on a monthly basis, involving both informal meetings and formal occasions that will assist their development as a local leader.

1.3       The relationship also provides both partners with the opportunity to gain a deeper insight into inter-generational issues, cultural values and experiences.

1.4       They are expected to undertake and record a 100 hour community service project in their community which will provide them with an opportunity to share their experiences, practice new strategies and demonstrate leadership.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       Antoinette has attend five wānanga throughout the year which encompassed five different concepts of learning within Māoritanga.  Each wānanga were strategically located and share messages that everyone reflected differently.

2.2       Each and every wānanga provided Antoinette with new learnings to incorporate within either her community, whanau, herself or even in her classroom, as a primary school teacher.

2.3       Antoinette’s first year with TUIA was enlightening and now shes strive to live life to my fullest, continue to absorb matauranga Māori and empower the rangatahi who are our future.

 

3.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the Project Advisor titled “Antoinette Hapuka-Lambert” dated 28/03/2019 be received.

 


File Ref: 19/274

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Pou Ahurea Matua - Principal Advisor: Relationships, Responsiveness and Heritage

Dr James Graham

Chief Executive

Nigel Bickle

SUBJECT:                    Review of Māori Participation in Council Decision Making        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1      This report contributes to the achievement of the Council’s community outcomes and specific Council objectives as set out in the Long Term Plan 2018 – 28 by seeking to improve effective working relationships with mana whenua.

1.2      The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from Council on a recommendation from the HDC: Māori Joint Committee regarding Māori participation in Council decision-making, and in particular, on the appointment of a HDC: Māori Joint Committee tangata whenua member to each of the four Council Standing Committees.

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.

1.4      The objectives of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government the inclusion of Māori in the Council’s decision-making processes of Council in order to recognise and respect the Crown’s responsibility to take appropriate account of the Principle of the Treaty of Waitangi and to maintain and improve opportunities for Māori to contribute to local government decision making processes.

1.5       This report concludes by recommending that the Council appoints the named HDC: Māori Joint Committee tangata whenua members to the respective Hastings District Council Standing Committees.

 

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1      Heretaunga haukūnui, Heretaunga ararau, Heretaunga haaro te kaahu, Heretaunga raorao haumako, Heretaunga ringahora, Heretaunga takoto noa, Tihei Heretaunga!

            The whakataukī (proverb) above is inspired by and reflective of the cultural narratives (metaphors, idioms, local sayings) and their intrinsic connection and relationship to Heretaunga or Hastings district as the extrapolation of each line of this whakataukī describes, and are listed as follows:

 

 

Heretaunga haukūnui - Heretaunga of the life-giving dews and waters

“Heretaunga haukūnui” describes the thick fog that hovered/hovers over Heretaunga and the heavy dews from when the first arrivals landed here centuries ago right up to today in the 21st century. The fog was and remains a symbol of warm land, life enriching waters and a veritable breeding ground of fish, fowl, livestock, produce and fruit to support a huge and diverse community including communities across the nation, indeed globally. The translation of this line refers to the lifeblood from the awa (rivers), manga (streams), reporepo (swamps), roto (lakes) and the muriwai hou (aquifers) including the haukūnui (heavy mists). This, the lifeblood is what gives the Heretaunga and the Hastings district the fertility that is renowned for as being amongst the best lands in Aotearoa New Zealand.

 

2.2       Heretaunga ararau - Heretaunga of converging pathways

            “Heretaunga ararau” is a further saying about the myriad of pathways both on land and by water (rivers were once a method of getting from place to place) that all converge on Heretaunga due to this fertile oasis that is the Hastings district. Ararau also speaks of diversity, discourse, innovation, collision and a collusion of ideas, identity, and interpretation. These descriptors all refer to the productivity from the notion of ‘ararau’, which lends itself to great diversity and ultimately sustenance and production from the ‘ararau’ of Heretaunga.

 

2.3       Heretaunga haaro te kaahu - Heretaunga from the eye of the hawk

            “Heretaunga haaro te kaahu” refers to the amazing beauty of the land and waterways, which once upon a time could only be seen by the sharp eye of the hawk in full flight. Today we have the luxury of drones, aircraft and other means to view the magnificent vista and landscape that is our home. Features of this landscape too are recognised and acknowledged today by their respective status including as ‘outstanding natural landscapes’ and ‘outstanding natural landscape features’. The kaahu soars above the landscape to scope its prey but in doing so has a beautiful backdrop that we are inherently part of and that is Heretaunga.

 

2.4       Heretaunga raorao haumako - Heretaunga of the fertile plains

            “Heretaunga raorao haumako” pays homage to the lowlands or plains that are rich and fertile lands that produce the vast range of horticultural and viticultural produce and fruits as well as the agricultural livestock that the lands nurture and grow. Papatūānuku (Earth mother) is the whenua (land) that nurtures and ends to the fertility of Heretaunga, as provided for too, by the haukūnui that sustains life, the people and not only locally but globally; through the quality export products that the land produces.

 

2.5       Heretaunga ringahora - Heretaunga of its hospitality and open arms

            “Heretaunga ringahora” refers to the hospitality and or the manaaki that the district is renowned for and has been known for since the mid-19th century when European settlement was first welcomed by the hapū (tribes) and rangatira (chiefs) of Heretaunga. Ringahora is a metaphorical representation that symbolises manaaki with open hands and an acknowledgement of the welcome extended by tangata whenua (local people) to settlers and visitors to Heretaunga at the start of the 19th century, where this legacy continues today not only from tangata whenua but from the wider established and diverse community that comprises Heretaunga today.

 

2.6       Heretaunga takoto noa - Heretaunga of the departed chiefs

            “Heretaunga takoto noa” is in reference to Heretaunga of the many departed chiefs, only the land endures while people come and go therefore strong leadership is needed to ensure that the land is safe for generations to come. Heretaunga heritage sets the scene for greater leadership over the challenges ahead. The plains and wetlands were traditionally the common domain for all hapū although specific areas were the preserve of specific hapū or rangatira.

 

2.7       Today, Heretaunga, the Hastings district is the home for 81 000 people, where everyone has a role to play in being custodians of Heretaunga for future generations to come. Governance, management and leadership that aspires to handing the land over in good condition to the ensuing generation will continue the legacy set as this whakataukī alludes to and highlights.

 

            Tangata Whenua

2.8       Tangata Whenua have cultural, spiritual, historical and traditional association with, and customary rights to the land and resources of Heretaunga, the Hastings district. The district has an extensive history of ancestral settlement, particularly in the former wetlands, waterways and coastal areas where food resources were abundant and extensive cultivations flourished. In pre-European times the people of Heretaunga and their predecessors were renowned for the abundance of their food gathering and cultivations. These aspects remain specific to the identity of Heretaunga, the Hastings district today and especially to the nature of its land, landscapes, history and sense of community.

2.9       Approximately 25% of the 81 000 population of Hastings district identify as Māori with the majority belonging to the Ngāti Kahungunu iwi (tribe). Ngāti Kahungunu are the 3rd largest iwi by population and account for 10% of the entire Māori population; only Ngāpuhi (1st) and Ngāti Porou (2nd) are larger. Ngāti Kahungunu Iwi Incorporated is a mandated iwi organisation with the authority to represent the people of Ngāti Kahungunu, and is the governing body for all aspects of iwi development.

2.10    Land, humanity and the supernatural were and remain co-dependent entities among local [Heretaunga] Māori traditions; they co-exist and do so by a sequenced network of relationships (whakapapa) linking each entity, and that are maintained and strengthened by similar yet distinct cultural narratives and traditions of Heretaunga. Despite this cultural diversity amongst the tangata whenua of Heretaunga, Māori have a unique spiritual relationship with ‘place’ and with Heretaunga that underpins a commonly shared belief; an impression of unity and harmony with land and the environment; as tangata whenua.

 

 

 

            Te Tiriti o Waitangi - Treaty of Waitangi

2.11    The assumptions of this innate connection to land assume that, like other large natural groupings throughout Aotearoa New Zealand, tangata whenua of Heretaunga connect with their respective landscapes. So, while much land has physically been lost or passed over in terms of ownership since 1840, Kahungunu and Heretaunga traditions associated with the land remain entrenched in tribal lore, traditions and narratives; tribal lore for instance, reflected in old traditional oriori (songs) such as ‘Pinepine te kura’ that celebrate tribal heritage and the importance and significance of notions of place.

 

2.12    The Treaty of Waitangi (1840) paved the foundations of biculturalism for Aotearoa New Zealand including the bicultural relationships as espoused through the guiding principles of partnership, participation and protection. In order to recognise and respect the Crown’s responsibility to take appropriate account of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, and to maintain and improve opportunities for Māori to contribute to local government decision-making processes, the requirements for councils are intended to facilitate participation by Māori in local government decision-making processes.

 

            Te Kura Nui - The HDC Māori Responsiveness Framework

2.13    The Hastings District Council Māori Responsiveness Framework, named Te Kura Nui after ‘Pinepine te kura’, highlights the ‘kura’ as a localised cultural construct and one that is normalised through a Heretaunga ‘gaze’. In this way, the ‘kura’ is reflected upon, analysed, and framed in order that it is viewed as a vessel that houses a Heretaunga philosophy; a Heretaunga way of knowing, of being and of doing. It is this philosophy that has manifest as a framework that aims to strengthen cultural responsiveness here at the Hastings District Council. Te Kura Nui is the organisational cultural framework that aims to capture the needs and aspirations that represent Heretaunga understanding and framing of the HDC workforce’s growth and development as well as the organisation’s aspirations to celebrate culture and recognise the history and narratives that are vital components of a vital, caring and culturally connected territorial authority.

 

            HDC: Māori Advisory Standing Committee

2.14    On 24 June 1991, in partnership with tangata whenua, the Hastings District Council established the Māori Advisory Standing Committee (MASC). Instrumental in this significant gesture of partnership was the Mayor at the time, the late Jeremy Dwyer and local kaumātua, the late Eru Smith. Council originally approved 8 members to MASC; five from Heretaunga, three from Ahuriri and two Councillors. This number was in due course increased to 12 members, then finally to 23 members.

 

2.15    The fourteen years of the MASC’s existence (1991 - 2005) was an interesting and revealing experience, for both Council and Māori. Ultimately, the MASC’s membership came to represent the differences between council and tangata whenua, rather than the things held in common (aspirations, objectives and or experiences).  While not necessarily a negative thing, this division at the time did highlight the need for a more positive formal working relationship between Council and tangata whenua; the transformation of the mere advisory function of MASC to one with more ability to help the decision making process within Council resulted in the establishment of the HDC: Māori Joint Committee on 13 October 2005 with 6 Māori (or tangata whenua) appointees and 6 Councillors.

 

            Māori Wards

2.16    In 2014, the HDC: Māori Joint Committee made a recommendation to Council to consider a Māori Ward with the Council eventually passing a resolution regarding a Maori Ward at its extraordinary meeting held 18 November 2014. The Council resolved: “That the Council not undertake any action to introduce a Māori Ward for the 2016 triennial       election, but it confirm that if the local government reorganisation of Hawke’s Bay does not proceed it will, as soon as the matter has been concluded, initiate the appropriate process with a view to ensuring, subject to the poll provisions of the Local Electoral Act 2001, that a Māori Ward can be put in place for the 2019 triennial election.

 

2.17    In 2015 the New Plymouth District Council decided to introduce Māori wards. This decision was challenged via a petition and, in the resulting referendum, was defeated by a majority (83% - 17%) The decision and the referendum created significant controversy and division within the community. Māori Wards from five other territorial authorities were rejected in binding referendums similar to New Plymouth’s: Manawatū, Western Bay of Plenty, Palmerston North, Kaikoura and Whakatāne.

2.18    In 2016, a referendum was held on a decision to introduce Māori wards in the Wairoa District. The decision to approve Māori wards was approved by a slim majority (54%-46%); Wairoa has a majority Māori population.

2.19    Hastings District Council’s position at the time was that it considered it unfair that Māori wards are the only part of the representation process, which is subject to poll provisions, as this effectively prevents, in most communities, Māori from pursuing the representation arrangements that best suit them.

2.20    In April 2016 the Māori Party co-leader Te Ururoa Flavell, presented a petition on this issue to Parliament at the urging of New Plymouth Mayor, Andrew Judd.  Mr Flavell commented in the NZ Herald as follows: “A change is long overdue.  The fact that 5% of the voting public can challenge any decision related to Māori representation is disheartening and means Māori will almost always be defeated in the process. How is it fair that mechanisms such these can apply?”

2.21    In April 2017 the HDC: Māori Joint Committee made a majority decision to recommend to the Council that it resolve not to introduce a Māori Ward at the 2019 election. In reaching a decision not to adopt Māori wards in April 2017, a significant concern for both Hastings District Council and its Māori Joint Committee was that the outcome of a poll would not achieve Māori wards and could potentially cause conflict, create divisions and harm relationships with Māori.

2.22    The Committee also recommended that the Chief Executive be asked to report back to the HDC: Māori Joint Committee and Council on options for increasing Māori participation in Council governance and decision-making. This decision paper today is another stage in this two-year long process of the HDC: Māori Joint Committee expounding the notion of Māori participation in Council governance and decision-making.

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

            Strategic Intent

3.1       The Hastings District Council aspires to kaitiakitanga (care and stewardship) of its whole community conducted in good faith at all times with respect to the aspirations and expectations of tangata whenua. Just as ‘haaro o te kaahu’, represents the kaitiaki (custodian) for Heretaunga flying above and around the district to monitor, guide and protect us all, so too does the Hastings District Council take seriously its responsibility to tangata whenua, so that whānau, hapū (sub-tribes), marae and iwi develop joyously and positively to contribute to and be connected with a vibrant and positive Hastings district community as a whole. To realise the strategic intent of this commitment to community, the Hastings District Council Mission, Vision and Values along with Te Kura Nui (the Māori Responsiveness Framework) exist and provide the foundation from which Hastings District Council functions.

 

3.2       Hastings District Council Mission

·  Te mutunga kē mai o te oranga, i tēnei rā, āpōpō hoki - Great living, today and tomorrow.

 

3.3       Hastings District Council Vision

·  E mahi ngātahi ana i te hapori whānui kia ekengia ki te taro o te ora - Working with our people towards a progressive and proud community.

 

3.4       Hastings District Council Values

·     Te Hiranga - Excellence   

·     Te Mana-ā-kī - Integrity      

·     Manawa Rahi - Commitment     

·     He Kauanuanu – Respect

 

3.5       Te Kura Nui - Hastings District Council Māori Responsiveness Framework

·     Kāwanatanga me te Whanaungatanga - Governance and Relationships

·     Ngā Tikanga-ā-iwi me te Tuakiri - Culture and Identity        

·     Te Taurikura me te Oranga - Prosperity and Wellbeing       

·     Ngā Rauemi me Ngā Hanganga - Resources and Infrastructure

 

3.6       Te Kura Nui recognises the Treaty of Waitangi as the founding document of our nation and the Council’s statutory obligations to tangata whenua. Importantly this framework articulates the Council’s role in enabling opportunities for tangata whenua to flourish and participate in a thriving community. Accordingly, the framework also recognises that in order to foster effective Māori participation in democracy and to build strong Māori communities, an empowered Council organisation is needed, one which places emphasis on developing staff to enhance the organisation’s ability to respond more effectively to Māori.

 

3.7       Te Kura Nui is a tool:

·     To support Council to fulfil its responsibilities and obligations to tangata whenua and to the Treaty of Waitangi;

·     To support Council to take appropriate account of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi;

·     To improve and maintain opportunities for tangata whenua to contribute to local government decision-making processes;

·     To facilitate participation by tangata whenua in local government decision-making processes;

·     To enable the assessment of Council performance where the underlying objective is to integrate in a mutually appropriate way, Māori responsiveness, into the organisation’s culture, and practices.

4.0       SUMMARY

4.1       Since 2017 the HDC: Māori Joint Committee has been researching the nature and purpose of their role and how Māori participation can be increased to be more effective in Council decision-making. Officers have undertaken site visits to other councils, and researched other models to gain an understanding of how Māori participation may be taken into account. There are many different models) and a good number of Councils throughout Aotearoa New Zealand do have Māori appointments to standing committees with full voting rights.

4.2       Some Councils form relationships or Memoranda of Understanding, or Terms of Reference that provide for nomination to Council Committees or other bodies from hapū, tribal or mandated Māori trusts with particular purposes; for example, wāhi tapu. Others appoint an appointed member of a Council Māori committee to each of their respective standing committees. Kapiti Coast District Council Partnership Committee appoints tangata whenua to their Kapiti Coast Council Standing Committees.

4.3       No two local authorities are alike in their history, their inter hapū relationships, or ‘personality in the large’. It is not predictable that what works in one local authority will work in another, yet comparison between Councils may yield particular practices that may be adopted anew by a Council.

4.4       The appointed HDC: Māori Joint Committee members expressed a preference to not be confined in their focus to Māori matters alone, rather to be considered for a wider brief of engagement with all of Council’s activities. A wider and increased Māori worldview will only add value to Council decision-making.

4.5       As a part of this review process it was considered that the membership and terms of reference for the HDC: Māori Joint Committee should be revised accordingly and refreshed for the 2019-22 triennium. This work is yet to be undertaken.

5.0       APPOINTMENTS OF NON-ELECTED MEMBERS TO COUNCIL COMMITTEES

5.1       The Local Government Act (LGA) 2002 Part 6 provides for:

“Section 81 - Contributions to decision making processes by Māori:

(1)     A local authority must-

a.    Establish and maintain processes to provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to the decision making processes of the local authority; and

 

b.    Consider ways in which it may foster the development of Māori capacity to contribute to decision making processes of the local authority;

 

c.    Provide relevant information to Māori for the purposes of (a) and (b)”

 

5.2       This is a specific requirement to address the Treaty of Waitangi that does not exist for other ethnicities in local government.

 

            Role of an elected member

5.4       The LGA 2002 provides guidance on the question about whether elected members act on behalf of their wards or on behalf of the district as a whole, by requiring all elected members to swear an oath before taking up their role.

 

5.5       All elected members swear an oath at the inaugural meeting of the council, which states:-

 

I [name] declare that I will faithfully and impartially, and according to the best of my skill and judgement, execute and perform, in the best interests of [name of region district, city, local or community board], the powers, authorities and duties vested in, or imposed upon me as a member of the [name of local authority] by virtue of the Local Government Act 2002, the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, or any other Act”

 

5.6       The oath makes it clear that despite the fact that members may have been elected by a ward, they must make decisions in the interests of the district as a whole. Elected members are drawn from all sections of the community, the Council provides training and support to its governors throughout the political triennium to ensure that they have the skills, attributes and knowledge to participate in good decision making.

5.7       The appointed HDC: Māori Joint Committee members also swear the same oath at the first meeting of the Committee following their appointment by resolution of Council at its inaugural meeting.

 

            LGA 2002 Schedule 7 Section 31 (3) states:

“The members of a committee or subcommittee may, but need not be, elected members of the local authority, and a local authority or committee may appoint to a committee or subcommittee a person who is not a member of the local authority or committee, if, in the opinion of the local authority, that person has the skills, attributes, or knowledge that will assist the work of a committee or subcommittee”.

5.9       It will be important for the Council and appointees to ensure that decision making is free of any conflicts of interest that may arise between an appointee’s relationship with their iwi authority and the Council’s obligation to make decisions in the best interest of Hastings District as a whole. It is also essential to not “muddy the water” in terms of the Council’s separate obligation to consult or otherwise work with Māori in particular circumstances.

5.10    There are four Standing Committees of Council:

·   Community Development

·   Finance and Risk

·   Strategy Planning and Partnerships

·   Works and Services

5.11    There are also Māori/tangata whenua appointments to a number of other regulatory and statutory subcommittees. 

6.0       IMPLICATIONS FOR COUNCIL

6.1       Many Councils have Standing Committees with Māori appointments. Māori members can be full members with voting rights, or be observers, who generally have the right to speak but not vote. Although voting appointments can be made to committees and subcommittees, the legislation does not allow for non-elected members to have a vote at full Council. (Section 41 of the Local Government Act 2002).

Masterton District Council

6.2       Mayor Lyn Patterson has on behalf of the Masterton District Council made the following observations to demonstrate the path that they have followed, as bulleted below:

·   I am proud that Masterton District Council made the decision to appoint iwi representatives to our Standing Committees and support the work that Hastings District Council is doing in terms of looking at ways to further strengthen Māori participation in Council decision-making;

·   I believe it has been a positive step in terms of creating a more genuine partnership with Rangitāne o Wairarapa and Kahungunu ki Wairarapa;

·   We have an iwi representative from both Rangitāne o Wairarapa and Kahungunu ki Wairarapa appointed to the Infrastructural Services Committee, Community Wellbeing Committee and the Strategic Planning Policy Committee with full speaking and voting rights.  Both representatives attend our Council meetings and have full speaking rights, but obviously not voting rights (as not allowed for in legislation);

·   The iwi representatives were recommended by iwi through their processes and came to Council for approval;

·   The iwi appointments add a high level of value and richness to our discussions and decision-making;

·   They bring a lot to the table - an iwi perspective, te ao Māori perspective, mātauranga Māori and kaupapa Māori frameworks;

·   In addition to this, both of our iwi representatives bring a wealth of knowledge and experience in terms of their respective backgrounds (for example, environmental development, community development, governance, and youth development);

·   Our Council’s decision to include iwi representatives at the table was to honour and recognise our obligations under the Treaty of Waitangi, the Local Government Act and importantly, a sincere desire to work in partnership with Māori.

           

6.3       A critical point to be considered is the matter of accountability: to whom are appointed members accountable?  If appointments are made to reflect sectors of the community, it is notable that once selected for appointment the focus of participation is to benefit the whole community, not just their interest group or be at risk of conflict of interest.  So it is with elected members: once they are elected to Council they are there to benefit the community as a whole.

 

6.4       This does not detract or impede the purpose for the appointments; which is to provide for a Māori perspective into Council decision-making. It is this perspective, if not otherwise reliably present, which strengthens the make-up of the decision-making processes of the Council, and broadens the range of perspective being considered.

 

            Appointment process

6.5       The HDC: Māori Joint Committee full Council workshop discussed and largely supported the principle of the appointment of tangata whenua members to Council’s standing committees.

 

6.6       The HDC: Māori Joint Committee see a real benefit that these appointments will increase the voice, mana and resilience of the committee, and will strengthen and support the council to make more effective and inclusive decisions for the whole community.

6.7       The HDC: Māori Joint Committee tangata whenua members consider that the appointments should be made from members of the committee for the following reasons:

 

·     A sound understanding of issues facing council;

·     Skills, experiences and knowledge of te ao Māori/a Māori worldview;

·     An understanding of the way council works; and,

·     Representation across the geographical and hapū boundaries of Council.

 

6.8       The advantage of making the appointments effective immediately would be to demonstrate the vision and commitment of Council to Māori engagement in decision-making.

 

6.9       The significance of these appointments will enable the Council to move forward in its stated aim to engage more effectively with Māori, and future proof Council’s relationships with tangata whenua.

 

6.10    HDC: Māori Joint Committee members currently receive the same payments as Rural Community Board Members as agreed by full Council at its inaugural meetings on 31 October and 7 November 2016. This is an annual payment rather than an attendance allowance for each meeting. It is not proposed to vary this arrangement for the remainder of the triennium. Consideration will need to be given to appropriate remuneration for all appointed committee members under any new governance structure proposed by the incoming Mayor after the 2019 local elections.

7.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

7.1       Although this decision is significant in terms of Council governance, it does not trigger the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

7.2       Under Schedule 7 cl 31 (3) the Council can appoint a person or persons to a committee or subcommittee, if in the opinion of the local authority that person has the skills, attributes and knowledge that will assist the work of the committee. The Council already has a number of appointed members on its committees and subcommittees with specialist skills and knowledge who assist the council to make effective decisions. 

8.0       OPTIONS

8.1       Option 1 - To support the recommendation of the HDC: Māori Joint Committee to appoint one tangata whenua member of the Committee to each of the Council’s four standing committees as listed in Paragraph 9 (A) below.

 

8.2       Option 2 – To retain status quo.

9.0       ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

9.1       The Council is recommended to endorse the recommendations of the HDC:  Māori Joint Committee to strengthen and support the council to make more effective and inclusive decisions for the whole community.

10.0    RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

 

A)   That the report of the Pou Ahurea Matua: Principal Advisor Relationships, Responsiveness and Heritage and the Chief Executive titled Review of Māori Participation in Council Decision Making dated 6/03/2019 be received.

 

B)   That the HDC: Māori Joint Committee recommend to Council that it agrees to the appointments of tangata whenua members, with voting rights to the Hastings District Council Standing Committees.

 

C)   That the HDC: Māori Joint Committee recommend to Council that the  following tangata whenua members be appointed to the following Standing Committees from 28 March 2019:

 

Community Development   

Evelyn Ratima

Finance and Risk                

Ngaio Tiuka

Strategy, Planning and Partnerships

Tracee Te Huia

Works and Services       

Te Rangihau Gilbert

 

D)   That the HDC: Māori Joint Committee review the current Terms of Reference and Membership for the 2019-2022 triennium.

 

       With the reason for these decisions being that the objective of the decisions 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 improving Māori engagement in the Council’s governance and decision-making processes.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 


File Ref: 19/327

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Health and Safety Manager

Jennie Kuzman

Project Manager

David Bishop

Risk and Corporate Services Manager

Regan Smith

Group Manager: Asset Management

Craig Thew

SUBJECT:                    Cape Kidnappers - Interim Health & Safety Control Measures        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from Council on proposed interim Health and Safety Control Measures for Cape Kidnappers.

1.2       This proposal arises from the Council resolution regarding the Cape Kidnappers Hazard Management Report at the Council Meeting held on 5 March 2019.

1.3       The reasons for this decision being that the objective of the decision will contribute to meeting the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by balancing public safety with public access.

1.4       This report concludes by recommending Council adopt Option 1 which would give effect to 5 March 2019 Council resolution to implement reasonable control measures and remove the temporary road closure restriction, prior to the Quantitative Risk Assessment for the entire beach being undertaken.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       The Council resolution from the 5th March 2019 states:

A.      That the report of the Group Manager: Asset Management titled “Cape Kidnappers Hazard Management” dated 5/03/2019 be received.

B.      That the Chief Executive be delegated authority to negotiate and enter into a contract with suitably qualified professionals to undertake a Quantitative Risk Analysis of the landslide hazard posed by the cliffs from Clifton beach to Cape Kidnappers, acknowledging that this will be unbudgeted expenditure.

C.      That the Chief Executive be delegated authority to negotiate and enter into cost sharing arrangements for the Quantitative Risk Analysis with other relevant stakeholders to achieve the most reasonable balance in costs for Council.

D.      That the existing temporary road closure notice under s342 and the tenth schedule of the Local Government Act 1974 is removed after implementation of reasonable control measures, with urgency as outlined in Option 1.

E.      Officers continue to investigate known risks and minimise, where practical, and regularly report back to Council

2.2       The current HDC Risk Policy sets the following objectives which are particularly relevant to the current situation:

·    HDC seeks to protect personal safety in all undertakings.

·    All sources of risk are assessed before undertaking any activity.

·    Risks are managed within the risk criteria established for the activity.

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

3.1       Preliminary Qualitative Risk Assessment

3.2       In order to implement the ‘reasonable control measures’ as required by the resolution, officers have undertaken a preliminary risk assessment in line with the Health and Safety legislative framework.

3.3       A number of limitations and assumptions regarding the risk of harm to persons accessing the beach were noted during the preliminary risk assessment due to the limited information available.

3.4       Whilst the potential impact (consequences) are understood and classed as ‘severe’ (potential for loss of life and/or serious injury to person/s) the likelihood of this occurring is less well understood as officers do not have quantitative data in order to quantify likelihood.

3.5       Given recent events (two people were seriously injured) and ongoing landslide activity, the assumption taken is that the likelihood of death or serious injury occurring is ‘possible’ (temporal and special factors considered).

3.6       Utilising the HDC Risk Matrix (below), a likelihood of ‘possible’ and an impact of ‘severe’, the resultant risk is assessed as ‘High’.

3.7       Proposed Interim Health and Safety Control Measures

3.8       Health and Safety legislation requires organisations to consider the hierarchy of controls when implementing control measures (see diagram below from WorkSafe).

3.9       The controls are to be assessed in order of most effective through to least effective. Therefore the first step is consider if the risk can be eliminated.  If it is not reasonably practicable to do so, then the risk must be minimised as low as reasonably practicable.

 

 

3.10    Officers have considered the options available within the constraints of the Council resolution and were unable to consider any viable options to eliminate or minimise via substitution, isolation, or use of engineering control measures.

3.11    Therefore officers reviewed options available under Administrative Control Measures and consider that the following options are appropriate:

·    Development of an interim Operations Manual

·    Development of education and communications measures

3.12    The interim Operations Manual will include emergency response measures, monitoring requirements and interim reporting measures. For example, if there’s been a significant weather event or earthquake then it will include what steps are to be taken (e.g. some events may trigger short term closures). This manual is currently being written and will be made available to Councillors for their information once completed (first draft by early April).

3.13    In regards to education and communication measures the objectives are to:

·    Reduce exposure by discouraging use (fewer people = lower risk).

·    Inform users, so those who choose to proceed have a better appreciation of the hazards.

3.14    The communications plan is also under development. It will note the various mechanisms and messages to be used to inform the users.

3.15    Additionally the plan recommends the deployment of Kaitiaki (during daylight hours for low tide (approx. four hours per day), 7 days per week) for the initial opening period (ongoing use to be reviewed). The Kaitiaki would be stationed at the end of the motor camp, just before users enter the cliff face beach section.

3.16    The role of Kaitiaki will be to:

·    Reinforce educational messages and provide information to public entering the beach (particularly tourists)

·    Observe / survey those entering to gain further information regarding demographics and reasons for access

·    Monitor the effectiveness of signage and messaging

3.17    It is also necessary to consider the upcoming Easter and school holiday period (ends 28th April). It is likely that this period would provide a situation of higher usage and therefore an increased risk if the beach was open.

3.18    Health and Safety legislation also requires that risk control measures are regularly monitored and reviewed for effectiveness.

3.19    It is proposed that CCTV (retrospectively) and Kaitiaki (over initial period) will be utilised in order to monitor the effectiveness of signage and messaging.

3.20    Officers will review information gathered through this process on a regular basis in order to ascertain whether the proposed control measures are effective.

3.21    Department of Conservation (DOC): DOC have confirmed their position in that the section of track that they control will remain closed, at least until the QRA is completed and considered. This also includes the DOC shelter and toilet facilities. The DOC position assists in achieving objective 1, by helping to reduce usage.

4.0       OPTIONS

4.1       Option 1 is to adopt the proposed “Interim Control Measures” and authorise Officers to implement these after the 29th April 2019.

4.2       Option 2 is to not adopt the proposed “Interim Control Measures” and request further information.

5.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1       As outlined in Council’s Report on 5 March 2019, a permanent restriction of access to the Clifton Beach and Cape Kidnappers is likely to be of significance to the community. Therefore, any decision that involves ongoing restriction of access would require the opportunity for appropriate consultation before a decision is made.

5.2       However, as the decisions considered in this report relate to removing the existing temporary road closure restriction, the current decision is not considered sufficient to trigger the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

5.3       It should be noted that Officers continue to be in regular contact with key members of the local community and operators to keep them informed of the situation and to understand their needs.

6.0       ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

6.1       Option 1 is the only practical option available to implement Council’s 5th March 2019 resolution to adopt reasonable control measures and remove the Temporary Road closure notice under Section 342 and the Tenth Schedule of the Local Government Act 1974.

6.2       Considering the heightened risk of the upcoming holiday period and the time required to implement measures, Option 1 should be implemented at the end of April 2019.

6.3       Option 2 would effectively leave the temporary road closure in place whilst further work was progressed.

6.4       There is no budgeted expenditure allowance in Council’s 2019/20 financial plan, funding for this work will need to be dealt with as unbudgeted expenditure and options to partially offset from other budgeted items considered.

7.0       PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

7.1       In order to give effect to the Council Resolution to implement reasonable control measures and remove the temporary road closure restriction, prior to the Quantitative Risk Assessment for the entire beach being undertaken, Option 1 is the preferred option.

 

8.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)  That the report of the Health and Safety Manager titled “Cape Kidnappers - Interim Health & Safety Control Measures” dated 28/03/2019 be received.

B)  That Council approve the proposed Cape Kidnappers “Interim Control Measures” namely the development of an interim Operations Manual and the development of education and communications measures, and authorise Officers to implement these after 29th April 2019.

With the reasons for this recommendation being that the objective of the recommendation will contribute to meeting the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by:

i)        Balancing public safety with public access

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.


File Ref: 19/222

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Waste Minimisation Officer

Angela Atkins

Waste and Data Services Manager

Martin Jarvis

SUBJECT:                    Plastic Recycling        

 

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from Council on changes to the plastics collected from the kerbside and drop-off depots for recycling in Hastings District. 

1.2       This issue arises from changes in the national and international commodity market for recycled plastics.

1.3       This report contributes to the adopted Long Term Plan and Joint Waste Management and Minimisation Plan objectives by providing refuse and recycling services to the community.

1.4       Waste and recycling activity is categorised under the ‘Safe, Healthy and Liveable Communities’ section of the Long Term Plan. The aims of this activity are to:

·        Increase recyclables diverted from landfill from 9,800 tonnes to at least 11,760 tonnes per annum by 2024


 

1.5       WMMP Goals, objectives and targets

1.6       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.

1.7       The objective of this decision, relevant to the purpose of Local Government, is to provide local infrastructure which contributes to public health and safety, supports growth, connects communities, activates communities and helps to protect the natural environment and wasting less as a community.

1.8       This report concludes by recommending that only plastic bottles that have the grade numbers 1 and 2 stamped on them be collected.


 

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       Council Provided Recycling Services

2.2       Hastings District Council provides weekly kerbside recycling services to the  urban communities of Hastings, Flaxmere, Havelock North, Clive, Haumoama, Te Awanga, Whirinaki and Whakatu.

2.3       Recycling drop-off facilities in the following communities: Tutira, Pukehamoamoa, Maraekakaho, Poukawa, Waimarama and Martin Place, Havelock North

2.4       Recycling facilities are also available at the Henderson Road and Blackbridge Refuse Transfer Stations.

2.5       The kerbside recycling collection services are currently provided under contract by Green Sky Waste Solutions (GS).

2.6       The drop off recycling facilities service is currently provided under contract by Waste Management (WM).

2.7       Plastics Situation

2.8       Plastic is primarily made from seven different grades that are numbered 1 to 7 (including non-recyclable plastics) as detailed in Attachment 1.  The grade is usually stamped on the base of the packaging item. Demand, financial value and accessibility to recycling markets for the different grades of plastic varies considerably. Plastic bottles, especially un-coloured bottles, achieve the best prices as they are easily reusable (grades 1 & 2). Coloured plastic is less desirable due to the inclusion of colour, which cannot be removed.

2.9       In communicating grades 1 and 2 to the public they can be generalised as follows: Grade 1 = Soft drink bottles, sports drink bottles and condiment/food jars; Grade 2 = Water bottles, milk bottles and some cleaning product containers.

2.10    Until recently approximately 50% of the world’s waste plastic went to China for recycling. Much of this material was highly contaminated with general waste or plastic that was unsuitable for recycling. This resulted in a rubbish disposal problem along with the associated environmental impact for China.

2.11    In August 2017, the Chinese Government announced their intention to restrict the importation of 24 categories of solid waste products from around the world including all plastics because of environmental impacts and risks to public health. This “National Sword” policy was put into effect 1 January 2018 which means China is no longer accepting imports of these solid wastes. The change has gained large amounts of media attention around the world turning the public’s focus towards the often overlooked question of what happens to recyclables after they are accepted for processing.

2.12    Currently the Hastings District and Napier City Council provides services for mixed plastic of grades 1 to 7. All recycling becomes the property of the contractors who are then responsible for the sorting and disposal of the product. Prior to the Chinese restrictions, the most common destination internationally for plastics 1 to 7 was Asian countries (96% by value) with China and Hong Kong receiving 53% of the world’s plastic exports in 2017.

2.13    Once the materials have left New Zealand shores there is no guarantee that these products will be recycled, let alone in an appropriate and sustainable manner. Harmful and inappropriate disposal practices have been uncovered by investigative journalists and environmentalists including burning, dumping in poorly managed landfills or littering into the environment where they can then enter the ocean and pose a risk to marine life and water quality.

2.14    Of these exported 1 to 7 plastics, grades 1 & 2 make up around 50% of the total. These grades have some value that could possibly be diverted to recycling facilities in New Zealand where their recycling outcome can be more easily monitored and assured while contributing to the establishment of a circular economy for plastic in New Zealand. This would however require extra sorting. With grades 1 & 2 removed, grades 3 to 7 hold very little value for recyclers. These are the plastic types potentially not recycled and poorly managed once exported. On their own they are not viable for export overseas and there are limited, if any, established facilities to recycle them in New Zealand.

2.15    Other end users of recyclables e.g. Malaysia, Indonesia and Thailand are now overwhelmed with product. Malaysia and Thailand have now imposed restrictions on imports. Previously the 1-7 bales were going to Malaysia.

2.16    The long term sustainability of contaminated and/or low value plastic recycling is uncertain. The above-mentioned countries are facing the same environmental issues from the enormous volume of reject plastics being imported that prompted China to introduce the ‘National Sword’ programme. These actions have caused a global crisis that has impacted the international ability to find a market for low value plastics, graded 3 to 7.

2.17    Accordingly, the future of national and international recycling markets is uncertain with no improvements likely in the foreseeable future.

2.18    Equally, there is no national strategy around plastic recycling standards and therefore each Local Authority manages their plastic recycling differently. To date central government has not progressed initiatives at a scale to assist and effect change.

2.19    In 2018 the South Waikato, Taupo and Far North councils reduced the collection of plastic recycling to grades 1 & 2 only.  Whangarei, Hamilton, Otorohonga, Waitomo, and Tauranga councils have only been accepting grade 1 & 2 plastics and have not made a change recently. Gisborne Council is currently in the process of making the change to only accepting grades 1 & 2 in the near future.

2.20    Currently plastics graded 3 to 7 comprise approx. 50% of Hawke’s Bay’s recycling plastic and 7% of all recycling items (glass, cardboard etc.) by weight. This is a small quantity in comparison to international markets.

2.21    2018 Recycling Tonnages

 

Plastic/Cans (tonnes)

Paper/Cardboard (tonnes)

Glass (tonnes)

Kerbside Collection

625

1163

1982

Drop Off Collection

210

670

910

2.22    This report only relates to the collection of plastics for recycling and the collection of paper/cardboard, cans and glass will continue and is not the subject of this report.

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

3.1       The HDC recycling contracts currently specify that the contractors accept and take ownership of plastics graded 1 to 7 presented at the kerbside or brought to recycling centres by customers.

3.2       Plastics grades 1 & 2 still hold some value and can be sold to national and international buyers. However, the range of containers within each grade have varying degrees of acceptance and value.

3.3       Council officers have been advised that plastics grades 3 to 7 can no longer be disposed of by most NZ recyclers and brokers, either as a mixed commodity or when separated into individual numbered grades. Both contractors working for Council have struggled to maintain regular markets for the past 6 months.

3.4       Officers are also aware of other Councils in NZ who have approximately six months of baled material in storage that they have been unable to sell.

3.5       Since 1 March contractors in Hawke’s Bay have started to stockpile bales of mixed plastic as the market for 1 to 7’s has largely come to an end this month (March 2019).

3.6       There is a significant community perception and reputational risk if plastics collected for recycling are not recycled.  Furthermore if products are not recyclable then the community should be made aware of the situation in order to assist them with their product choices. The community should be kept informed of these changes with openness, honesty and transparency.

3.7       In December 2018 the Sustainable Business Network released a report “New Zealand’s Plastic Packaging System, An Initial Circular Economy Diagnosis” which identifies the key challenges, opportunities and pathways for creating a circular economy for plastic packaging that works in NZ.

3.8       This report has highlighted a number of challenges, however our community deserve transparent and honest communication around the current recycling market challenges and need to be informed of what is actually happening to material put out for recycling.

3.9       Responsibility for recycling in NZ has historically fallen to councils to pick up the mess and ownership of recycling at the ratepayers’ expense.  This raises the question of whether it’s the responsibility of territorial authorities to provide this service as there is no legal requirement to do so.

3.10    If a certain waste stream is going to be landfilled the most expensive way of getting it to the landfill is via the recycling system.  This cost obviously has a negative impact on the financial viability of the recycling process and there would need to be compelling reasons for this situation to continue.

3.11    There are public petitions circulating throughout the national community collecting signatures to ban the export of waste plastic.

3.12    Ban of single use plastic bags comes into effect on 1 July 2019 and as a result major retailers have ceased using these bags.  This has also had an impact on the current kerbside collection as residents are now using heavier plastic bags and collectors cannot see through the sides and confirm it is recycling material not rubbish.

3.13    Contractors:

3.14    Green Sky Waste Solutions (GS)

3.15    GS currently collects all grades of plastics but, as of 15 March 2019, has no access to disposal options of mixed grade plastics.

3.16    GS management has notified Council officers they no longer have viable disposal options for plastics graded 3 to 7. They have a market for some plastic bottles in grades 1 & 2, with the exception of some coloured plastics and food trays.

3.17    GS will need to store this material from kerbside recycling pending the outcome of discussions with Council.

3.18    It is arguable that under the terms of contract the HDC has with GS, there is an ability for GS to claim a variation for unforeseen conditions that may introduce additional contract costs (likely the cost to transport and dispose of plastic 1-7 bales at landfill).

3.19    Waste Management (WM)

3.20    WM has changed its processing centre in Napier and from 1 March 2019 has not been willing to accept plastic grades 3 to 7 for recycling. This affects the drop-off recycling facilities.

3.21    WM management states that there are no current disposal methods for plastic grades 3 to 7 in New Zealand or in overseas markets, but they will continue to search for options.

3.22    WM has already informed its commercial customers that it will no longer be collecting grades 3 to 7 plastics for recycling and businesses need to dispose of these materials as general waste.

3.23    Both contractors preference is to stop accepting these plastics 3 to 7 as they cannot guarantee such plastics will be recycled in a responsible manner (if at all).

4.0       SUMMARY OF THE SITUATION

4.1       China’s “National Sword” policy has had a major impact on the viability of plastic recycling in Hawke’s Bay and NZ.

4.2       The remaining export markets outside of China are proving problematic in terms of both access and credibility.

4.3       Grades 1 & 2 plastics can still be recycled but will require sorting by the householder and contractor.  Rejected materials (contamination) would need to be landfilled.

4.4       Other recyclable materials can still be recycled in Hawkes Bay.  Nationally and internationally the recycling of fibre (paper and cardboard) is a significant issue, but in Hawke’s Bay we have Hawk Packaging that can use the separated paper and cardboard.

5.0       OPTIONS

5.1       Option 1: Status Quo - Council continues to accept all recyclable plastics including grades 3 to 7 and ownership and sale remains with the contractors which may result in stockpiles or landfill disposal of all grades of plastic.

5.2       Option 2: Council continues to accept all recyclable plastics including grades 3 to 7, and contractors sort out the grades 1 & 2. Council then takes responsibility to store or divert to landfill (as waste) the 3 to 7 grades of plastic.

5.3       Option 3: Collect only grades 1 & 2 plastic - Council services stop accepting recyclable plastics graded 3 to 7 until national guidance or sustainable markets for lower grade plastics become available.  For consideration within this option is the opportunity to accept only grade 1 and 2 bottles and within that, only clear and opaque bottles.

5.4       Option 4: Stop collecting all plastics, amend all contracts to not collect any plastics at all.

6.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

6.1       In 2018 HDC and NCC reviewed the Joint Waste Management and Minimisation Plan which received an unprecedented number of submissions (6,165). Many of the submissions highlighted the need for more transparency and information regarding what happens to our recycling.  This decision supports the feedback provided by the community.

6.2       No specific consultation or engagement has been undertaken with the wider community relating to this situation. In general terms this decision will affect all residents of Hastings and Napier, however the main considerations are whether it is sustainable to continue to collect plastic materials which may not actually be recycled, given the financial cost to the community and global environmental impacts

6.3       It is important to note that the arrangements GS has with the NCC and HDC are different.  It is therefore possible that the NCC and HDC will favour different approaches and options in dealing with the plastic recycling situation.  As a result of the HDC contract with GS running longer than the agreement NCC has with GS, options other than status quo are expected to be favoured more by HDC.  NCC may wish to tender a new contract relatively soon and therefore maintain the status quo (or the options that involve still collecting 1 to 7’s) until the start of the new contract. Napier City Council has a report from staff on this issue going to its Strategy and Infrastructure committee meeting on 19 March 2019.

7.0       ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS

7.1       There are no provisions in the current budget for the impact of changes to the global plastic recycling market on solid waste operations as budgets were set prior to the impacts being fully realised.

7.2       An extensive campaign to convey any change in recycling would require a financial commitment of at least $100,000 so that the changes can be comprehensively communicated to the entire community including key messages such as encouraging our community to be conscious consumers. These costs can be covered by the use of Council’s accrued Waste Disposal Levy funds. This communication and education are key work streams in the adoption Joint WMMP.

7.3       The costs of the various options below are estimates based on changes proposed but will need to be finalised by negotiation with the two contractors.

7.4       Option 1: Status quo - Council continues to accept all recyclable plastics including grades 3 to 7 and ownership and sale remains with the contractors, which may result in stockpiles of all grades of plastic.

7.5       This option will see all grades of plastics 1 to 7 baled together which means none of the plastic (including grades 1 & 2) will be recycled as the mixed plastics market has collapsed.

7.6       There is no guarantee that the market will change and that contractors will be able to sell mixed plastics for recycling in the future.

7.7       Council officers believe this option would put undue pressure on the contractors to provide a service that is potentially unsustainable and would also mislead the public given the serious concerns raised in the media that much of this material may be landfilled or cause worse environmental impacts overseas.

7.8       GS management has approached HDC officers advising them that this option is not commercially viable.  GS is seeking a variation to the contract that would include additional HDC payments to them, as well as Council paying storage and/or disposal (landfilling) costs for all plastics.  This is unbudgeted.

7.9       The HDC recycling drop off (Green Bin) contract has expired and this option has not been priced by the contractor when agreeing to a short term extension to the contract.  The contractor has advised HDC that Council will need to take ownership of the 3 to 7 plastics.

7.10    As of March, and under the present status quo services, no plastic will be recycled.  Plastic will need to be stored or landfilled and as a result there is a strong argument for it to go directly to the landfill as the cheapest option rather than via the more expensive recycling network.

7.11    This option has been considered and discounted because there are very limited to no markets for this material and to continue with the service would be misguided.

7.12    Option 2: Council continues to accept all recyclable plastics including grades 3 to 7, and contractors sort out the grades 1 & 2. Council then takes responsibility to store or divert to landfill (as waste) the 3 to 7 grades of plastic.

7.13    This may require the acquisition of a secure, accessible and appropriate site that could cater to store mixed 3 to 7 plastic bales. Stockpiled plastics will gradually deteriorate due to exposure to sunlight / weather and could pose a fire risk. There are no assurances that this material will be able to be recycled in the future.

7.14    The storage option is cheaper than the disposal option, however if the stored material cannot be moved on, or sold, it would eventually need to be landfilled and as a result would incur disposal costs at that time.

7.15    Neither contractor is prepared to guarantee that baled grades of 3 to 7 plastics would be “clean” and they may even contain in excess of 5% contamination as there would be no benefit (only cost) to the contractor for additional sorting of this material.

7.16    If the material was landfilled rather than stored it could be perceived as undermining the integrity of Council recycling. The public generally assume that plastics grades 3 to 7 are being recycled.

7.17    This is the most expensive option and as a result highlights the cost difference between sending certain plastics straight to the landfill from the kerb rather than feeding them through the recycling system.  

7.18    This option has been considered and discounted because there are very limited, if any, markets for this material and to continue with the service would be misguided. It also fails to transparently inform the community.

7.19    Option 3: Council collects only plastic grades 1 & 2 - Council services stop accepting recyclable plastics graded 3 to 7 until national guidance or sustainable markets for lower grade plastics become available.

7.20    A variation within this option is to only collect recyclable bottles in the grades 1 & 2 that are clear or opaque. Any coloured bottles or trays will be landfilled because there are no end users of the material. A further variation of this option would be to collect all bottles graded 1 and 2 regardless of colour.

7.21    This will require a comprehensive communication plan to be developed and rolled out across the district to inform the public that plastics grades 3 to 7 can no longer be recycled at Council facilities and to make informed decisions at the time of purchasing to understand what plastic products they will need to dispose of.

7.22    The cost range of this option will depend on exactly what is picked up from the kerbside and the level of sorting required at the recycling plant.  The costs will need to be negotiated with the recycling contractors.  If agreement cannot be reached with a contractor on price, Council may need to take ownership of the grade 1 and 2 plastics and store and/or sell the items. 

7.23    Taupo District Council made the change to only grade 1 and 2 plastics in October 2018 which was well received by both the community and contractors.  The implementation of this was undertaken without any negative backlash.

7.24    Discussions have been held with both contractors and currently they have access to markets for plastic bottles within the grades 1 & 2.  Most of these markets are local NZ markets.  To further complicate the situation, coloured bottles within these grades can be collected to simplify the message to the community but it is likely that they would be landfilled most of the time as markets are scarce, and this would add an additional sorting cost.

7.25    Option 4: Stop collecting all plastics, amend all contracts to not collect any plastics at all.

7.26    This will require a comprehensive communication plan to be developed and rolled out across the District where the public is informed that plastics can no longer be recycled at Council facilities.  The community will be advised to make informed decisions at the time of purchasing and become “conscious consumers”.

7.27    This option would complement, and fits best alongside product stewardship and container deposit schemes that need to be established at a national level.

7.28    This option may be seen as negative and attract questions about why we are not recycling grades 1 & 2 which can be recycled in NZ?  Or may even reinforce the view held by some that recycling has not always delivered on its intentions and this proves it.

7.29    This approach may even tarnish the recycling efforts undertaken for other materials and place them in a negative light.  This could deter people from actually recycling anything.

7.30    The amount of “waste” collected at the kerbside will increase and therefore have a negative impact on those services as well as shortening the life of the landfill.

7.31    From environmental (local, national and international) and fiscal perspectives there are pros and cons to this option, however the non-collection of plastics can be considered better in several ways.  Fundamentally landfilling (albeit in a modern well managed facility) is not ideal from an environmental point of view, however if the plastic is going to end up there anyway it should go directly there as the cheapest method of dealing with it and without creating false expectations.

7.32    Costs estimated on available information to officers, based on 2018 annual weights for plastics

 

Options

Combined Drop Off and Kerbside Collection Services

Total $

Option 3 - Collect only grades 1 & 2

Costs could range from an extra $500,000 to a saving of $5,000 per annum depending on the level of servicing required.

Variable

 

Option 4 - Stop collecting all plastics

Disposal responsibility would rest with the resident.

Potentially a saving to Council for the reduction of service

Current Service Cost (approximate) for recycling all materials from drop off facilities and kerbside

$1.1M per annum

$1.1M per annum

 

 

Options

Combined Drop Off and Kerbside Collection Services

Total $

Additional Information: Communication and education plan

 

$100,000

Weight of 1 to 7 plastics (includes aluminium and tin cans) per annum

835 tonnes per annum

835 tonnes

Estimated weight of 3 to 7 plastics per annum

418 tonnes per annum

418 tonnes

 

7.33    Other considerations

7.34    An extensive campaign to convey a change in recycling would require a financial commitment of at least $100,000 so that the changes can be comprehensively communicated to the entire community.  This would include key messages such as encouraging our community to be conscious consumers.

7.35    A communications plan has been prepared and the key messages will be finalised following Council decisions, however they will include clear messaging on the plastics that will be collected, the reasons for the change, that we need the community's help to achieve optimum results, and ways to become a conscious consumer in the plastics realm.

7.36    There will also be continued messaging on the receptacles in which recycling can be presented for the kerbside pick-up.

7.37    The tools and action plan are necessarily broad to cover kerbside recycling service users; those who make use of the Henderson Rd Transfer station, and those who use the unmanned urban and rural recycling ‘green bin’ facilities.

7.38    The tools range from newspaper and radio advertising, upgrading of all on-site signs and advertising and editorial on traditional and on-line media, to a letterbox drop and a request to service groups, schools and the like to include information in their newsletters/other communications. We will be asking councillors to assist us by disseminating messages (particularly social media) through the networks and closed groups they are part of.

7.39    A one month transition period in which plastics grades 3 to 7’s are still collected but landfilled by Council could be introduced. Following this transition period these plastics would not be collected and would therefore need to be disposed of with normal waste by residents and businesses.

7.40    The suspension of plastic recycling may be seen by some as going against the goals and objectives of the Joint Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.  However the environmental (and financial) impacts need to be considered and the HDC wants to ensure that plastic recycling isn’t putting others’ lives and environments at risk.

7.41    Depending on the decisions made by each Council (Hastings and Napier) the proposed 80 litre wheelie bin for each property proposed for the new kerbside rubbish collection contract may need to be increased (i.e. 120L/140L).  Additional work will be undertaken by officers regarding householder capacity.

7.42    Along with the environmental and financial considerations, the suspension or reduction of plastic recycling services sends a strong message to industry and central government for the need to make changes to a system that is struggling to deliver on its intended goals.

7.43    Council officers are in regular contact with other councils, interest groups and central government with regards the recycling industry both nationally and internationally.

8.0       PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

8.1       The preferred option is Option 3 - that only plastic bottles identifiable as grade numbers 1 and 2 and have accessible national end users or international markets are collected for recycling through the Council kerbside and drop off depot recycling services.

8.2       A one month transition period in which plastics grades 3 to 7’s are still collected but landfilled by Council would be introduced. Following this transition period these plastics would not be collected and would therefore need to be disposed of with normal waste by residents and businesses.

8.3       An extensive communication campaign commencing immediately will be launched to inform the community of the change, using accrued Waste Disposal Levy funds.

8.4       Officers have delegated authority to enable and complete negotiations with the contractors to implement the change.

 

9.0       RECOMMENDATION

A)        That the report of the Waste Minimisation Officer titled Plastic Recycling dated 28/03/2019 be received.

B)        That Council endorses the change in plastic material accepted for recycling via the Council services to only plastic bottles identifiable as grade numbers 1 and 2 and have accessible end uses or international markets.

C)        That Waste Disposal Levy funds be utilised to fund an extensive communication campaign to inform the community of the change.

D)        That officers have delegated authority to undertake negotiations with the contractors to implement the change.

E)        That officers, in line with the Joint WMMP, lobby central government for national change in the use of plastic packaging in New Zealand.

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 good quality local infrastructure and local public services in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by:

i)          Providing fit for purpose solid waste services and facilities.

 

 

Attachments:

 

1

Plastics Recycling Guide by Type

CG-14-36-00101

 

 

 

 


Plastics Recycling Guide by Type

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


File Ref: 19/224

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Strategy Manager

Lex Verhoeven

SUBJECT:                    Adoption of Draft Annual Plan 2019/20, Draft Development Contributions Policy and Consultation Document        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Council to adopt the following in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Local Government Act 2002:

§ Draft Annual Plan 2019/20 supporting information as required by section 95A (3C);

§ Draft Development Contributions Policy as required by section 102 (4B);

§ Consultation Document as required by section 95 (2).

1.2       This issue arises from the legislative requirement to place the documents above on an agenda of the local authority.

1.3       This is an administrative matter.  The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is to enable community participation in Council decision making processes as set out in the Local Government Act 2002.

1.4       This report concludes by recommending that the relevant documents set out in section 1.1 be adopted for community consultation.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       The Council considered the Draft Annual Plan, Draft Development Contributions Policy and mock-up of the Consultation Document at its budget meeting of 21 February 2019, and instructed officers to complete the material based on the decisions of that meeting.

2.2       The only matter remaining unresolved from that meeting, to be brought back to Council, being a response to the presentation made by Arts Inc in respect of the HB Arts Festival.

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

3.1       In accordance with the general direction from the meeting of 21 February, officers have reviewed how the funding request to support the festival in 2019 could be accommodated, within the draft Council budget presented at the meeting without further impacting on rates.  Having re-considered the forecast year-end result, now that year-end is approaching with more certainty, Officers have been able to achieve this based on the $120,000 2018/19 allocation for the festival.

3.2       It was also raised at the meeting on 21 February that some further information regarding the festival be brought back to Council, relating to matters such as the cost structure of the festival, the impacts of not achieving funding targets and how the festival dove-tailed with other events.  It is recommended that Arts Inc be informed of these matters and that they be instructed to report back to Council prior to June to enable Council to undertake its final budget deliberations, including the agreed level of funding support.

3.3       The documentation has been completed in accordance with the decisions made by Council, and the Consultation Document includes a section on the work being undertaken in the Social Development/Youth Development area as requested by Council at the 21 February meeting.  This documentation is now submitted for Council adoption.  This is a formal requirement of the Act.

 

4.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the Strategy Manager titled Adoption of Draft Annual Plan 2019/20, Draft Development Contributions Policy and Consultation Document dated 28/03/2019 be received.

B)        That the Council adopt the supporting information required by section 95A (4) of the Local Government Act 2002 (‘The Draft Annual Plan 2019/20), the statement of matters attached (CP-01- 02-19-120), incorporating any amendments made at its meeting of 28 March 2019.

C)        That the Council adopt the Draft Development Contributions Policy in accordance with section 102 (4b) of the Local Government Act 2002.

D)        That the Council adopt the Annual Plan 2019/20 Consultation Document (incorporating Draft Development Contributions Policy) pursuant to Section 95 (2) of the Local Government Act 2002, incorporating any amendments made at its meeting of 28 March 2019.

 

Attachments:

 

1

Statement of Matters Annual Plan 2019/20

CP-01-02-19-120

 

2

Draft Development Contributions Policy

CP-03-10-10-19-15

Separate Doc

3

Draft Annual Plan

 

Separate Doc

4

Consultation Document

 

Separate Doc

 

 

 


Statement of Matters Annual Plan 2019/20

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


File Ref: 19/273

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Manager Strategic Projects & Partnerships

Raoul Oosterkamp

SUBJECT:                    Business Improvement District Poll Results        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Council taking into account the results of the poll, endorse the transition of the Hastings City Business Association (HCBA) to a Business Improvement District, and that the targeted rate will be included, or otherwise, in the Draft 2019/20 Annual Plan and put out for public consultation. 

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. 

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.

1.3       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 an efficient and cost effective manner that is supported by the stakeholders that make up the area.

1.4       This report concludes by recommending in accordance with the Business Improvement District Policy, that Council take into account the results of Business Improvement District Poll, completed in March 2019, when making its decision to include the targeted rate in the 2019/20 Draft Annual Plan.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       The Business Improvement District transition process 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. 

2.2       Council has been working in partnership with the Hastings City Business Association over the last 12 months to explore and investigate options and this has ultimately lead to the establishment of the Business Improvement District Model.

2.3       On 6 November 2018 Council resolved to:

2.4       In light of the survey findings at 68% support from Ratepayers           / Property Owners and 69% from Stakeholder – Businesses /      Tenants within the prescribed catchment area, Council resolve to formally adopt the Business Improvement District Model and initiate implementation for the Hastings Central Marketing Area

2.5       Council officers have since been working in partnership with the Hastings City Business Association to transition towards to a Business Improvement District in accordance with Council Policy. 

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

3.1       In accordance with the Council Business Improvement District Policy, Council engaged the services of a 3rd party provider, Electionz.com, to complete a poll of property owners and businesses (tenants) within the catchment to confirm the level of support for, or against the Hastings City Business Association Business Improvement District. 

3.2       The targeted rate and collection area will remain the same as the existing Hastings City Marketing Rate for 2018/19. 

3.3       To inform this process the Hastings City Business Association has produced a business plan, and associated work programme, and circulated this to its membership.  The scope of the business plan is centred on the existing pillars of the Hastings City Business Association strategy, Vibrancy, Security, Communication and Advocacy.  In addition a Special General Meeting and more specific “block” meetings have also taken place.  Members are therefore well informed as to what the Business Improvement District will deliver. 

3.4       Voting packs were issue to members via a combination of mail and email, with votes being able to be cast via both respective mediums. 

3.5       The poll closed on 21 March 2019 12 noon.

3.6       Officers will table full and final poll results at the Council meeting.

3.7       The poll results provide robust statistical rationale to inform Council’s decision making as required by section 78 of the LGA 2002. 

4.0       OPTIONS

4.1       That Council, in accordance with adopted policy, take into account the results of the Business Improvement District Transitioning Poll, and include or otherwise, the targeted rate in the Draft 2019/20 Annual Plan.

5.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1       Council Officers have been working in partnership with the Hastings City Business Association Board, to establish a Business Improvement District Transition Team to manage the shift to the new model.

5.2       The 2019/20 Annual Plan process retains flexibility for Council decision making in respect of this matter.

5.3       The draft plan contains the necessary provisions to levy the targeted rate over the defined area should the Council wish to do so. The Annual Plan process also enables the Council to seek and hear further community views on this matter prior to making a final decision in June 2019.

 

6.0       PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

6.1       That Council, in accordance with adopted policy, taking into account the results of the Business Improvement District Transitioning Poll, include the targeted rate in the Draft 2019/20 Annual Plan for community consultation

7.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the  Manager Strategic Projects & Partnerships titled Business Improvement District Poll Results dated 28/03/2019 be received.

B)        That Council, in accordance with adopted policy, taking into account the results of the Business Improvement District Transitioning Poll, include the targeted rate in the Draft 2019/20 Annual Plan for community consultation.

 

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

i)          Achieving the outcomes for a vibrant and productive Hastings City Centre

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 


File Ref: 19/75

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Chief Financial Officer

Bruce Allan

SUBJECT:                    Opera House Precinct Update - March 2019        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to update the Council about progress being made with the Opera House Precinct strengthening and redevelopment.

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.

1.3       The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is to enable the provision of good quality community infrastructure providing recreational and cultural opportunities that meet the needs of our current and future communities in the most cost effective way.

1.4       This report concludes by recommending that the report be received.

2.0       CURRENT SITUATION

2.1       Project Governance Structure

2.1.1   The Chief Executive made changes to the project delivery structure in February 2019 with the appointment of Council’s Chief Financial Officer to the role of Senior Responsible Owner (SRO) of the Opera House Precinct strengthening and Redevelopment project.

2.1.2   A Project Charter is being developed to meet this new arrangement which will outline the purpose, accountabilities and decision rights for individuals and groups involved. It is expected that once finalised this will be circulated to Council for your information.

2.1.3   The Chief Executive and Project SRO are working on creating a Technical Advisory Group of well-respected specialists who can be utilised to provide advice on different aspects of the process, from providing peer review of the Strategic Plan to commercial property negotiations.

2.2       Revised Timeline

2.2.1   Following the changes made to the project delivery structure, a review has been conducted on the most appropriate timeline to ensure a successful delivery of the project. The most pressing matter for Council’s consideration is the adoption of a Strategic Plan which will then allow the Business Case to be fully developed and finalised.

2.2.2   The following timeline incorporates the key milestones for the project.

 

Draft Strategic Plan

April 2019

Workshop

Adopt Strategic Plan

2 May 2019

Council

Draft Business Case

23 May 2019

Workshop

Adopt Business Case

27 June 2019

Council

DIA Lotteries funding decision

June 2019

 

Consultation with Community

July 2019

 

CRITICAL PATH DECISION re Municipal redevelopment options

 

September 2019

Council

Opera House Construction Complete (excluding fire remediation) (No access to back stage for fire remediation work)

 

15 September 2019

 

Plaza construction complete

24 December 2019

 

Opera House Fire remediation complete

24 December 2019

 

Construction on MMA / Code of Compliance design commences

 

January 2020

 

Municipal Southern wall complete

1 February 2020

 

Official opening of Theatre and Plaza

xx February 2020

 

Construction complete and Precinct projects finalised

 

January 2021

 

 

2.3       Fire Update

2.3.1   The estimated cost for the repairs is in the vicinity of $700,000 which in broad terms has been agreed with the insurer. The impact of the fire and associated repairs on the construction programmes for the Opera House and the Municipal has been assessed.

2.3.2   The consequence of the fire on both programmes is a delay applying for the Opera House code of compliance until January 2020. In practicable terms this means that the Opera House team can have access to the Opera House (excluding the stage area) by September 2019 for fit out purposes whilst the Public will have access by the end of January 2020. 

2.3.3   Work to remediate the damage caused by the fire is ongoing. 

 

 

 

2.4       Opera House

2.4.1   As noted above, due to the recent fire, the Opera House programme for completion has been extended until December 2019 with the code of compliance being issued to HDC by 1 February 2020 (formerly November 2019).

2.4.2   The key milestone to enable the Opera House to obtain Code of Compliance which will allow the public into the building is the strengthening of the Municipal Building Southern walls. The Opera House strengthening construction is estimated to be complete by mid-September 2019 which will enable operational staff to enter the facility and begin preparations for the official opening to the public.

2.4.3   Despite the fire, the strengthening of the Opera House Theatre continues on schedule and on budget.

New Railing for Opera House

Theatre Floor strengthening and rebuild

2.5       Plaza

2.5.1   Work on the Plaza (structure) continues to progress in preparation for the installation of the roof which is scheduled to take place mid-2019. Large columns (weighing 24 tonne each) were installed on the Hastings Street side of the Plaza requiring Hastings Street to be closed for three days (20th-22nd March). The installation of these columns are a critical component of the Plaza structure and a very technical and complicated installation.

2.5.2   Council was advised in February of delays getting critical components for the construction of the Plaza and the slight delay in Council approving the acoustic and aesthetic improvements mean that the Plaza now has an estimated completion date of Christmas 2019.

2.5.3   The Plaza construction remains on budget.

Preparing for column installation at Plaza

2.6       Municipal Building

2.6.1   Building consents for the Municipal structural strengthening have been approved. Work on the strengthening progresses with the priority focus remaining on the southern wall area to allow for the Opera House to open in February 2020 as scheduled. 

2.6.2   The structural engineering design to strengthen the Municipal Building has been developed to allow for the full implementation of the Mathews and Mathews Architects (MMA) concept to be implemented should sufficient funding be raised and Council approval be received.

2.6.3   A critical path decision for Council to enable the MMA concept to be implemented without adding additional cost and delays is September 2019. Officers will be bringing back regular updates to Council to enable Council to make an informed decision on this within the timeframes set down.

2.6.4   The estimated cost of implementing the MMA design fully is $5.8m plus design fees with a scaled back option of $3.2m which provides Council with a building that can attain code of compliance.

Inside Municipal Building – ready for foundations to be strengthened

 

Laneway between Opera House and Municipal Building – ready for foundations strengthening on southern wall

2.7       Strategic Plan Development

2.7.1   Over the last 3 months officers have established a Draft Strategic Plan for the overall precinct. 

2.7.2   The priority of this plan was to engage with the community and stakeholders around the potential of revitalising and regenerating the Hawke’s Bay Opera House as a vibrant performing arts and event precinct, honouring its rich history and celebrating its bright future.  Genuine engagement with the business and arts sector in Hastings, Ngati Kahungunu, the Independent Working Party and the Working Group for the Use of the Municipal Building as well as the positive response from the community

2.7.3   The outcome being that the Strategic Plan proposes a 4th Generation Performing Arts and Event Precinct.

2.7.4   A 4th Generation Venue is more than just a “hall for hire” or even a community arts centre. It is “a resource for the arts, not just delivering the arts”.  As described by Steven A Wolff, arts and entertainment researcher and strategist a 4th Generation Venue is “a learning environment through which new experiences are generated and new knowledge is created that enhances cultural awareness, expression and understanding.” Through this viewpoint, and by seizing this bold position in the market, we can enable community access and participation in performing arts and cultural activities, and facilitate opportunities for youth employment, cultural expression and pride. 

2.7.5   The focus for a 4th Generation Venue is on:

·    Facilitating employment pathways by providing a learning environment

·    Creating new experiences and new knowledge

·    Enhancing cultural awareness and competency

·    Encouraging exploration

·    Considering different viewpoints and dialogue

2.7.6   In developing the Strategic Plan there are always competing priorities and outcomes that need to be considered and alongside the concept of the 4th Generation Venue is the need for the Precinct to be operationally sustainable and for all of the identified success factors to be achieved. While the Top 10 success factors are not something that have been adopted by Council, they are criteria that have resonated through the different consultations, working parties and working groups.

2.7.7   As part of the development of the Strategic Plan, Officers will be asking Council to endorse these success criteria

 

            Draft Top 10 Success Criteria

·    Heritage Buildings retained – enhanced

·    Performing Arts – enhancing and showcasing

·    Events and conference spaces

·    Pathways for youth – performing arts, hospitality etc.

·    Showcasing Kahungunu / Takitimu

·    Operational sustainability – rates

·    Maximising external funding

·    Enhancing user experience – hospitality etc.

·    CBD Integration – CBD revitalisation strategy

·    Flexible and adaptable

2.7.8   The Draft Strategic Plan will be circulated to Council in early April with a workshop organised for mid-April for this Strategic Plan to be presented to Council on 2 May 2019 for adoption. 

2.8       Municipal - Business Case and Community Consultation

2.8.1   Work to establish a robust business case for the future use of the Municipal Building is ongoing alongside the development of the Strategic Plan. 

2.8.2   The timeline above has a draft business case being presented to Council for consideration in a workshop setting in much the same manner as the Strategic Plan with adoption of the Business Case by Council by the end of May. Officers expect to know if applications for significant funding from Lotteries in particular have been successful in June and this will help present a fuller picture to the community as part of the consideration of the future of the Municipal Building scheduled for July 2019.

2.9       Funding

2.9.1   An Officer has been appointed to manage all Government Funding applications and relationships and has carried out a stock take of funding sources/opportunities. At the time of writing applications had been made to three Lotteries funds; Significant Projects, Community Facilities, Environment and Heritage.

2.9.2   An Expression of Interest was made to the Lotteries Significant Project Fund in November 2018. Council was informed on the 10th December 2018 to submit a full application (23rd March 2019) and the funder gave advice around the information they will be looking for in a full application

2.9.3   Council have appointed Jessica Soutar Barron to manage the community funding and engagement process, totalling $1M.  Mrs Soutar Barron has presented the community funding and engagement plan to the Sub-Committee. This plan is now being finalised and will be presented to the Community and Economic Development Committee.

2.10    Council Funding Budget ($20m)

2.10.1 Council through the 2015-25 Long Term Plan and budget variations through subsequent Annual Plans have allocated $20m to the strengthening and redevelopment of the Opera House Precinct project. The $20m was the accumulation of three CBD projects; Civic Square, Opera House Strengthening and a proposed investment in a CBD Hotel.

2.11    Opening Arrangements

2.11.1 With more secure completion dates being established, an opening date in February 2020 for the Opera House Theatre and Plaza will be set down in the coming weeks. It is important that the opening is marked in appropriate style. Opera House management are currently working on securing shows and events and developing a programme that is fitting for the occasion. It is important that we work around events that can be secured for this time of the year and around other major events in Hawkes Bay, e.g. Art Deco Weekend, Mission Concert and Horse of the Year.

2.12    Wesley Church - $400k funding

2.12.1 Council has through the 2017/18 Annual Plan allocated $400,000 to the Wesley Church’s redevelopment given its proximity to the Opera House and Plaza and complementary nature for conferences and large events. This funding was allocated from the $20m of loan funding set down as Council’s contribution to the Opera House precinct project.

2.12.2 Officers have put in place a Funding Agreement with Wesley Church acknowledging the funding that Council has been set aside, the milestones on which it will be released and the outcomes for which it is provided. To-date no funding has been drawn down.

2.12.3 Council had previously asked if this allocated funding could be set aside from the Opera House reserve rather than the projects loan funding budget. Officers have reviewed the potential operating costs associated with the Precinct and recommend that the Opera House Reserve be utilised to meet initial operating cost escalations while the buildings come on stream. Given the debt now associated with this activity it will have operating costs in excess of that experienced previously and the Reserve can be used to smooth the effect of this increase in costs.

2.12.4 The most recent update from the Church is that their project is progressing slowly and they are hoping to start the build at the end of this year. Council’s $400,000 contribution is towards an estimated total project cost of $2.5m.

3.0       RISKS

3.1.1   Officers have prepared a project risk register with the two significant risks for the current stage identified below.

3.1.2   Funding Bid Failure – External funding continues to be recognised as a major risk to this project. The total cost to fully deliver the Opera House Precinct Strengthening and redevelopment project is estimated at $32m with $20m of Council funds available. At the time of writing $4.7m of external funding had been confirmed leaving a current funding gap of $7.3m. More resources to help mitigate this risk are being identified.

3.1.3   Project Coordination – Any lack of coordination across this project has the ability to allow conflict objectives to arise potentially causing delays in construction and less than optimal outcomes to be achieved. Officers have been refining the project delivery structure since August 2018 to ensure project coordination occurs.

 

4.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

4.1       While this project is significant for Council and the community, the matters raised in this report are not assessed as significant when assessed against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

5.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)       That the report of the Chief Financial Officer titled Opera House Precinct Update - March 2019 dated 28/03/2019 be received.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 


File Ref: 19/194

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Parking Transportation Officer

Mel England

SUBJECT:                    Parking Controls        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       This report aligns with Council Objectives and Regulatory functions by;

A.  Supporting and attracting business;

B.  Reducing public nuisance and threats to public health and safety;

C.  Moving people and goods around safely and efficiently.

1.2       The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from Council on a number of changes to parking controls throughout the district.

1.3       These proposals arise from requests for new parking controls and amendments to existing controls.

1.4       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.

1.5       The objective of this decision is relevant to the purpose of Local Government in the provision of quality infrastructure and public service.

1.6       This report concludes by recommending;

A.  Removal of the P60 parking time limit from Eastbourne Street East to accommodate the bus terminus extension.

B.  Establish P120 time limited parking on Havelock Road so vehicles are not staying outside businesses and residences all day.

C.  Extend the length of the already existing P120 limited parking to incorporate the new carparks outside of the new Hastings Health Centre Building in King Street North.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       From time to time it is necessary to introduce parking controls and or amend those that are already in place.

2.2       In order that the changes are legally established these need to be formally resolved by Council.

2.3       The following information provides the background and current situation relevant to the various changes being proposed:

 

Eastbourne Street East – Bus Terminus

2.4       The Hastings District Council was approached by Hawkes Bay Regional Council and Go Bus Hawkes Bay to discuss the extension of the existing bus terminus in Eastbourne Street East. This is due to safety concerns for the drivers and ongoing damage of the buses when parked in Karamu Road South, due to the isolation of the area. This request was made to ensure there was a safe layover for the drivers and buses during changeover and breaks. To provide a safe zone Council need to remove the 3 existing P60 time limited carparks.

 

Havelock Road – P120 Time Limited Parking

2.5       The Hastings District Council was approached by a business on 37 Havelock Road to investigate the feasibility of P120 parking outside their premises, this is due to vehicles parking all day. Currently there are no time restrictions in this area.



King Street North – P120 Time Limited Parking

2.6       The existing car parking outside of the new Hastings Health Centre is reverting from angle parking to parallel parking to accommodate the projected growth in traffic.

2.7       The P120 area needs to be extended due to more parking being available.

3.0       OPTIONS

3.1       The options available to Council are to:

A)        Approve the changes being proposed

OR

B)        Not approve all or some of the changes being proposed

4.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

4.1       The matters in this report do not trigger the threshold in terms of Council’s Significance Policy.

P60 Removal and Bus Terminus Extension – Eastbourne Street East

4.2       With the proposed bus terminus extension, three parking spaces and the associated P60 parking signs will be removed. The library and other businesses in the immediate area have been consulted, and are in favour of the proposed changes.

P120 Time Limited Parking - Havelock Road

4.3       An occupancy survey was carried out and showed the overall average to be 92%.

 

4.4       It is generally accepted as a national standard that if occupancy levels are in excess of 85% a motorist will normally have difficulty finding a carpark within close proximity to their destination.

4.5       30 businesses and residents in and around the surrounding area were consulted on the proposed P120 time limit introduction. 20 responses were received with 15 in favour of the P120 being introduced.

4.6       Parking Officers support the introduction of the P120 time limited parking as it is consistent with controls in the surrounding area.

King Street North – P120 Time Limited Parking

4.7       Parking Officers support the extension of the P120 time limited parking.

5.0       PREFERRED OPTION/S AND REASONS

P60 Removal and Bus Terminus Extension – Eastbourne Street East

5.1       With safety concerns for the drivers and ongoing damage of the buses raised by Hawkes Bay Regional Council and Go Bus officers support the extension of the exiting bus terminus and removal of the P60 parking.

5.2       This may also assist with redevelopment of the Eastbourne Street area by removing visual clutter.

5.3       This will help support Go Bus by providing an extra space for layover, increase transportation of passengers, and most importantly provide a safe place for both drivers and buses.

Havelock Road - P120 Time Limited Parking

5.4       Officers and the majority of nearby businesses and residents support the introduction of the time limit for this area.

5.5       This will help keep a steady flow of traffic outside of the businesses and residents in the area.

King Street North – P120 Time Limited Parking

5.6       Officers support the extension of the P120 time limited parking spaces outside of the new Totara Health Centre.

5.7       This will help keep vehicles moving in the area and help to alleviate any parking issues with the increased traffic.

 

 

6.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)      That the report of the Parking Transportation Officer titled Parking Controls dated 28/03/2019 be received.

B)     That the Council resolve pursuant to Chapter 5(Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Council Consolidated Bylaw 2016, that the one hour time limit that applies to 3 carparks on the Southern side of Eastbourne Street East, commencing approximately 12 metres from the intersecting kerbline with Karamu Road South and extending for 16.5 metres in a Southerly direction be revoked as set out Attachment 1 to the report.

C)     That Council resolve pursuant to Clause 5.3.1(a)(iv) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Consolidated Bylaw 2016, the 3 carparks revoked in Part B (above) become a bus stop. as set out Attachment 1 to the report 1.

D)     That Council resolve pursuant to Clause 5.3.1(a)(i) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Consolidated Bylaw 2016, that all parking on the southern side of Havelock Road, between Porters Drive and Karanema Drive be resolved to have a 120 minute time limit as set out Attachment 2 to the report.

E)      That Council resolve pursuant to Clause 5.3.1(a)(i) of Chapter 5 (Parking and Traffic) of the Hastings District Consolidated Bylaw 2016, that all parking spaces on the Western Side of King Street North, commencing approximately 26 metres from the intersecting kerbline of Saint Aubyn Street West and extending 56 metres East be resolved to have a 120 minute time limit as set out Attachment 3 to the report.

With the reasons for this decision being that the objective of the decision will contribute to performance of regulatory functions in a way that is efficient, effective and appropriate to present and future circumstances by:

·    Providing parking spaces in relevant places within the district that are safe and readily available to motorists.

 

 

Attachments:

 

1

Eastbourne Street Bus Terminus Extension and P60 Removal

REG-22-03-12-19-447

 

2

Havelock Road P120 Time Limited Parking

REG-22-10-18-3061

 

3

King Street North - P120 Parking

REG-22-10-19-3100

 

 

 

 


Eastbourne Street Bus Terminus Extension and P60 Removal

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


Havelock Road P120 Time Limited Parking

Attachment 2

 

PDF Creator


King Street North - P120 Parking

Attachment 3

 

PDF Creator


File Ref: 18/754

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Principal Advisor: District Development

Mark Clews

SUBJECT:                    Greater Heretaunga Plains Freshwater Management - TANK Process and Draft Plan Change        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to seek direction from the Council on a Draft Change to the Regional Resource Management Plan (RRMP) for land and water management in the Greater Heretaunga/Ahuriri Freshwater catchments.

1.2       This issue arises from a collaborative stakeholder engagement process run by the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council (HBRC) to implement the 2014 National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPSFM) in the Tutaekuri, Ahuriri, Ngaruroro and Karamu (TANK) catchments. Under the Resource Management Act (RMA) the HBRC is required to consult with various statutory bodies including the Territorial Authorities in its region before publicly notifying a proposed plan change. HBRC have released a pre-consolation draft for this purpose and to consult informally with other stakeholders

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, effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

1.4       The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of Local Government is the performance of the HBRC’s regulatory functions under the Resource Management Act and the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management as it affects this Council’s interest as a stakeholder. This includes the provision of good quality water and stormwater services, and the potential impacts the regulatory outcomes may have on the District’s economic social and environmental wellbeing.

1.5       The subject matter of the report is also directly related to the Council specific objectives in the table below.


 

Local Infrastructure

·    Infrastructure supporting economic growth

·    Industrial development opportunities

·    Resilience to hazards and shocks

·    Sustainable use of land & water resources

·    Healthy drinking water and sanitary services

Local Services

·    Supporting and attracting business

·    Building a resilient and job rich local economy

·    A community which wastes less

Regulatory Functions

·    Healthy waterways

1.7       This report concludes by recommending that the report be received and the Chief Executive be delegated authority to make submissions to the Regional Planning Committee on the matters raised in this report.

2.0       BACKGROUND

2.1       Implementation of the NPSFM is largely the HBRC’s responsibility with the primary policy instrument being the Regional Resource Management Plan (RRMP). The NPSFM requires regional councils to set freshwater objectives, water allocation limits and water quality targets for every water body in their region, including aquifers and wetlands in order to maintain and improve water quality.

2.2       In this case the Regional Council adopted a combined catchment approach to reflect the interconnectedness of the Heretaunga Plains aquifer and the surface water resources in these TANK catchments as shown in Figure 1 below.  

2.3       85% of Hawkes Bay people live, work and play within this catchment footprint. A range of community held and ecosystem values rely on adequate water levels and flows to be maintained within water bodies, but the community also values water for a range of abstractive uses such as domestic water supply, irrigation for a range of purposes including food and wine production; mahi mara, food processing, stock watering and municipal supply.

2.4       Ngati Kahungunu regard water as a Taonga. This also aligns with Council’s own philosophy, but access to water is also a critical component in realising the productive capacity of the versatile Heretaunga Plains soils for food and fibre production.

2.5       The prosperity of the Region’s rural and urban populations is dependent upon the land based primary industries and some significant processing industries rely on a secure supply of primary produce and access to reliable and clean water for processing. It is important therefore that the right balance between protection and use is found and agreed upon.

 

Figure 1 TANK Catchments

 

2.6       In view of this the HBRC elected to use a stakeholder based collaborative planning exercise to determine how water bodies within the TANK catchments should be managed to meet the diverse interests and needs of the community. The TANK group was established in 2012 and comprises over 30 groups and organisations representing a spectrum of water users, environmental interests, recreationalists and Tangata whenua/mana whenua groups. The process included Hastings District and Napier City Council officer participation. Industrial abstractors reliant on their own bores instead of municipal supply were not however, specifically represented.

2.7       Council was represented on the TANK Group by the Principal Advisor, District Development and since the middle of 2017 Council’s Group Manager Asset Management has also attended meetings to ensure Council’s roles and interests as a territorial authority as set out below are represented:

 

·      Abstracting groundwater for municipal supply and discharging urban stormwater to freshwater receiving bodies

·      Having landuse planning responsibilities under the RMA that affects freshwater

·      Advocating for district rural and urban dwellers economic and social wellbeing where this is dependent upon water quality and quantity.

3.0       CURRENT SITUATION

3.1       The TANK Collaborative process has now drawn to a close and a Draft Plan Change was presented to the Regional Planning Committee of the HBRC on 15 August 2018. This was hastened by the application for a Water Conservation Order for the Ngaruroro. The Special Tribunal appointed by the Minister for the Environment to hear and determine it, deferred temporarily the hearing on the lower reaches, to allow the TANK process to conclude so that any consensus reached could be considered in their deliberations. 

3.2       The role of the TANK Collaborative Stakeholder Group was to provide the HBRC’s Regional Planning Committee (RPC) with consensus recommendations regarding objectives, policies and methods, including rules, for a new chapter of the RRMP. The RPC had previously agreed to have particular regard to any TANK consensus outcome, if one emerges.

3.3       The RPC has completed its initial deliberations on the Plan Change and released a draft for informal pre-notification consultation. The HBRC is required under the RMA to consult specifically with the Territorial Authorities within its region during the preparation of any proposed plan change and have requested the Council’s feedback on the draft change by 31 March 2019.  

3.4       In considering it’s feedback Council needs to be cognisant that the plan is required to give effect to national and community values for freshwater, but that compulsory values have been set by the NPSFM for ecosystem health and human health for recreation, which is an important direction to be borne in mind at every step in the process.

3.5       The NPSFM requires that regional councils set limits and targets, include measures that prevent or reduce over-allocation, both in relation to water quantity and the capacity of the environment to assimilate diffuse discharges from land use on water quality. Over-allocation means that the ecosystem needs of the water body are not being met and/or that abstractive users are subject to uncertain security of supply in the case of water quantity.

3.6       Once sustainable limits have been set to protect instream values, the plan must manage the allocation and re-allocation of the water available for abstraction and the application of nutrients to land in an equitable way among a wide range of water users. It should also enable users to manage use of allocable water in efficient and cost effective ways so that the allocation can generate the most benefit for the community (without the HBRC necessarily picking winners).

4.0       OPTIONS

4.1       The options available to Council are to;

1.         Make no comment to HBRC on the draft plan change at this stage and wait until formal notification is made before making submissions.

2.         Make comment to the HBRC on the matters of support and concern to Council along the lines described in Section 6.0 of the report.

3.         Oppose the Plan Change provisions that limit water allocation and or impose significant water quality improvement costs on landusers.

4.2       Of course with options 2 and 3 there is an option to take intermediate positions as desired at the meeting. 

5.0       SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

5.1       The TANK process has been a form of consultation in its own right and Council is acting in a stakeholder capacity, rather than in a final decision making role. The major stakeholder interests are already covered in the process and the public will have an opportunity to lodge submissions with the HBRC when the Plan Change is notified, if not before, should it wish to publish a consultation draft. No separate Council consultation is therefore required on this matter.

6.0       ASSESSMENT OF OPTIONS (INCLUDING FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS)

6.1       Council has had two workshops on the Draft plan change and possible responses to the challenges for water allocation and management it represents or poses for the council and community. Attached (Attachment 1) is an Overview and Discussion Paper prepared for those workshops by way of further elaboration.

6.2       Council’s concerns are likely to relate to the provisions of the plan concerning water quantity limits and allocation provisions, rather than quality concerns (where there is largely a consensus of views), both in terms of irrigation demand on the Heretaunga Plains and in terms of its own core responsibilities for municipal water supply. This is where the major economic limitations are likely to bite, but with less certain and demonstrable benefits for instream fauna and flora given, our naturally occurring summer winter weather extremes.

6.3       The capping of allocation to existing use, clawing back over-allocation where that exists and only offsetting stream existing depletion effects through storage and/or aquifer fed stream flow enhancement, will leave no room for growth, or intensification of land based production and associated processing industries.

6.4       Allocation for municipal supply to deal with urban growth will also likely be limited, meaning this will not be a ready source of alternative water for industrial processing use in lieu of new bores, or increased takes from existing bores. Indeed, it appears at present that municipal needs associated with growth will also potentially need to be met through storage with potentially greater pragmatic and cost difficulties.

6.5       Until the re-allocation to existing use is completed and a review of sustainable allocation completed alongside feasibility studies for water storage and flow enhancement, there simply will not be any available water for intensification or new use. This could take ten years to complete.

6.6       While these are significant issues for the Council it needs to be recognised that there is now a new reality around freshwater resources nationally and within the Heretaunga Catchments as a result of:

·    Greater National Direction on freshwater management, urban development and protection of versatile soils.

·    Heightened public awareness and expectations on quality

·    Groundwater /surface water connectivity in the TANK catchments is much greater than previously understood

·    The scale of potential over-allocation versus actual allocation is better understood in the TANK catchments

·    Greater understanding of abstraction effects on groundwater and surface water levels in the TANK Catchments

·    Increased innovation in water use and allocation management

·    Integration of 3 waters thinking  and Government Review

6.7       These are longer term enduring changes that present challenges which will not be met taking a short or even medium term view. These are fundamental; shifts that cannot be satisfactorily addressed through a modified business as usual approach. Not only do we need to change how we view and use water resources, we a also need to review what represents desirable economic development growth when it involves the use of scarce resources such as water and versatile soils of the Heretaunga Plains. Increasingly decisions about land and water will need to be made against backdrop the government’s desire to move New Zealand towards a low carbon economy as signalled by through the Carbon Zero Bill.

6.8       Accordingly it is the officers’ view that Council should take a positive rather than a combative approach to responding to the plan change. Specifically it should be seeking changes to the plan change that will better enable the Council to take a longer term strategic approach that works within the limitations of the current water resources, and to facilitate growth through investment in augmentation; innovation and excellence in water management, and changing community awareness and behaviour.

6.9       It is recommended therefore that the Council prepare a 50 year intergenerational water strategy that is underpinned by the following (but still draft) high level principles:

·          Kaitiakitanga - Intergenerational - sustainable growth through excellent leadership and guardianship - providing enough for now while creating room for the future.  Smart growth, innovation and water excellence to facilitate population growth and prosperity.


·          Toitū te TaiaoSustainable – economic objectives and environmental outcomes are complimentary - economy within sustainable environmental limits and approaches, rather than holding to current levels. People/ animals/environment share impacts and benefits of life-giving waters.

·    Te ArarauAdaptable - resilience, multiple pathways – flexibility within parameters to change and evolve to new opportunities beyond our current practice.  Potential infrastructural investment in sustainable resource use to meet growth objectives.

·    Oranga HaporiSocietal - community wellbeing – HDC takes a lead role in working with others, taking our people with us, whilst recognising different perspectives to improve water availability for our community.

·    Mana TauriteEquitable -accessibility, affordability and equity for our community as a basic right embodying needs before wants, fairness for all, cultural recognition & redress

6.10    A multi-disciplinary team of officers with assistance of Annette Sweeney of Good Earth Matters and Cam Dury of Stradegy Consultants have prepared some suggested comments on the draft plan change on this basis for submission to the HBRC as set out in Attachment 2. It takes the approach that there are provisions that should be supported, but also provisions that Council holds concern about that require amendment if they are to enable the Council and community to better rise to the challenges of growing within the limits of the water resource. In summary the suggestions seek amendments to:

·        Recognise the nature of urban growth demands and nature and frequency of changes are different to other sectors and therefore require different management tools.

·        Recognise HPUDS as minimum demand for planning for municipal growth, but that changes are inevitable and need to be responded to positive.

·        Acknowledge it is reasonable to reserve some unused allocation as a means of enabling for independent industrial/community growth and use of water on versatile soil and in addition to municipal growth.

·        Greater clarity and flexibility around activity status for municipal takes

·        Stronger commitment to investigate increasing or decreasing groundwater abstraction with mitigation to establish a sustainable equilibrium. 

·        Greater flexibility for transfers of allocated water as a means of enabling opportunity provided they do not result in an increase in water abstraction, including for and between municipal use. 

·        Provide for TAs to manage some allocations on a collective basis for urban activities not supplied from municipal as a means of enabling opportunity while managing water use.

·        Greater clarity and flexibility in relation to stormwater performance.

7.0       PREFERRED OPTION AND REASONS

The preferred option is to adopt the recommended submissions outlined in Appendix A. Officers also recommend that Council endorse officers commencing work on a 50 year intergenerational water management strategy. The purpose of the strategy would be to facilitate economic and urban growth within acknowledged limits on the available fresh water resources.

 

8.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the Principal Advisor: District Development titled Greater Heretaunga Plains Freshwater Management - TANK Process and Draft Plan Change dated 28/03/2019 be received.

 

B)        That pursuant to section 3 1) c) of the Resource Management Act Council authorise the Chief Executive to make comments to the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council on its Draft Plan Change 9 to the Regional Resource Management Plan as set out in Appendix 2 to this report.

 

C)        That Council endorse officers commencing work on an intergeneration water strategy to help facilitate economic and urban growth within the limitations of current and future freshwater resources of the Heretaunga Plains.

 

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 good quality local infrastructure performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and business by:

 

I.    Influencing the exercise of the HBRC’s statutory functions under the Resource Management Act and the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management as it affects this Council’s interest as a stakeholder; and

 

II.   This includes the provision of good quality water and stormwater services, and the potential impacts the regulatory outcomes may have on the District’s economic social and environmental wellbeing.

 

Attachments:

 

1

Background Briefing Document for HDC Councillors TANK Regional Plan Change Greater Heretaunga Catchments

EXT-11-02-19-866

2

HDC Comments on Draft TANK Plan Change

EXT-11-02-19-873

 

 

 


Background Briefing Document for HDC Councillors TANK Regional Plan Change Greater Heretaunga Catchments

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


HDC Comments on Draft TANK Plan Change

Attachment 2

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


HDC Comments on Draft TANK Plan Change

Attachment 2

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


File Ref: 19/154

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Chief Executive

Nigel Bickle

SUBJECT:                    Chief Executive's Consolidated Report - March 2019        

 

 

 

 

1.0       INTRODUCTION

 

1.1       The Chief Executive’s (CE) Consolidated Monthly Report for March 2019, is my first monthly report to Council since my appointment on 11 February 2019.

 

1.2       The reports will be evolved over the next 3 months into a format that presents information in sufficient detail  to enable Elected Representatives to ensure the strategic direction and specific goals set by Council are being delivered effectively and in accordance with expectations.

 

1.3       I aim for this report to be easily understood by Elected Members and our Community.  Feedback is welcome as it allows us to continuously improve our reporting.

 

2.0       EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

2.1       This report provides a progress summary on Councils key areas of focus and investment including;

 

·    Our Environment – We are investing significantly in drinking water infrastructure as our first priority to meet community expectations and likely changes to national standards around safe drinking water.

 

·    Moving Around – We are investing in our core infrastructure to look after our assets prudently and to meet new challenges in bridge strengthening, increasing environmental standards and climate change.

 

·    Our Economy-We are investing in Hastings City Centre to help increase its vibrancy and meet the challenges of changing retail patterns and how people use the city.

 

·    Where We Live – We are working to enable the supply of a range of housing options to meet the needs of our changing community while protecting our valuable productive soils.

 

·    Things To Do - We are investing in and enhancing our parks, recreational and cultural facilities to make Hastings District a place where people want to live, work and play.

 

·    Our People – We are working together in partnerships to build Civic Pride, develop our Youth and help uplift people in our communities.  We are working to help ensure development opportunities are easily accessible in our Omahu, Irongate and Whakatu/Tomoana industrial zones to meet our priorities of increased sustainable employment opportunities and investment.

 

2.2       This report is primarily based on financial metrics as a measure of how we are progressing.

 

2.3       Our team are working on other monitoring measures to track both the quantum and quality of our progress. We are also in the early stages of developing easily understood infographics, interactive sensitivity analysis and reporting tools to strengthen our future consultative procedures and clarity and relevance of our reporting.

 

3.0       RECOMMENDATION

 

3.1       This report concludes by recommending that Council receive the Chief Executive’s Consolidated Monthly Report for March 2019 as it is for information purposes.

 

 

4.0       FINANCIAL SUMMARY TO 28 FEBRUARY 2019   (Refer Schedule 1)

 

4.1       In respect of our overall financial position given at 28 February 2019 we are two thirds of the way through our financial year, we are generally tracking well against budgets. In February we had our AA long term credit rating affirmed by international independent financial analysis and rating agency Standard and Poors. They also forecast a stable outlook for us amid increased deficits as we deliver our water infrastructure upgrades and Hawke’s Bay Opera House complex upgrade.

 

4.2       Revenues and interest charge savings are positive. Our forecast development contribution revenues in the Irongate Zone are lagging behind budget, however staff anticipate an improvement in this situation with new developments expected over the next 18 months.

 

4.3       We forecast our Capital Investment programme in a relatively linear fashion except when we have more certainty around the actual commencement times of major capital projects. At this stage our 2018-19 capital budget programme is unlikely to be fully delivered at 30 June 2019 as some large projects - particularly around water infrastructure may commence after June.

 

4.4       The other challenge we currently face is market capacity to deliver our capital works. This requires our staff to work closely with the market and consider new innovative approaches to procurement to help ensure ongoing delivery of our programme of works.

 

 

 

Schedule 1

 

 

5.0       OUR ENVIRONMENT     (Refer Schedule 2)

 

5.1       In respect of ‘Our Environment’ we are placing priority on;

·    Safe Drinking Water

·    Stream Enhancements

·    Waste Minimisation

·    Water Demand Management

·    Stormwater Quality Management

·    Parks Irrigation

 

 

 

5.2       A big part of the programme of work focusing on our environment is for safe drinking water. You will see that we have so far invested 36% of this year’s budget. Two large capital projects are currently being tendered.

 

5.3       I congratulate our staff on the nearing completion of the Hastings to Havelock North Watermain Project.  The most significant portion of this project is now in its final stages with some minor works to complete on landscaping and general clean-up.

 

5.4       This $10m project is part of Hastings District Council's strategy to ensure the delivery of safe drinking water and effective sustainable water services to the community.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Schedule 2

 

 

 

 

6.0       MOVING AROUND          (Refer Schedule 3)

 

6.1       In respect of ‘Moving Around’ we are placing priority on,

·    Te Ara Kahikatea (Whakatu Arterial Route)

·    Footpath Renewals

·    Emergency Reinstatement (Flood Damage)

·    LED Streetlight Upgrade

·    Walking and Cycling

·    Bridges

 

6.2       The June and September 2018 flood events have placed some pressure on our flood reserve budgets

 

6.3       I congratulate our staff on the delivery of Te Ara Kahikatea.  This $24m road will add to our productivity and improve regional logistics. I note that this project has been an exemplar in terms of consultation and engagement with our community.

 

 

Schedule 3

 

 

 

7.0       OUR ECONOMY              (Refer Schedule 4)

 

7.1       In respect of ‘Our Economy’ we are placing priority on;

·     Omahu Industrial Zone

·     Irongate industrial Zone

·     Economic Development Investment Attraction Activities & Key Account Services

·     City Centre Development

 

7.2       Delivery of Infrastructure Services and Roading Improvements into the Irongate and Omahu Industrial Zones continues. The tender for the Irongate Road upgrade has been awarded.

 

7.3       The Community Development Committee has approved the priority for several $m of public space improvement works in the city which along with the substantial private and public sector developments going on in the city will see step change improvements in the cityscape over the next 18 months.

 

7.4       I congratulate all our staff across Assets, Planning and Regulatory, Community and Facilities and the EGOI Group who are working to align Council investment with the public and private sector for better outcomes. Our collaboration on the new Police Headquarters is a great example.

 

7.5       The following extract from the Infometrics quarterly monitor succinctly describes our economy.

 

“Solid provisional regional GDP growth that again outstripped the national economy, strong contributions from horticulture and hospitality, population growth buoying housing demand and a robust labour market. These are the factors driving the Hawke’s Bay economy according to Infometrics”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Schedule 4

 

 

 

8.0       WHERE WE LIVE            (refer Schedule 5)

 

8.1       In respect of ‘Where We Live’ we are placing priority on;

·    Lyndhurst Residential Zone

·    Howard Street Residential Zone

·    Iona Stage 1

·    Clifton Revetment

 

8.2       Our staff are also working with Partners to enable the development of affordable housing, interim housing, emergency housing, and recognised seasonal employee (RSE) accommodation.

 

8.3       I congratulate our staff on their collaborative approach with partners and developers which is seeing a catch-up in greenfields section supply with market demand and RSE and socially focused housing projects getting underway.

 

 

 

Schedule 5

 

 

 

 

9.0       THINGS TO DO                (refer Schedule 6)

 

9.1       In respect of ‘Things To Do’ we are placing priority on;

·    Hawke’s Bay Opera House Redevelopment

·    Cornwall Park Premier Playground

·    Regional Sports Park

·    Park Reserve Management Plans

 

9.2       Construction of the Opera House continues on budget. The team are working through the consequences from the fire and on the Strategic and Business plans for fundraising and future uses of the Municipal building.

 

 

Hearings have been held this month on the Draft Management Plan for Cornwall Park. I have been very impressed with the level of consultation and collaboration in the development of this plan. It was great to see positive feedback from ‘The Friends of Cornwall Park’ interest group on the Council effort to improve this area.

 

Schedule 6

 

 

10.0    OUR PEOPLE         (refer Schedule 7)

 

10.1    In respect of ‘Our People’ we are placing priority on;

·    Youth Development

·    Hapu Development and Community Plans

·    City Assist, Kaitiaki and Skate Park Guardians

·    Community Assistance Grants

 

10.2    I want to take this opportunity to thank all of our staff who have assisted with public acknowledgements and services for the tragic events which took place in Christchurch on Friday 15 March resulting in the deaths of 50 people from our New Zealand community and injury and mental trauma to countless other members of our community.

 

10.3    Our City Assist and Kaitiaki teams have provided a reassuring presence for our community.

 

10.4    I am excited by the results being achieved with our staff and partners for helping our Youth onto employment pathways. A holistic and protective approach is required in some cases to help our people become work ready – the outcomes certainly make this commitment worthwhile.

 

10.5    Applications for this year’s Contestable Grants Fund have now opened for groups serving the needs of the Hastings community.  Nearly $250,000 was allocated to 31 groups in last year’s funding round with recipients’ projects ranging from education initiatives to victim support, making community radio programmes, training young opera singers and fixing and redistributing bicycles.

 

Schedule 7

 

 

11.0    REFLECTIONS FROM MY FIRST 5 WEEKS AS CHIEF EXECUTIVE

 

11.1    I have been able to work alongside a number of our teams getting a first-hand appreciation of the complexity and diversity of work that our staff do in order to deliver Councils Annual Plan and priorities. Whether it is the great customer service provided by our front of house staff or the team work from Assets, Marketing and Communications, Health and Safety, Risk Management, Project Management, and Legal to present a decision paper to Council re the opening of the Beach to Cape Kidnappers I have been impressed by the professionalism of our staff. It is evident to me that Council as an organisation is very busy. I expect this mirrors our very buoyant economy.

 

11.2    Discussions at my retreat with Councillors and second retreat with Councillors and the Senior Leadership team are providing me clear direction on the present and future priorities for Council.

 

11.3    Over the coming month I will be working with the Senior Team and all our staff to best position Council to work effectively with our elected representatives to deliver for our community.

12.0    RECOMMENDATION

The Chief Executive’s Consolidated Report for March 2019 be received by Council.

13.0    RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the Chief Executive titled Chief Executive's Consolidated Report - March 2019 dated 28/03/2019 be received.

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

 


File Ref: 19/239

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Manager: Democracy and Governance Services

Jackie Evans

SUBJECT:                    2019 Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting, Conference  and Remit Process        

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to:

·    to nominate Councillors for attendance at the 2019 Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) Conference and Annual General Meeting (AGM).

·    advise on the process for submitting proposed remits for consideration at the LGNZ AGM

1.2       This report concludes by recommending that the Council nominate 3 councillors to attend the conference and consider what remits it would wish to submit to the AGM

2.0       BACKGROUND AND CURRENT SITUATION

2.1       The conference and AGM will be held in Wellington from Sunday 7 July (AGM and conference opening) until Tuesday 9 July 2019. The theme of the conference is “Riding the localism wave: Putting communities in charge”. It is about communities and empowering them to take charge of their social, economic, environmental and culture well-being through localism. This is a global concept reshaping governments around the world, recognising that best outcomes are a result of local people making local decisions about the places they live.

 

2.2       The Council has no hard and fast rule as to how many councillors will accompany the Mayor and Chief Executive to the LGNZ Conference. As will be seen from the list below, over the last few years the Council has generally sent three councillors to the Conference.  In 2016 and 2017 four Councillors were approved to attend.

2.3       In addition to the Mayor, Council approval for attendance at previous conferences has been as follows:

·        2015   -    Rotorua – Councillors Heaps, Pierce and Hazlehurst

·        2016   -    Dunedin - Councillors Hazlehurst, Heaps, Kerr and Nixon

·        2017   -    Auckland –Councillors Barber, Dixon, Harvey and Heaps

·        2018   -   Christchurch – Councillors Kerr, Schollum and Travers

2.4      Although the Council has been entitled to have up to four delegates attending the AGM it is the presiding delegate, or in their absence an alternate, who is responsible for voting on behalf of the Council.

2.5       As part of the conference, all Councils have been invited to submit proposed remits for the LGNZ AGM to be held on Sunday 7 July 2019. The deadline for submission has been announced as 13 May 2019 to enable the LGNZ remit screening committee to assess the remits against specific criteria. Proposed remits should only relate to the internal governance and constitution of Local Government New Zealand, and relate to “issues of the moment”. The application form and Remit Process is attached.  Remits must have formal support from at least one sector group meeting, or 5 councils, prior to being submitted,

2.6       At a workshop held on 19 March 2019, and it was proposed to recommend to

·    Seek support at the Zone 3 meeting to be held in Dannevirke on 4 and 5 April 2019 for the following remit: Policy changes to reduce alcohol harm (Attachment 2).

·    Support the remit from Napier City Council on Social Housing (Attachment 3).

·    Undertake further research on the following remits for possible future submission to LGNZ: Coastal Erosion, Civics Education in schools and the harmful effects of social media on young people.

3.0       OPTIONS

3.1       To support the remits listed above and gather support from the Zone 3 meeting and elsewhere for submission the LGNZ AGM to be held on 7 July 2019 in Wellington.

3.2       To nominate 3 Councillors to attend the LGNZ conference on 7 -9 July 2019.

4.0      RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)      That the report of the Manager: Democracy and Governance Services titled 2019 Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting, Conference  and Remit Process dated 28/03/2019 be received.

B)     That the Council’s delegates to the 2018 Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting and Conference to be held in Wellington on 7–9 July 2019 is the  Mayor, Chief Executive (or his nominee) and the following Councillors:

         …………………………………………………………………………………….

C)     That the Council’s delegates to the Local Government New Zealand 2018 Annual General Meeting be:

       …………………………………………………. Presiding Delegate

       …………………………………………………. Alternate Delegate

       The Chief Executive (or his nominee) Subsequent Alternate Delegate.

D)        That the following remit be put forward to the 2019 Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting:-

·    Policy changes to reduce alcohol harm

            E)        That the Council support the remit on Social Housing from the Napier City Council (CG-14-1-0218).

F)        That the Chief Executive and Delegates to the zone 3 meeting to be held in Dannevirke on 4 and 5 April 2019 be given delegated authority to present the Council’s remits and decide whether to give support to remits submitted from other local councils, as appropriate and report back to the Council meeting on 2 May 2019.

 

Attachments:

 

1

LGNZ 2019 Remit process

CG-14-1-01200

 

2

Alcohol Policy Remit

CG-14-1-01221

 

3

Napier City Counicl Social Housing Remit

CG-14-1-01218

 

 

 

 


LGNZ 2019 Remit process

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Alcohol Policy Remit

Attachment 2

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Napier City Counicl Social Housing Remit

Attachment 3

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


File Ref: 19/235

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Manager: Democracy and Governance Services

Jackie Evans

SUBJECT:                    Updated 2019 Meeting Schedule Changes        

 

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

 

1.1       The purpose of this report is to consider amendments to the schedule of Council and Committee Meetings for the 2019 Meeting Calendar which was adopted by Council 6 December 2018.

 

1.2       This report recommends that the 2019 Meeting Schedule as amended below be adopted.

 

2.0       BACKGROUND

 

2.1       The Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, Clause 19 states:

(4)       A local authority must hold meetings at the times and places that it appoints”.

(5)       If a local authority adopts a schedule of meetings-

 

a) The schedule-

i)       may cover any future period that the local authority considers appropriate, and

ii)       may be amended

 

2.2       Although a local authority must hold the ordinary meetings appointed, it is competent for the authority at a meeting to amend the schedule of dates, times and number of meetings to enable the business of the Council to be managed in an effective way.

 

2.3       The following meetings are proposed to be included or amended in the 2019 meeting schedule:

 

Committee

Date

Time

Venue

HB Crematorium Committee

 

Monday, 8 April 2019

10.00am

Landmarks Room

Council (Keirunga Garden Draft Tree Management Plan Submissions)

 

Thursday, 14 May 2019

9.00am

Council Chamber

2.4      Councillors will be kept informed of specific changes on a day to day basis through the centralised calendar system.

 

 

3.0       RECOMMENDATIONS AND REASONS

A)        That the report of the Manager: Democracy and Governance Services titled Updated 2019 Meeting Schedule Changes dated 28/03/2019 be received.

B)        That the 2019 Meeting Schedule be amended as follows:-

Committee

Date

Time

Venue

HB Crematorium Committee

 

Monday, 8 April 2019

10.00am

Landmarks Room

Council (Keirunga Garden Draft Tree Management Plan Submissions)

 

Thursday, 14 May 2019

9.00am

Council Chamber

 

Attachments:

 

1

2019 meeting schedule with amendments

CG-14-1-01213

 

 

 

 


PDF Creator


File Ref: 19/148

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Manager: Democracy and Governance Services

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 February 2019.

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

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

o 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 28/03/2019 be received.

B)        That the LGOIMA requests received in February 2019 as set out in Attachment 1 (IRB-2-01-19-1542) of the report in (A) above be noted.

 

Attachments:

 

1

LGOIMA - Monthly Report to Council February 2019

IRB-2-01-19-1542

 

 

 

 


LGOIMA - Monthly Report to Council February 2019

Attachment 1

 

PDF Creator


File Ref: 19/290

 

 

REPORT TO:               Council

MEETING DATE:        Thursday 28 March 2019

FROM:                           Waste and Data Services Manager

Martin Jarvis

SUBJECT:                    Summary of Recommendations of the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee meeting held on 22 March 2019        

 

 

 

1.0       SUMMARY

1.1       The purpose of this report is to advise that the recommendations from the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee meeting held on 22 March 2019 require ratification by Council.

1.2       The relevant recommendations to be ratified will be circulated separately if there is any further information arising from the 22 March 2019 meeting.

 

2.0      RECOMMENDATION

A)   That the report of the Waste and Data Services Manager titled “Summary of Recommendations of the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee Meeting held on 22 March 2019” dated 28/03/2019 be received.

B)   The following recommendations of the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee meeting held 22 March 2019 be ratified:

 

“5.  WASTE MANAGEMENT AND MINIMISATION PLAN (WMMP) - IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

 

A)       That the report of the Waste Minimisation Officer titled Waste Management And Minimisation Plan (WMMP) - Implementation Plan dated 22/03/2019 be received.

 

B)       That the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee commit to the WMMP as an aspirational goal but acknowledge that during the course of the Plan there may be variations”.

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

           


TRIM File No. CG-14-1-01214

 

 

 

HASTINGS DISTRICT COUNCIL

 

Council MEETING

 

Thursday, 28 March 2019

 

 

 

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:

 

24.       CBD Development Proposal

25.       Hawke's Bay Food Innovation Hub

26.       Summary of Recommendations of the Hastings District Rural Community Board held on 4 March 2019

27.       Summary of Recommendations of the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee meeting held 22 March 2019 while the Public were Excluded

 

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

 

 

 

 

24.       CBD Development Proposal

Section 7 (2) (b) (ii)

The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely to unreasonably prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information.

To protect third party commercial interests and 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.

25.       Hawke's Bay Food Innovation Hub

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.

Commercially sensitive information.

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.

26.       Summary of Recommendations of the Hastings District Rural Community Board held on 4 March 2019

As stated in the minutes

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.

27.       Summary of Recommendations of the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee meeting held 22 March 2019 while the Public were Excluded

As stated in the minutes

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.