Council

Tuesday 21 August 2018 at 10.30am

 

 

AGENDA

 


Council Meeting

21 August 2018

Northland Regional Council Agenda

 

Meeting to be held in the Council Chamber

36 Water Street, Whangārei

on Tuesday 21 August 2018, commencing at 10.30am

 

Recommendations contained in the council agenda are NOT council decisions. Please refer to council minutes for resolutions.

 

Item                                                                                                                                      Page

Housekeeping

1.0    apologies

Chairman Shepherd  

2.0    declarations of conflicts of interest

3.0    Presentations                                                                                                                                                       5

4.0    Health and Safety Report                                                                                                                             6

5.0    Council Minutes/Action Sheet/Council Working Party and Working Group Updates

5.1      Confirmation of Minutes - 16 May 2018, 10 July 2018, and 24 July 2018                              8

5.2      Receipt of Action Sheet                                                                                                                          38

5.3      Council Working Party Updates and Chairpersons' Briefings                                                    40

5.4      Council Working Group Updates                                                                                                         41

6.0    Financial Reports

6.1      Request for Approval to Carry Forward Operational Budget from the 2017/18 Financial Year into the 2018/19 Financial Year                                                                                                                    43

6.2      Request for Approval to Carry Forward Capital Expenditure Budget from the 2017/18 Financial Year into the 2018/19 Financial Year                                                                                                           46

6.3      Special Reserves at 30 June 2018                                                                                                        55

6.4      Regional Rates Collection for 2017/18                                                                                              64

6.5      Reinvestment of Gains Earned on Council's Externally Managed Funds                              76

7.0    Decision Making Matters

7.1      Investment and Growth Reserve: Changes to the Criteria and Procedures for the Allocation of Funding                                                                                                                                                         82

7.2      Te Taitokerau Māori and Council Working Party (TTMAC) -  Proposed Amendment to Ngā Kupu Pānga | Terms of Reference                                                                                                                  92

7.3      Amendment to Delegations                                                                                                                105

7.4      Amendment to Elected Members' Expenses and Allowances Policy                                   118

7.5      Environment Fund Overallocation                                                                                                    134

7.6      Inter-regional Marine Pest Pathway Plan – Discussion Document                                       138

7.7      Representation Review 2018 Final Proposal                                                                                142

7.8      Northland Walking and Cycling Strategy                                                                                        143

7.9      Treatment of Whangārei Harbour Board Land                                                                            196

7.10   Biosecurity Operational Plan 2017-2027 - Sustained Control Diseases (Kauri Dieback) Update     201

8.0    Operational Reports

8.1      Chair's Report to Council                                                                                                                     206

8.2      Chief Executive’s Report to Council                                                                                                 209

9.0    Receipt of Committee Minutes                                                                                                              232  

10.0  Business with the Public Excluded                                                                            235

10.1   Confirmation of Confidential Minutes - 24 July 2018

10.2   Human Resources Report

10.3   Chief Executive Officer's Salary Increase

10.4   Acquire Interests in Land for Awanui Flood Scheme Upgrade

10.5   Marsden Maritime Holdings Ltd - Appointment of Directors  

 


 

ACC - Accident Compensation Corporation

AHB -  Animal Health Board

ALGIM -  Association of Local Government Information Management

AMA -  Aquaculture Management Area

AMP – Asset Management Plan/Activity Management Plan

BOI -  Bay of Islands

BOPRC - Bay of Plenty Regional Council

CAPEX - Capital Expenditure (budget to purchase assets)

CBEC -  Community, Business and Environment Centre

CDEM -  Civil Defence Emergency Management

CEG -  Co-ordinating Executive Group – Northland Civil Defence management team

CEO -  Chief Executive Officer

CIMS -  Co-ordinated Incident Management System (emergency management structure)

CMA -  Coastal Marine Area

CPCA -  Community Pest Control Areas

CRI -  Crown Research Institute

DHB - District Health Board 

DOC -  Department of Conservation

DOL -  Department of Labour

DPMC -  Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet

ECA -  Environmental Curriculum Award

ECAN -  Environment Canterbury

EE -  Environmental Education

EECA -  Energy Efficiency Conservation Authority

EEZ -  Exclusive Economic Zone

EF -  Environment Fund

EMA -  Employers and Manufacturers Association

EMC - Environmental Management Committee

EOC -  Emergency Operations Centre

EPA - Environmental Protection Authority

FDE -  Farm Dairy Effluent

FNDC -  Far North District Council

FNHL -  Far North Holdings Limited

FPP -  First Past the Post – voting system for NRC elections

GE -  Genetic Engineering

GIS - Geographic Information System

GMO - Genetically Modified Organism

HSNO - Hazardous Substances & New Organisms Act

HBRC -  Hawke's Bay Regional Council

HEMP -  Hapū Environmental Management Plan

Horizons - Brand name of Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council 

HR - Human Resources

HSWA - Health and Safety at Work Act 2015

IEMP - Iwi Environmental Management Plan

IPPC -  Invited Private Plan Change: a process to allow Aquaculture Management Areas to be established

IRIS -  Integrated Regional Information System

KDC -  Kaipara District Council 

KPI -  Key Performance Indicator

LATE - Local Authority Trading Enterprise

LGA -  Local Government Act 2002

LGNZ -  Local Government New Zealand

LGOIMA -  Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

LGOL -  Local Government Online

LTP -  Long Term Plan

LTFS -  Long Term Financial Strategy

MCDEM -  Ministry of Civil Defence & Emergency Mgmnt

MFE -  Ministry for the Environment 

MHWS - Mean High Water Springs

MMH -  Marsden Maritime Holdings Limited

MNZ -  Maritime New Zealand

MOH -  Ministry of Health

MOT -  Ministry of Transport

MPI – Ministry for Primary Industries

MSD -  Ministry of Social Development

NCMC -  National Crisis Management Centre

NES – National Environmental Standards

NDHB -  Northland District Health Board

NZRC -  New Zealand Refining Company (Marsden Point)

NGO -  Non-Governmental Organisation

NIF -  Northland Intersectoral Forum

NIWA - National Institute of Water and Atmosphere

NORTEG - Northland Technical Advisory Group

NZCPS - New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement

NZTA - New Zealand Transport Agency

NZQA - New Zealand Qualifications Authority

NZWWA - New Zealand Water and Wastes Association

OFI - Opportunity for Improvement

ORC -  Otago Regional Council

OSH -  Occupational Safety & Health (now Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment)

PCBU – Person Conducting Business or Undertaking

PDF - Portable Document Format

PPE -  Personal Protective Equipment

RAP -  Response Action Plan

RAQP -  Regional Air Quality Plan

RCP -  Regional Coastal Plan

RFI - Request for Information

RFP - Request for Proposal

RTC - Regional Transport Committee

RLTS - Regional Land Transport Strategy

RMA - Resource Management Act 1991

RMG - Resource Managers Group (Regional Councils)

RMZ - Riparian Management Zone

ROI - Return on Investment

RPMS - Regional Pest Management Strategy

RPS - Regional Policy Statement

RSG - Regional Sector Group

RTO - Regional Tourism Organisation

RWASP - Regional Water and Soil Plan

SIPO – Statement of Investment Policy and Objectives

SITREP - Situation Report

SMF - Sustainable Management Fund

SOE -  State of Environment (or) State Owned Enterprise 

SOLGM -Society of Local Government Managers

SPARC -  Sport & Recreation New Zealand

SRC - Southland Regional Council (Environment Southland)

STV -  Single Transferable Vote

SWAG - Surface Water Allocation Group

SWPA -  Sustainable Water Programme of Action

TA - Territorial Authority: City & District Councils

TAG -Technical Advisory Group

Tier 1 - Site level plan or response for an oil spill

Tier 2 - Regional level plan or response to an oil spill

Tier 3 - National level plan or response to an oil spill

TLA - Territorial Local Authority – City & District Councils

TMP - Treasury Management Plan

TOR - Terms of Reference

TPK - Te Puni Kōkiri (Ministry of Maori Development)

TRAION - Te Rūnanga a Iwi o Ngāpuhi

TRC - Taranaki Regional Council

TROTR -Te Rūnanga o Te Rarawa

TUANZ - Telecommunications Users Association of NZ

WCRC - West Coast Regional Council

WDC -  Whangarei District Council

WHHIF -  Whangarei Harbour Health Improvement Fund

WRC - Waikato Reginal Council

WSMP – Workplace Safety Management Practices

WWTP -  Wastewater Treatment Plant

 

  


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 3.0

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Presentations

ID:

A1094908

 

Executive summary

The presentations that will be presented at the meeting are listed below.

 

Recommendation

That the presentations:

1.         Tane Mahuta Response Plan

2.         CEO to present new executive team

be received.

 

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Chris Taylor

Title:

Governance Support Manager

Date:

07 August 2018

  


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 4.0

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Health and Safety Report

ID:

A1094593

From:

Tracey Warboys, Health and Safety Specialist

 

Executive summary

This report provides an update from the Health and Safety Specialist for the month of July 2018.  For the year-end period for 2017/18, a total of 115 reports were received, a decrease of 0.9% reports from the 2016/17 period (133 in total).

 

There were seven Lost Time Injuries in the 2017/18 year as opposed to two Lost Time Injuries in the previous year.  Four out of the seven Lost Time Injuries were of a minor nature with one-day lost time each.

 

Recommendation

That the report ‘Health and Safety Report’ by Tracey Warboys, Health and Safety Specialist and dated 6 August 2018, be received.

 

Background

Reports on council’s health and safety activities for the month of July 2018 – 10 reports.

Summary of Events (only items of note documented)

 

Serious Chemical Event Update (June) – Investigation complete with many recommendations being worked through and/or completed.  Assisting the Waste and Water Monitoring Officer to develop a timeline to implement remaining recommendations. 

 

Incident (2)

Staff member witnessed a violent attack on a member of the public when leaving the office after work.  Employee is being supported through duty of care and counselling. 

Garmin activated – first responder responded within five minutes and established employee inadvertently pressed the wrong button (false alarm).  Employee received further tuition on the unit. 

Discomfort, Pain and Injury (4)

Workstation assessments undertaken, with one new starter.  Adjustments made to set up and/or equipment ordered. 

Internal Policy and documentation review

·    Snorkelling manual reviewed and published.

·    H&S Promapp continues.

Audits and Inspections

·    Contractor – Clarks Buses (4 July), no issues.

·    Contractor – Height Access Technology (13 July), no issues.

·    Assisted staff to review six contractor health and safety plans as part of the pre-qualification requirements.

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Dave Tams

Title:

Group Manager, Corporate Excellence

Date:

07 August 2018

  


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 5.1

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Confirmation of Minutes - 16 May 2018, 10 July 2018, and 24 July 2018

ID:

A1091048

From:

Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager

 

 

Recommendation

That the minutes of the Long Term Plan deliberations meeting held on 16 May 2018, the extraordinary council meeting held on 10 July 2018, and the council meeting held on 24 July 2018, be confirmed as a true and correct record.

 

Attachments

Attachment 1: Long Term Plan Deliberations Minutes - 16 May 2018

Attachment 2: Extraordinary Council Minutes - 10 July 2018

Attachment 3: Ordinary Council Minutes - 24 July 2018  

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Chris Taylor

Title:

Governance Support Manager

Date:

01 August 2018

 


Council Meeting  ITEM: 5.1

21 August 2018Attachment 1

Northland Regional Council Minutes

 

Meeting held in the Council Chamber

36 Water Street, Whangārei

on Wednesday 16 May 2018, commencing at 9.30am

 

 

Present:

Chairman, Bill Shepherd

Deputy Chairman, David Sinclair

Councillors:

John Bain

Justin Blaikie

Paul Dimery

Mike Finlayson

Penny Smart

Rick Stolwerk

Joce Yeoman

 

In Attendance:

Full Meeting

Chief Executive Officer

GM - Governance and Engagement

GM - Environmental Services

GM - Corporate Excellence

Management Accountant

Strategy Specialist

Governance Support Manager

Part Meeting

                                                         GM - Customer Service - Community Resilience

                                                         Compliance Monitoring Manager

                                                         Transport Manager

                                                         Finance Manager

                                                         Transport Strategic Planning Officer

                                                         Economist

 

The Chair declared the meeting open at 9.30am and advised the meeting would adjourn at 10am for a morning tea celebration for staff.

Secretarial Note: The GM – Governance and Engagement provided a brief introductory presentation addressing the following key points:

·    Consultation - Feedback

·    How people heard about LTP process

·    Substantial support for the ‘Big three’ consultation topics (water, pest management, region-wide flood rate)

·    Recommended changes following consultation

·    Next steps

Apologies (Item 1.0)

There were no apologies.

 

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest (Item 2.0)

It was advised that councillors should make declarations item-by-item as the meeting progressed.

 

Secretarial Note: The Chairman commenced proceedings with the following opening remarks:

·    The draft 2018-28 Long Term Plan:

-      was bold, visionary and a credit to council;

-      had been developed in response to the community, government and council’s aspirations; and

-      had attracted substantial community support for initiatives.

·    For the purpose of discussion, the Chair and Deputy Chair would move and second all recommendations (Technically this would not prohibit either from moving or seconding an amendment).

 

Council Deliberations on the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and Supporting Information (Item 3.1)

ID: A1052445

Report from Malcolm Nicolson, Chief Executive Officer

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

1.         That the report ‘Council Deliberations on the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and Supporting Information’ by Malcolm Nicolson, CEO and dated 7 May 2018, be received.

2.         That the Chief Executive Officer be given delegated authority to approve any consequential amendments as a result of council decisions on submissions and any minor accuracy and grammatical amendments.

3.         That the Chief Executive Officer be given delegated authority to approve changes required to revise the financial statements and rating information within the final Long Term Plan 2018-2028.

4.         That the 17 inadmissible submissions that were received not be accepted or considered by council during deliberations.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

5.         That council supports the division of the land management rate and council services rate in to six core targeted region-wide rates (the council services rate, freshwater management rate, pest management rate, land management rate, civil defence and hazard management rate, and flood infrastructure rate), to provide a more transparent and fair rating system.

6.         That council supports the establishment of a new freshwater management rate, to be set based on the equalised land value of each rateable unit in the region.

7.         That council supports the establishment of a new pest management rate, to be set based on equalised capital value and number of rating units or separately used or inhabited parts of a rating unit (SUIPs).

8.         That council supports the establishment of a new civil defence and hazard management rate, to be set based on equalised capital value and number of rating units or separately used or inhabited parts of a rating unit (SUIPs).

9.         That council supports the establishment of a new flood infrastructure rate, to be set on a fixed amount on each rateable SUIP/rating unit.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

10.       That council supports the provision of an additional $280,000 per year from 2018/19 to 2021/22 for four additional staff members (including associated overhead costs), to progress freshwater improvement in the Northern Wairoa and Northland dune lakes, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

11.       That council supports the provision of an additional $127,858 in 2018/19, and $35,681, $91,535, $119,000, and $12,000 over the following four years for Council's contribution toward the operational costs of the Northern Wairoa and dune lakes freshwater improvement projects, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

12.       That council supports the provision of an additional $364,000 per year from 2021/22 to continue freshwater improvement projects, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

13.       That council supports the provision of an additional $7,800 in 2019/20 and 2020/21, and then every second and third year after that, for expansion of council's wetland monitoring programme, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

14.       That council supports the provision of an additional $48,490 in 2018/19, $5,104 in 2019/20, and $6058 in 2020/21 for the expansion of council's annual lakes ecological monitoring programme, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

15.       That council supports the provision of an additional $229,556 in 2019/20, increasing to $307,043 each year following, for three additional hill country erosion staff (including associated overhead costs), increasing to four additional staff in 2020/21, to progress council's soil conservation programmes and priority catchment management plans as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

16.       That council supports the provision of an additional $85,500 in 2020/21, increasing to $303,000 by 2027/28 to increase funding to create a council afforestation grant scheme, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

17.       That council supports the provision of an additional $507,942 in 2018/19, and $369,412 and $387,883 in the two years following, to be made available in council's Environment Fund, which supports land management and biodiversity projects, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

18.       That council supports the provision of an additional $36,000 in 2018/19, $47,000 and $58,000 the following two years for an expansion of council's Flyger road nursery, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

19.       That council supports the provision of an additional $66,285 per year for a full time equivalent Flyger road nursery manager (including associated overhead costs), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

20.       That council supports the provision of an additional $3,500 in 2018/19, and $6,500 each year following, for additional equipment to support the increase in level of service for land and water, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

21.       That council supports the provision of an additional $146,883 in the 2019/20 year and $222,918 every year following, for two additional full-time equivalent positions for hydrology (including associated overhead costs), rising to three positions in 2020/21, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

22.       That council supports the provision of an additional $81,221 per year from 2019/20 for an additional groundwater scientist (including associated overhead costs) as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

23.       That council supports the provision of an additional $55,809 per year for a junior hydrology officer (including associated overhead costs) from 2019/20, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

24.       That council supports the provision of an additional $40,000 in 2019/20, $40,000 for 2020/21, and up to $45,000 every year following to support the increase in hydrometric operations as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

25.       That council supports the provision of an additional $69,500 per year for council's coastal state of the environment monitoring programme, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

26.       That council supports the provision of an additional $152,069 per year for two additional staff members (including associated overhead costs), for environmental science reporting and freshwater ecology as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

27.       That council supports the provision of an additional $81,000 per year from 2019/20 for an additional staff member (including associated overhead costs), for freshwater monitoring as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

28.       That council supports the provision of an additional $55,809 for 2018/19, and $105,924 from 2019/20 and every year following to cover the cost of field and digital equipment and lab testing associated with state of the environment monitoring, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

29.       That council supports the provision of an additional $15,000 per year from 2019/20 for a regional sediment monitoring programme, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

30.       That council supports the provision of an additional $70,848 per year for an additional compliance monitoring officer (including associated overhead costs), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

31.       That council supports the provision of an additional $10,000 per year until 2022/23, for the control of wild ginger as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

32.       That council supports the provision of an additional $40,000 per year for a feral animal eradication response programme as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

33.       That council supports the provision of an additional $190,000 for the 2018/19 year and $330,000 for two years from 2019/20 for additional staff members (inclusive of associated overhead costs) to implement the Pest Free Northland programme as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information, with ongoing costs for up to eleven additional members by 2027/28 as proposed in the supporting information.

34.       That council supports the provision of an additional $431,120 in 2018/19, $530,702 in 2019/20, and $606,802 in 2020/21 for the operational costs associated with the Pest Free Northland programme as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information, with ongoing costs until 2027/28 as proposed in the supporting information.

35.       That council supports the provision of an additional $60,000 in 2018/19, and $40,000 in 2019/20 for a vessel hull surveillance database for marine biosecurity, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

36.       That council supports the provision of an additional $5800 in 2018/19, increasing  $2475 every year following for additional costs associated with pest control and monitoring equipment, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

37.       That council support an additional $200,000 every year to address established and emerging risks posed by Kauri dieback on private land throughout the region, to be funded by a reduction in the funding of the projects (by 16.68%) in Western Northland, and the Mid North/Bay of Islands, Tutukaka, Kai Iwi Lakes and the Mangawhai/Waipū high value pest control areas.

Carried

(Councillor Blaikie voted against the motion)

 

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

38.       That council supports the provision of an additional $365,775 per year for Western Northland projects associated with Pest Free Northland, including projects at Tane Whakapiripiri, Puketi, Mataraua, Waimā, Waipoua and Warawara, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

39.       That council supports the provision of an additional $93,000 per year for biosecurity work in the high value pest control area of Whangārei Heads, to be funded from the pest management rate, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

40.       That council support ceasing the collection of the Whangārei Heads Pest Management targeted rate.

 

An amendment was moved (Dimery/Finlayson)

39.       That council supports the provision of an additional $93,000 per year for biosecurity work in the high value pest control area of Whangārei Heads, to be funded from the pest management rate, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

40.       That the targeted rate for the Whangārei Heads Pest Management remains in place but council ceases collection of it.

Secretarial Note: Councillor Bain notified the Chair his intention to move a further amendment if the existing was lost (as per Standing Order 22.6).

Lost

(The Chairman in putting the motion called for an expression of opinion by show of hands; the result being Councillors Bain, Dimery, Finlayson and Sinclair voted in support of the motion.  Councillors Blaikie, Smart, Stolwerk and Yeoman voted against the motion.  The Chairman applied his casting vote against the motion (as per Standing Order 18.3).

 

Moved (Bain/Sinclair)

39.       That council supports the provision of an additional $93,000 per year for biosecurity work in the high value pest control area of Whangārei Heads, to be funded from the pest management rate, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

40.       That council supports ceasing the collection of the Whangārei Heads Pest Management targeted rate; noting that the previous targeted rate be reinstated if funding for pest management is reduced in this area (on request by the community).

Carried

The Chairman subsequently put the substantive motion which was Carried.

 

Secretarial Note: The meeting adjourned at 10.05am and reconvened at 10.25am.

 

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

41.       That council supports the provision of an additional $249,960 per year for biosecurity work in the high value pest control area of the Mid North/Bay of Islands, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

42.    That council supports the provision of an additional $91,652 per year for biosecurity work in the high value pest control area of Tutukaka, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

43.       That council supports the provision of an additional $124,980 per year for biosecurity work in the high value pest control area of Kai Iwi Lakes, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

44.       That council supports the provision of an additional $166,640 per year for biosecurity work in the high value pest control area of Mangawhai/Waipū, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

45.       That council supports the funding of 70% of the cost of new flood infrastructure capital work that meet the criteria of the Flood Infrastructure Fund, via the newly established flood infrastructure rate (FIR), making the portion of the rate to fund these works $7.81 per SUIP/rating unit.

46.       That council supports lowering the local contribution from 50% to 30% for ratepayers in the Awanui, Kaeo-Whangaroa, and Whangārei flood management areas.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

47.       That council supports the $15 million 'Option 1' Awanui flood scheme upgrade proposal, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

48.       That council supports ongoing flood works in Kerikeri-Waipapa, to be funded from the existing Kerikeri-Waipapa flood scheme reserve, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

49.       That council supports the provision of an additional $400,000 total funding from 2019/20 for floodway construction and channel benching works at Matangirau, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

50.       That council supports the provision of an additional $750,000 total funding from 2024/25 for flood works at Kāeo (Kāeo Flood Scheme Stage II), comprising: widening of Waikare Creek ($150,000); re-alignment of the Kāeo River ($450,000); and deflection bank extension work ($150,000), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

51.       That council supports the provision of an additional $950,000 total funding from 2018/19 for the lower Waiarohia stream flood overflow reduction project, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

52.       That council supports the provision of an additional $50,000 total funding from 2022/23 for a basin wetland creation project at the Hopua te Nihotetea detention dam, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

53.       That council supports the provision of an additional $440,000 total funding from 2018/19 for the development of a flood scheme at Panguru, to be funded 100% from the Flood Infrastructure Rate. The works, budget, and funding arrangements are as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information, however the timing of the works is proposed to be brought forward to 2018/19 - 2019/20, with $40,000 in 2018/19 (design and consenting) and $400,000 in 2019/20 (construction).

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

54.       That council withdraws the flood works proposed at Taumārere-Kawakawa in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information, and not strike a targeted river management rate for this catchment.

Carried

 

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

55.       That council supports the provision of $100,000 per year for a full-time equivalent staff member (including associated overhead costs) to effectively resource Māori engagement, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

(Councillor Bain voted against the motion)

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

56.       That council supports the provision of $5000 in 2018/19 and 2020/2021, increasing to $7000 in 2022/2023 and continuing every second year following, for sponsorship of the biennial Māori Business Awards, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

(Councillors Bain and Sinclair voted against the motion)

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

57.       That council supports the provision of an additional $2000 in 2018/19, increasing to $6000 from 2019/20, for a Northland Regional Council Tai Tokerau Māori Scholarship, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

 

An amendment was moved (Bain/Dimery)

57.       That council supports the provision of an additional $2000 in 2018/19, increasing to $6000 from 2019/20, for a Northland Regional Council Tai Tokerau Māori Scholarship, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.  A second scholarship to be provided with the same quantum of funding as the Northland Regional Council Tai Tokerau Maori Scholarship.

Carried

The Chairman subsequently put the substantive motion which was Carried.

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

58.       That council supports the provision of $55,000 every year from 2020/2021 for a new Māori internship position (including associated overhead costs) as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

 

An amendment was moved (Bain/Sinclair)

58.       That council supports the provision of $55,000 every year from 2020/2021 for a new internship position (including associated overhead costs) as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Lost

The Chairman subsequently put the original motion which was Carried.

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

59.       That council supports the provision of $10,000 per year from 2019/2020 onward to support the Māori initiatives fund as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

 

An amendment was moved (Blaikie/Smart)

59.       That council supports the provision of $20,000 per year from 2019/2020 onward to support the Māori initiatives fund as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Lost

The Chairman subsequently put the original motion which was Carried.

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

60.       That council supports the provision of an additional $25,000 per year for marketing and promotions, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

61.       That council supports the provision of $15,000 for 2018/19 and 2019/20, increasing to $20,000 from 2020/2021 for a community environmental awards programme, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

62.       That council supports the provision of an additional $21,000 per year for work and equipment required to maintain online services, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

63.       That council supports the provision of an additional $72,000 per year for a new full time equivalent position for social media management (including associated overhead costs), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

64.       That council supports the provision of $20,000 per year for the first three years, increasing to $22,500 from 2021/2022, and to $25,000 from 2024/2025 for technical support to facilitate social media management, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

65.       That council supports the provision of an additional $32,500 per year from 2019/20 onward for an additional Enviroschools early childhood contractor, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

66.       That council supports the provision of an additional $5,000 per year to meet the demand for Enviroschools Biosecurity and WaiRestoration courses, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

67.       That council supports the provision of an additional $84,000 per year for a realignment and increase in capacity of the customer services front line team (including associated overhead costs), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

68.       That council supports the provision of $31,000 a year to increase funding for elected members expenses and allowances as required by the Remuneration Authority, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

69.       That council supports the provision of $40,000 in 2019/20 and every election year following, for additional costs associated with elections as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

70.       That council supports the provision of an additional $81,000 per year for a full time equivalent position (including associated overhead costs) to support council's economic development activities, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

71.       That council supports the provision of an additional $20,000 in 2018/19, and $50,000 in 2019/20 and 2020/21 to progress stalled proposals for marine protected areas, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

72.       That council supports the provision of $50,000 to complete the hearings process for the new Regional Plan, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

73.       That council supports the provision of an additional $71,000 per year from 2019/20 for a full time equivalent to increase the capacity of the maritime team (including associated overhead costs), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

74.       That council supports the provision of and additional $15,000 in 2018/19, $22,500 in 2019/20, and $30,000 every year following, to fund an increase in remuneration for the region's harbour wardens, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

75.       That council supports the provision of $50,000 per year from 2019/20, for an additional full time equivalent to increase capacity for transport project planning (including associated overhead costs), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

76.       That council supports the provision of a one-off payment of $18,400 in 2019/20 to enable a regional investigation into disability transport need, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

77.       That council supports the provision of an additional $100,000 per year for a human resources manager (including associated overhead costs), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

78.       That council supports the provision of an additional $70,000 per year for a full time equivalent (including associated overhead costs) to enhance financial management, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

79.       That council supports the provision of an additional $152,000 in 2019/20 and 2020/21, and $112,000 every year following to cover costs associated with necessary information technology consolidation and improvement, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

80.       That council supports the provision of an additional one-off cost of $90,000 in 2020/21 to repaint the exterior to the council's Whangārei office to keep it in good repair, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

81.       That council supports the provision of an additional $15,000 in 2018/19, increasing to $40,000 by 2020/21, for vehicle running costs, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

82.       That council supports the provision of an additional $68,000 in 2018/19, increasing to $254,000 by 2020/21 for depreciation to allow for replacement of new capital assets, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

83.       That council supports a reduction in capital expenditure for corporate services by $70,000 in 2018/19 and $80,000 to reflect a reduction in the number of new vehicles.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

84.       The council supports the provision of an additional $100,000 in 2018/19 and $150,000 per year in 2019/20 and 2020/21 for an additional resource and consultant support for the information technology team, to be funded from the Council Services Rate.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

85.       That council supports additional capital expenditure of $300,000 in 2019/20, and $250,000 in 2020/21, for land purchase and development of a far north poplar and willow nursery, to be funded from both council’s Property Reinvestment Fund and the Forestry Equalisation Fund.

86.       That council supports the provision of an additional $6,250 in 2020/21 for deprecation on the development of infrastructure for the Far North poplar and willow nursery, to be funded from the Council Services Rate.

87.       That council supports the provision of an additional $66,285 from 2020/21 for a full time equivalent Far North land management and nursery advisor, to be funded from the Land Management and Freshwater Management rates.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

88.       That council supports an additional $70,000 per year from 2019/20 for an additional full time equivalent monitoring officer, to be funded from the Freshwater Management rates.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

89.       That council supports the provision of an additional $5,000 per year from 2020/21 to meet the demand for Enviroschools Biosecurity and WaiRestoration courses to support delivery of the Enviroschools Strategy to be funded from the Council Services Rate.

 

An amendment was moved (Dimery/Stolwerk)

89.       That council supports the provision of an additional $10,000 per year from 2020/21 to meet the demand for Enviroschools Biosecurity and WaiRestoration courses to support delivery of the Enviroschools Strategy to be funded from the Council Services Rate.

Carried

(Councillor Smart voted against the motion).

The Chairman subsequently put the substantive motion which was Carried (Councillor Smart voted against the motion).

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

90.       That council supports the provision of an additional $72,000 per year from 2020/21 for a new full time equivalent position and associated resources to support delivery of the Enviroschools Strategy to be funded from the Council Services Rate.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

91.       That council supports the provision of an additional $130,588 in 2019/20 and $112,117 in 2020/21 to bring the additional amount available in council's Environment Fund during these years up to $500,000, and supporting land management and biodiversity projects, to be funded from the Land Management and Freshwater Management rates.

Carried

 

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

92.       That council determines to join the Local Government Funding Agency as a guarantor member, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

93.       That council continues to support emergency services via the emergency services rate and that council makes this emergency services fund non-contestable, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

94.       That council supports the continuation of the allocations of funding to: the Northland Emergency Services Trust ($525,000 per year); St John, Northern Region ($90,000 per year); and Coastguard, Northern Region ($84,000 per year);

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

95.       That council supports an increased allocation of funding to Surf Life Saving Northern Region (of $200,000 per year) for sustaining the regional lifeguard service at 6 Northland beaches. 

Carried

(Councillor Stolwerk declared a conflict of interest and abstained from voting on this matter).

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

96.       That council adds Far North and Northland Search and Rescue ($20,000) to the list of organisations supported by the emergency services rate.

Lost

 

Secretarial Note: The meeting adjourned at 11.25am and reconvened at 11.33am.

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

97.       That council increase the emergency services rate from $11.76 per SUIP/rating unit by $0.30, to $12.06 to cover the increased allocation to Surf Life Saving, Northern region. 

Carried

(Councillor Stolwerk declared a conflict of interest and abstained from voting on this matter).

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

98.       That council supports the establishment of a regional sporting facilities rate at a fixed rate of $17.25 a year per SUIP/rating unit ('option 1'), to provide funding support to assist the development of sporting facilities across Northland that are of regional benefit, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

99.       That council allocates funds from the sporting facilities rate to Northland projects of regional significance or benefit where a project is identified and financially supported in relevant Territorial Authority's Long Term Plans, is on the Northland Sports Facilities Plan schedule and has substantially met schedule criteria, is a sporting facility not active recreation facility, involves a new build or significant extension of a current facility (not maintenance or refurbishment) and the fund is used for construction and construction management only.

100.    That staff prepare a paper for the July 2018 council meeting outlining the allocation process and procedures to cover the three years of the LTP 2018-2028.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

101.    That council supports the continuation of the regional infrastructure rate at a rate of $3.49 per $100,000 land value in the Whangārei district, $2.78 in Kaipara district and $3.14 in the Far North district, to fund activities relating to the development and/or completion of the regional infrastructure projects, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

102.    That council supports an increase in the Whangārei transport rate of $7.56, to allow for improvements to be made to the service as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

103.    That council supports an additional increase in the Whangārei transport rate of $2.50, to fund a trial of alternative transport services to Hikurangi, Whangārei Heads and Ruakaka/Waipū as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

104.    That council supports the establishment of a district-wide rate for transport in the Far North of $8.80 per SUIP, to fund the investigation and provision of transport services, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

105.    That council stops funding Creative Northland, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

106.    That council supports the rating policies (including the policy on the remission and postponement of rates on Māori freehold land) as consulted on and to be included in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

107.    That council supports the Revenue and Financing Policy as consulted on, to be included in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028.

Carried

 

Moved (Sinclair/Smart)

108.    That council supports the Significance and Engagement Policy, as consulted on in the Long Term Plan Consultation Document and supporting information, for inclusion in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028, subject to the following amendment:

 

 

Does the matter being considered involve:

 

Degree of significance

What this means

 

Rates

Setting a new rate; or

Increasing an existing specific targeted rate; or

Increasing an existing region wide targeted rate by more than 2% annually above that previously approved in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028.

.

SIGNIFICANT

We will consult

 

Carried

(Councillors Blaikie and Yeoman voted against the motion)

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

109.    That council supports the current arrangements for funding and operating the Investment and Growth Reserve and the Community Investment Fund as set out in the Supporting Information to the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document.

110.    That council supports the proposed level of operational funding for Northland Inc. Limited as set out in the Supporting Information to the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document.

Secretarial Note:  The Chairman signalled his intention to move an additional motion.

Carried

 

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

110A. That council invite Northland Inc to provide council with a recommendation for Investment and Growth Reserve project funding for regional promotions activities, with associated business case and deliverables, up to the value of $200,000 annually for the next three financial years.

Carried

Secretarial Note: The Chairperson in putting the motion called for an expression of opinion by the show of hands; the result being Councillors Bain, Finlayson, Sinclair, Smart and Stolwerk voting in favour of the motion.  Councillors Blaikie, Dimery and Yeoman voted against the motion.

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

111.    That council supports the replacement of the current list of objectives for Northland Inc. Limited in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 with the following list:

·    Advocate and promote the establishment and development of infrastructure that underpins regional economic growth.

·    Attract, facilitate and support investment opportunities in regionally strategic sectors.

·    Promote Northland as a progressive and positive place to visit, do business and live.

·    Provide and facilitate business support services that enable Northland businesses to grow.

·    Increase innovation and entrepreneurship in Northland.

·    Partner with Māori to develop and implement economic development projects for the benefit of Northland.

·    Support and facilitate the implementation of the Tai Tokerau Northland Economic Action Plan.

·    Support tourism product development and infrastructure as enablers of Northland’s tourism sector.

112.    That council supports the replacement of the current key performance measures and targets for Northland Inc. Limited in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 with the following list:

 

Work programme

How we will measure

2017/18 result

2018/19

2019/20

2020/21

Investment and infrastructure

Percentage of IGR business case decisions (by the Board) made within 90 days of receiving application

New measure

100%

Number of inward delegations hosted

New measure

4

4

4

Investment recommendations are accompanied by a robust business case

New measure

100%

Number and value of high impact projects that are implemented

New measure

2

2

2

Business innovation and growth

Number of unique businesses assisted (by TA and industry)

225

230

Value of NZTE and Callaghan Innovation grant funding facilitated

$1.5M

$1.5M

Client satisfaction (as measured by Net Promoter Score)

New measure

75% (NPS 50)

Orchard occupancy rate

45%

60%

65%

70%

Regional promotion and tourism

Visitor spend from target markets

New measure

$1,052M

$1,099M

$1,146M

Value of industry investment in regional promotion activity

$340,408

$350,000

Equivalent Advertising Value achieved from destination marketing

$15M

$16.5M

RTO Net Promoter Score

New measure

40

Action Plan

Percentage of milestones completed

New measure

100%

Māori economic development

Number of unique Māori businesses assisted (by TA and industry)

New measure

30

Number and value of high impact projects that are implemented

New measure

1

1

1

Value of NZTE and Callaghan Innovation grant funding facilitated for Māori businesses

New measure

$50,000

Client satisfaction (as measured by Net Promoter Score for Māori businesses)

New measure

75% (NPS 50)

 

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

113.    That council supports the inclusion of the following list of regionally strategic sectors for the Investment and Growth Reserve (IGR) in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028

·    Agriculture and Horticulture

·    Marine

·    Tourism

·    Digital

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

114.    That council does not make any changes to the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 as a result of submissions on these topics: Climate Change/Sustainability, Core Business, District Council Matters, Finances, GE/GMO, Governance, LTP Process, Mangroves, Mining/Industry, RMA and Roading/Rail.

Carried

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

115.    That council adopts staff recommendations outlined in the spreadsheet (included as Appendix 2 pertaining to Item 3.1 of the 16 May 2018 council agenda) as council decisions, and do not make any changes to the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 as a result of these submission points.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

116.    That council supports the Vision, Mission, Values and Areas of Focus (Community Outcomes), as set out in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document and supporting information document.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

117.    That council supports the capital expenditure required to support council's ongoing activities as included in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 supporting information document, subject to specific resolutions elsewhere in this report.

Carried

 

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

118.    That council notes the submissions opposed to the overall average rate increase however does not agree that the overall average rate increase needs to be lowered for the reasons stated by those submitters.

Carried

 

Council Deliberations on the Charging Policy 2018/19 (Item 3.2)

ID: A1064087

Report from Kyla Carlier, Strategy Specialist

Moved (Shepherd/Sinclair)

1.         That the report ‘Council Deliberations on the Charging Policy 2018/19’ by Kyla Carlier, Strategy Specialist and dated 7 May 2018, be received.

2.         That Jonathan Gibbard, Group Manager - Strategy and Governance be given delegated authority to approve any consequential amendments as a result of council decisions on submissions and any minor accuracy and grammatical amendments.

3.         That council supports the increase in charges contained in the Charging Policy by 2%, as set out in the draft Charging Policy 2018/19.

4.         That council supports the draft Charging Policy 2018/19, as notified, subject to the inclusion of an explanatory note in relation to cancellation of charges for cruise ships and an amendment to section 1.3.5 relating to remissions of charges, as documented in this report.

Carried

 

Secretarial Note: Council extended appreciation to staff for making the deliberations process ‘user-friendly’; which was endorsed by acclamation.

Conclusion

The meeting concluded at 12.11pm.

 


Extraordinary Council Meeting  ITEM: 5.1

21 August 2018Attachment 2

Northland Regional Council Minutes

 

Meeting held in the Council Chamber

36 Water Street, Whangārei

on Tuesday 10 July 2018, commencing at 9.30am

 

 

Present:

Chairman, Bill Shepherd

Deputy Chairman, David Sinclair

Councillors:

John Bain

Paul Dimery

Mike Finlayson

Penny Smart

R Stolwerk

Joce Yeoman

 

In Attendance:

Full Meeting

Chief Executive Officer

GM - Corporate Excellence

Management Accountant

Assistant Management Accountant

Governance Support Manager

 

The Chair declared the meeting open at 9.30am.

Apologies (Item 1.0)

Moved (Sinclair/Smart)

That the apology from Councillor Blaikie for delayed arrival be received.

Carried

 

Secretarial Note: The meeting concluded prior to Councillor Blaikie’s arrival.

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest (Item 2.0)

It was advised that councillors should make declarations item-by-item as the meeting progressed.


 

 

 

1.         Adoption of the rating policies pertaining to the Far North district (Item 3.1)

ID: A1076948

Report from Bree Torkington, Assistant Management Accountant

Moved (Yeoman/Smart)

1.         That the report ‘Adoption of the rating policies pertaining to the Far North district’ by Bree Torkington, Assistant Management Accountant and dated 20 June 2018, be received.

2.         That having undertaken consultation in accordance with sections 82 and 83, and pursuant to section 102 and sections 108-110 of the Local Government Act 2002, and having considered Schedule 11 of the Local Government Act 2002, the council adopt the rating policies for the Far North district (including the Policy on the Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori Freehold Land), effective from 1 July 2018, as attached to this report.

3.         That council authorises Dave Tams, Group Manager – Corporate Excellence, to make any necessary minor drafting, typographical, or presentation corrections to the rating policies prior to the document going to print.

Carried

 

Conclusion

The meeting concluded at 9.31am.

 


Council Meeting  ITEM: 5.1

21 August 2018Attachment 3

Northland Regional Council Minutes

 

Meeting held in the Council Chamber

36 Water Street, Whangārei

on Tuesday 24 July 2018, commencing at 10.30am

 

 

Present:

Chairman, Bill Shepherd

Councillors:

John Bain

Justin Blaikie

Paul Dimery

Mike Finlayson

Penny Smart

Rick Stolwerk

Joce Yeoman

 

In Attendance:

Full Meeting

Chief Executive Officer

Independent Financial Advisor

GM - Environmental Services

Governance Support Manager

Part Meeting

GM - Regulatory Services

GM - Governance and Engagement

GM - Corporate Excellence

 

 

The Chair declared the meeting open at 10.32am.

 

Secretarial Note: The Chief Executive advised that Confidential Item 9.7 had been withdrawn (as per Standing Order 9.9).

Apologies (Item 1.0)

Moved (Shepherd / Stolwerk)

That the apologies from Councillor Sinclair for non-attendance be received.

Carried

 

Declarations of Conflicts of Interest (Item 2.0)

It was advised that councillors should make declarations item-by-item as the meeting progressed.

 

2.         Health and Safety Report (Item 3.0)

ID: A1085047

Report from Tracey Warboys, Health and Safety Specialist

Moved (Smart/Yeoman)

That the report ‘Health and Safety Report’ by Tracey Warboys, Health and Safety Specialist and dated 6 July 2018, be received.

Carried

 

3.         Confirmation of Minutes - 21 June 2018 (Item 4.1)

ID: A1081375

Report from Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager

Moved (Yeoman/Blaikie)

That the minutes of the council meeting held on 21 June 2018 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

 

4.         Receipt of Action Sheet (Item 4.2)

ID: A1084937

Report from Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager

Moved (Finlayson/Stolwerk)

That the action sheet be received.

Carried

 

5.         Council Working Party Updates and Chairpersons' Briefings (Item 4.3)

ID: A1059887

Report from Sally Bowron, Governance and Engagement Team Admin/PA

Moved (Smart/Dimery)

That the report ‘Council Working Party Updates and Chairpersons’ Briefings’ be received.

Carried

 

6.         Council Working Group Updates (Item 4.4)

ID: A1079486

Report from Nola Sooner, Land and Rivers Team Administrator/PA

Moved (Blaikie/Finlayson)

That the report ‘Council Working Group Updates’ be received.

Carried

 

7.         Approval to write off bad debt (Item 5.1)

ID: A1080686

Report from Simon Crabb, Finance Manager

Moved (Blaikie/Stolwerk)

1.         That the report ‘Approval to write off bad debt’ by Simon Crabb, Finance Manager and dated 26 June 2018, be received.

2.         That $196,935 owed by Clear Ridge Station Limited and Beejay Stud Limited is written off against a corresponding specific provision held in council’s balance sheet.

 Carried

 

8.         Amendment to Delegations (Item 6.1)

ID: A1077966

Report from Dave Tams, Group Manager, Corporate Excellence

Moved (Blaikie/Dimery)

1.         That the report ‘Amendment to Delegations’ by Dave Tams, Group Manager, Corporate Excellence and dated 22 June 2018, be received.

2.         That council delegate to the Group Manager, Corporate Excellence all powers, duties and functions under the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.

Carried

 

Secretarial Note:  Clarification was provided that under the Local Government (Rating) Act delegated functions must be made directly from council to officers (the Chief Executive could not sub-delegate these functions).


 

9.         Marsden Maritime Holdings Ltd - Appointment of Directors (Item 6.2)

ID: A1083770

Report from Dave Tams, Group Manager, Corporate Excellence

Moved (Stolwerk/Bain)

1.         That the report ‘Marsden Maritime Holdings Ltd - Appointment of Directors’ by Dave Tams, Group Manager, Corporate Excellence and dated 3 July 2018, be received.

2.         That, consistent with council’s policy on the appointment of directors to council organisations, council establishes a committee comprising of Chair Bill Shepherd, Deputy Chair David Sinclair, Cr Penny Smart, and Cr Paul Dimery, to consider applications and conduct interviews, with responsibility to make a recommendation on preferred candidates to council.

3.         That council appoint Sandra McKersey as an independent member of the committee to provide advice and support.  For the avoidance of doubt, Sandra will be a full member of the committee with voting rights.

 Carried

 

10.      Regional Software Holdings Limited Statement of Intent 2019-2021 (Item 6.3)

ID: A1081796

Report from Carol Cottam, Information Services and Technology Manager

Moved (Yeoman/Blaikie)

1.         That the report ‘Regional Software Holdings Limited Statement of Intent 2019-2021’ by Carol Cottam, Information Services and Technology Manager and dated 28 June 2018, be received.

2.         That council note Regional Software Holdings Limited’s Statement of Intent 2019-2021 as set out in Attachment 1 (pertaining to Item 6.3 of the 24 July 2018 council agenda).

Carried

 

11.      Chair's Report to Council (Item 7.1)

ID: A1081480

Report from Bill Shepherd, Chairman

Moved (Shepherd/Yeoman)

That the report ‘Chair's Report to Council’ by Bill Shepherd, Chairman and dated 2 July 2018, be received.

Carried

 

12.      Chief Executive’s Report to Council (Item 7.2)

ID: A1075383

Report from Malcolm Nicolson, Chief Executive Officer

Moved (Shepherd/Blaikie)

That the report ‘Chief Executive’s Report to Council’ by Malcolm Nicolson, Chief Executive Officer and dated 24 July 2018, be received.

Carried

 

13.      Formal Lodgement of the Ngāti Kuri Environmental Management Plan (Item 7.3)

ID: A1085373

Report from Rachel Ropiha, Kaiarahi - Kaupapa Māori

Moved (Dimery/Finlayson)

That the report ‘Formal Lodgement of the Ngāti Kuri Environmental Management Plan’ by Rachel Ropiha, Kaiarahi - Kaupapa Māori and dated 9 July 2018, be received.

Carried

 

14.      Audit Report on the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 (Item 7.4)

ID: A1078150

Report from Dave Tams, Group Manager, Corporate Excellence, and Jonathan Gibbard, Group Manager – Governance and Engagement

Moved (Shepherd/Bain)

That the report ‘Audit Report on the Long Term Plan 2018-2028’ by Dave Tams, Group Manager, Corporate Excellence and Jonathan Gibbard, Group Manager - Governance and Engagement and dated 22 June 2018, be received.

Carried

 

Secretarial Note:  The Independent Financial Advisor provided commentary on the audit of the Long Term Plan 2018–2028.  Financial staff and the auditors were complimented for their involvement in the process.


 

 

15.      Receipt of Committee Minutes (Item 8.0)

ID: A1081235

Report from Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager

Moved (Stolwerk/Finlayson)

That the unconfirmed/confirmed minutes of the:

·        Property Subcommittee – 8 June 2018 and 3 July 2018;

·        Civil Defence Emergency Management – 19 June 2018; and

·        Investment Subcommittee – 26 June 2018

be received.

Carried

 

Business with Public Excluded (Item 9.0)

Moved (Shepherd/Smart)

1.         That the public be excluded from the proceedings of this meeting to consider confidential matters.

2.         That the general subject of the matters to be considered whilst the public is excluded, the reasons for passing this resolution in relation to this matter, and the specific grounds under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution, are as follows:

Item No.

Item Issue

Reasons/Grounds

9.1

Confirmation of Confidential Minutes – 21 June 2018

The public conduct of the proceedings would be likely to result in disclosure of information, as stated in the open section of the meeting.

9.2

Receipt of Confidential Committee Minutes

The public conduct of the proceedings would be likely to result in disclosure of information, as stated in the open section of the meeting.

 

 

9.3

Human Resources Report

The public conduct of the proceedings would be likely to result in disclosure of information, the withholding of which is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons s7(2)(a).

9.4

Purchase of a Hīhīaua Precinct Property

The public conduct of the proceedings would be likely to result in disclosure of information, the withholding of which is necessary to enable council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities s7(2)(h) and the withholding of which is necessary to enable council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) s7(2)(i).

9.5

Purchase of a Commercial Property in Kaitāia

The public conduct of the proceedings would be likely to result in disclosure of information, the withholding of which is necessary to enable council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities s7(2)(h) and the withholding of which is necessary to enable council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) s7(2)(i).

 

9.6

Sale of Council's Lessor's Interest to Freehold a Whangārei CBD Property

The public conduct of the proceedings would be likely to result in disclosure of information, the withholding of which is necessary to enable council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities s7(2)(h) and the withholding of which is necessary to enable council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) s7(2)(i).

 

9.7

Proposal for a significant property development

This item was withdrawn.

3.         That the Independent Financial Advisor be permitted to remain during business with the public excluded.

 

Carried

 

Conclusion

The meeting concluded at 11.53am.

 

 

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 5.2

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Receipt of Action Sheet

ID:

A1095594

From:

Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager

 

Executive summary

The purpose of this report is to enable the meeting to receive the current action sheet.

 

Recommendation

That the action sheet be received.

 

Attachments

Attachment 1: Action Sheet - August 2018  

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Chris Taylor

Title:

Governance Support Manager

Date:

14 August 2018

 


Council Meeting  ITEM: 5.2

21 August 2018Attachment 1

 

Id

Meeting

Date Completed

Description

Request Details

Most Recent Comment

4534

Council 24/07/2018

30/07/18

Amendment to Delegations

That the Delegation Manual be updated to reflect the delegation to the GM Corporate Excellence under the Local Government Rating Act 2002.

Delegations Manual updated accordingly.

4537

Council 24/07/2018

8/08/18

Northland Marine Pathway Plan

That a letter be drafted to compliment the biosecurity team on the highly commended award received at the LGNZ conference for the Northland Marine Pathway Plan.

Letter sent to Don McKenzie on 30 July 2018

 

Outstanding Actions

 

Id

Meeting

Target Date

Description

Request Details

Most Recent Comment

4538

Council 24/07/2018

7/08/18

LGNZ magazine

That consideration be given to circulating the LGNZ magazine to media contacts.

 

4539

Council 24/07/2018

7/08/18

Formal Lodgement of the Ngāti Kuri Environmental Management Plan

That councillors be provided a copy of the Ngati Kuri Environmental Management Plan.  The questions contained in the plan to be workshopped with council; including a suggested way forward.

 

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 5.3

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Council Working Party Updates and Chairpersons' Briefings

ID:

A1086407

 

Recommendation

That the report ‘Council Working Party Updates and Chairpersons' Briefings’ be received.

 

Te Taitokerau Māori and Council Working Party             (Co-chairs Cr Dimery and member Tipene)

The Te Taitokerau Māori and Council Working Party met on 5 July 2018.  The topics for discussion

included:

·    Updates on the council’s applications to the Provincial Growth Fund, the 2018 representation review and biosecurity risks, Mycoplasma bovis and Myrtle Rust.  Ngāti Rehia also provided some background to the training and work they have been doing under the guidance of the national response to Myrtle Rust.

·    TTMAC August Regional Marae Based Hui which will be hosted by Te Uri o Hau at Te Arai Nursery and Tara Iti.

Following discussion, the working party provided advice on the following next steps:

·    That council providing a bus to enabling all TTMAC members to travel together for the August regional marae-based hui at Te Arai Nursery so that members could learn about nursery operations.

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Jonathan Gibbard

Title:

Group Manager - Governance and Engagement

Date:

15 August 2018

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 5.4

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Council Working Group Updates

ID:

A1092341

 

Recommendation

That the report ‘Council Working Group Updates’ be received.

 

 

 

Waitangi Catchment Group (Interim Chair – Duncan Kervell)

The Waitangi Catchment Group met on 7 July 2018.  The topics for discussion included:

·    An update was provided to the group regarding the recently MPI approved DairyNZ Sustainable Farming Fund project based in the Waitangi Catchment regarding productive riparian zones.

·    Enviroschools nursery update and details of decision approved.

·    Update from Sustainable Coastlines regarding Waitangi based nursery and trees in the catchment.

·    Waitangi Catchment Plan – landowners’ field day.

 

Following discussion, the Waitangi Catchment Group provided advice on the following next steps:

·    DairyNZ are looking for expressions of interest from the Waitangi Catchment group for who might want to be involved in the governance group for the Sustainable Farming Fund project, and who would be happy to have demonstration sites on their farms.

·    Staff to arrange for Sam Judd, Co-Founder of Sustainable Coastlines, to speak to the catchment group.

 

Kaeo River – Whangaroa Catchment Working Group (Chair - Councillor Justin Blaikie)

The Kaeo River – Whangaroa Catchment Working Group met on 6 July 2018. The topics for discussion included:

·        Budget for 2018/2019.

·        Maintenance works update 2017/2018 and proposed works 2018/2019.

·        Long Term Plan.

·        Shepherds Forest update.

Following discussion, Kaeo River – Whangaroa Catchment Working Group agreed to the following actions:

·        Earmark $50,000 from the surplus budget to address ongoing flooding issues at Matangirau and for a bridge upgrade if required.

·        NRC staff to contact Summit Forest representatives to ask them to provide details on their planting programme around steep areas.

 

Kaihu River Working Group (Chair – Councillor John Bain)

The Kaihu River Working Group met on 9 July 2018.  The topics for discussion included:

·        Terms of Reference.

·        2018/2019 budget and proposed works programme.

·        Northland irrigation study update.

Following discussion, the Kaihu River Working Group agreed to the following actions:

·        Kaipara District Council – representative – letter to be sent to the Mayor of Kaipara District Council requesting that a councillor is appointed to the Kaihu River Working Group.

·        Spraying to be undertaken by helicopter and for any small areas not accessible by helicopter, staff will arrange for those areas to be sprayed by boat.

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Bruce Howse

Title:

Group Manager - Environmental Services

Date:

09 August 2018

 

  


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 6.1

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Request for Approval to Carry Forward Operational Budget from the 2017/18 Financial Year into the 2018/19 Financial Year

ID:

A1094558

From:

Vincent McColl, Financial Accountant and Simon Crabb, Finance Manager

 

Executive Summary

Unspent 2017/18 operational budget of $63,969 is proposed to be carried forward into the 2018/19 financial year to fund the completion of operational projects.

In addition, $66,146 of previously approved unspent operational budget will also be carried forward into 2018/19 and used to fund the completion of capital projects.

 

Recommendations

1.         That the report ‘Request for Approval to Carry Forward Operational Budget from the 2017/18 Financial Year into the 2018/19 Financial Year’ by Vincent McColl, Financial Accountant and Simon Crabb, Finance Manager and dated 8 August 2018, be received.

2.         That council approves the operational expenditure carry forwards from the 2017/18 financial year into the 2018/19 financial year of:

a.         $50,000 for Regional plan hearings; and

b.        $6,382 for removal of the Stanaway marine vessel

c.         $7,587 for the Ecosystem prioritisation project related project.

3.         That council notes $66,146 of unspent operational budget, approved under Schedule 3 of the Delegations Manual in 2017/18, has been carried forward into the 2018/19 financial year to fund:

a.         $37,756 for the Flyger road nursery expansion.

b.        $28,390 for the Tutukaka beacon replacement project

 

 

Background

As with previous years, carry forwards of unspent 2017/18 operational budgets are required to enable the completion of the various operational and capital projects in the 2018/19 financial year.

Following the 30 June 2018 year-end staff review, 5 projects totalling $130,115 were identified as requiring unspent 2017-18 operational budgets to be carried forward as funding in 2018/19. $63,969 related to operational work programmes.  $66,146 related to capital projects and was approved by under the delegation manual during the 2017/18 year.

The total of $130,115 has been incorporated into the draft financial result. The projects requiring this funding are explained over the page:

 

 

 

OPERATIONAL PROJECTS

2017/18 Budget

2017/18 Spent

2017/18 Budget Unspent

 Amount to Carry forward

Regional plan hearings

93,343

22,161

71,182

50,000

Stanaway Marine Vessel Removal

60,000

18,665

41,335

6,382

Ecosystem Prioritisation Project

26,308

18,721

7,587

7,587 

 

·    $50,000 for Regional plan hearing commissioner and associated hearing costs (e.g. venue hire, commissioner disbursements, printing and catering etc).  It was originally expected to hold hearings in June 2018 but now they are to be held in August 2018.

 

·    $6,382 for the removal of old boat sheds that was delayed due to health and safety documentation and weather issues.  This was carried out in July 2018.

 

·    $7,587 for the Ecosystem Prioritisation Project which was delayed due to availability of the contractor.  This project has partial contributions from district councils that have also been deferred.

 

 

CAPITAL PROJECTS

2017/18 Budget

2017/18 Spent

2017/18 Budget Unspent

 Amount to Carry forward

Flyger road nursery expansion

40,000

2,244

37,756

37,756

Tutukaka beacon replacement

28,390

0

28,390

28,390

 

·    $37,756 for the Flyger road nursery expansion work that is underway but expected to be completed in the 2018/19 financial year.  This funding was approved under schedule 3 of the Delegations Manual.

 

·    $28,390 for the Tutukaka beacon replacements delayed due to the contractor experiencing some equipment failure.  This is now expected to be completed in the 2018/19 financial year.  This funding was also approved under schedule 3 of the Delegations Manual.

 

 

Considerations

1.                                   1.      Options

No.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

Approve carry forward of all requested unspent operational budgets

Allows the completion of 2017/18 projects

Reduces retained earnings though at budgeted levels.

2

Approve no unspent operational budget carry forwards

Retains more surplus in the 2017/18 financial year.

Projects from the 2017/18 financial year do not get finished or 2018/19 programmes must be deferred to allow for 2017/18 work already contracted.

3

Approve some of the unspent operational budget carry forwards

Some projects will go ahead.

Some projects will not go ahead.  Some of 2018/19 programmes might be deferred to allow for 2017/18 work already contracted.

The staff’s recommended option is option 1 to maintain all contractual work programmes.

 

2.      Significance and engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, this decision is considered to be of low significance when assessed against council’s significance and engagement policy because it is part of council’s day to day activities. 

 

3.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

The activities detailed in this report are in accordance with the 2017/18 Annual Plan and 2018–28 Long Term Plan, both of which were approved in accordance with council’s decision making requirements of sections 76–82 of the Local Government Act 2002.

 

Other considerations

4.      Financial implications

In arriving at the draft surplus of $20,542, $63,969 has been deducted to represent the proposed operational carry forwards. A further $66,146 has also been deducted to represent the unspent operational budgets already approved to fund capital projects.

 

Being a purely administrative matter, community views, implementation issues and Māori impact statement are not applicable.

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Dave Tams

Title:

Group Manager, Corporate Excellence

Date:

14 August 2018

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 6.2

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Request for Approval to Carry Forward Capital Expenditure Budget from the 2017/18 Financial Year into the 2018/19 Financial Year

ID:

A1093840

From:

Vincent McColl, Financial Accountant and Simon Crabb, Finance Manager

 

Executive Summary

The purpose of this report is to seek council approval to carry forward $605,605 of unspent general capital budget from the 2017/18 financial year into the 2018/19 financial year. It should be noted that $66,146 of unspent 2017/18 operational budgets has already been approved as a source of funding for the Flyger Road nursery expansion and Tutukaka beacon projects.

 

Recommendations

1.         That the report ‘Request for Approval to Carry Forward Capital Expenditure Budget from the 2017/18 Financial Year into the 2018/19 Financial Year’ by Vincent McColl, Financial Accountant and Simon Crabb, Finance Manager and dated 3 August 2018, be received.

2.         That council approves the carry forward of $605,605 general capital expenditure budget from the 2017/18 financial year into the 2018/19 financial year, noting that $66,146 will be funded from unspent 2017/18 operational budgets.

 

Background

Staff have carried out a final review on any ongoing capital projects and associated capital expenditure carry forwards for council consideration and approval.

As part of the budget process finance staff ensure that all capital expenditure is adequately funded via depreciation over the expected useful life of each asset class.

Following the 30 June 2018 year-end staff review, which was based upon the actual capital expenditure incurred and the review of ongoing requirements, a total of $605,605 is proposed to be carried forward into 2018/19.  This is made up entirely of general capital expenditure as opposed to Capital Expenditure (Capex) funded by targeted rates.

 

2017/18 Actual and Budgeted Capital Expenditure

The revised capital expenditure budget for 2017/18 is $2,389,428.  The total actual capital expenditure incurred in 2017/18 is $11,688,840, resulting in an overspend of $9,299,411.  Of this $9,368,246 relates to unbudgeted commercial property transactions that are funded from the Property Reinvestment Fund.  For a breakdown of this please refer to Attachment One.

 

2018/19 Budgeted Capital Expenditure and Proposed Carry Forwards

The original 2018/19 capital expenditure budget is $5,190,265, and by adding the total requested 2017/18 carry forwards of $605,605, this budget will increase to $5,795,870.  The detail of the original 2018/19 capital expenditure programme and the proposed capital carry forwards are presented in Attachment Two.

 


 

 

Explanations to proposed capital carry forward expenditure for 2017/18

Monitoring: Proposed capital expenditure carry forward reduction of $3,414

Approval of a reduction of $3,414 capital expenditure reduction is sought in relation to:

·     $3,414 for the early replacement of a broken air conditioning unit.  State of the Environment (SOE) used some of the 2018/19 hardware replacement budget to replace an air conditioning unit that broke down in the 2017/18 financial year.  Thus, there was an overspend in 2017/18 and an offsetting reduction of $3,414 is required to the 2018/19 budget.

 

Land and Biodiversity: Proposed capital expenditure carry forward $72,473

Approval of $72,473 capital carry forward expenditure is sought:

·     $37,756 towards the Flyger Road nursery expansion.  The work is underway but expected to be completed in the 2018/19 financial year.  As presented in agenda item 6.1 this project is to be funded from an unspent operational budget and has already been approved under schedule 3 of the Delegations Manual.

·     $34,717 for the Riparian Planner initiative.  This Landcare Research project has suffered delays around software development scoping.

 

Harbour Safety: Proposed capital expenditure carry forward $38,972

Approval of $38,972 capital carry forward expenditure is sought:

·     $10,582 of the balance of the Automatic Identification system project is being requested to be used for improvements to Bay of Islands pilotage.

·     $28,390 for the Tutukaka beacon replacements delayed due to the contractor experiencing some equipment failure.  This is now expected to be completed in the 2018/19 financial year.  As presented in agenda item 6.1 this project is to be funded from an unspent operational budget and has already been approved under schedule 3 of the Delegations Manual.

 

River Management: Proposed capital expenditure carry forward $120,563

Approval of $120,563 capital carry forward expenditure is sought:

·     $92,308 for Hydrology safety system corrections.  This work is under contract and will run into 2018/19.

·     $28,256 for Awanui River flood scheme emergency preparedness.  This project was approved at council to be funded by the Land Management Reserve and the Equalisation Fund.  It is expected to be completed in early 2018/19.

 

Information Systems: Proposed capital expenditure carry forward $338,284

Approval of $338,284 capital carry forward expenditure is sought in relation to:

·     2018/19 new staff set up of $11,716 was incurred in 2017/18 and a reduction needs to be carried forward and applied to the 2018/19 revised capital budget.

·     Contribution to the future rating shared service of $300,000 as a recognition of the potential cost of future rating and rates collection.  The cost is not known at this time as the final configuration of any future solutions is unknown. 

·     Business Intelligence implementation of $50,000 was delayed due to a wider initiative within the regional sector to work more collaboratively across councils. 

 


 

 

Communications: Proposed capital expenditure carry forward $33,121

Approval of $33,121 capital carry forward expenditure is sought:

·     $11,712 to complete work on new display equipment delayed due to issues with the external designer.

·     $21,409 for the phone and contact system upgrade.  This was delayed due to the need to reassess once the enterprise solution is known.  Interim solutions are still being investigated.

 

Transport: Proposed capital expenditure carry forward $13,602

Approval of $13,602 capital carry forward expenditure is sought:

·     For the development of an electronic ticketing system for the bus services.  This is a national project that council is a part of.  This project is underway.

 

Property / Support: Proposed capital expenditure carry forward reduction $7,996

Approval of a reduction of $7,996 capital carry forward expenditure is sought in relation to:

·     Corporate Excellence move of $7,996 was spent in 2017/18 as Corporate Excellence had the opportunity to move to the third floor earlier than expected.  Thus, there was an overspend in 2017/18 and an offsetting reduction of $7,996 is required to the 2018/19 budget.

Considerations

Options

No.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

Approve carry forward of all requested capital carry forwards

Allows the completion of the 2017/18 capital programme.

Reduces retained earnings at budgeted levels.

2

Approve none of the Capex carry forwards

Retains more earnings for other capital projects.

Projects underway or delayed won’t get the required funding to be completed.

3

Approve some of the Capex carry forwards

Some of the capital projects get to be completed.

Some of the capital projects don’t get completed.

The staff’s recommended option is Option 1.  This maintains the unspent capital programme budget from 2017/18 allowing projects that are underway and delayed to be completed.

 

2.      Significance and engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, this decision is considered to be of low significance when assessed against council’s Significance and Engagement Policy because it is part of council’s day to day activities. 

 

3.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

The activities detailed in this report are in accordance with the 2017/18 Annual Plan and  2018–28 Long Term Plan, both of which were approved in accordance with council’s decision making requirements of sections 76–82 of the Local Government Act 2002.

 

Other Considerations

4.      Financial implications

$605,605 of capital carried forward from the 2017/18 financial year to the 2018/19 financial year, with $66,146 funded from previously approved unspent 2017-18 operational budget.

Being a purely administrative matter, community views, implementation issues and Māori impact statement are not applicable.

 

Attachments

Attachment 1: 2017/18 Actual and Budgeted Capital Expenditure

Attachment 2: 2018/19 Budgeted Capital Expenditure and Proposed Carry Forwards  

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Dave Tams

Title:

Group Manager, Corporate Excellence

Date:

14 August 2018

 



Council Meeting  ITEM: 6.2

21 August 2018Attachment 1

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting  ITEM: 6.2

21 August 2018Attachment 2

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 6.3

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Special Reserves at 30 June 2018

ID:

A1095483

From:

Simon Crabb, Finance Manager and Vincent McColl, Financial Accountant

 

Executive Summary

At 30 June 2018, council has $22.6M of special reserves set aside to cover expenditure on specific projects and work programmes.

This report provides a breakdown of the special reserves held by council, including their purpose and balance as at 30 June 2018.

 

Recommendation

That the report ‘Special Reserves at 30 June 2018’ by Simon Crabb, Finance Manager and Vincent McColl, Financial Accountant and dated 8 August 2018, be received.

 

Background

The equity in council’s balance sheet represents the communities’ interest in council and is measured by the value of total assets less total liabilities.  Equity is classified into a number of general and special reserves to enable a clearer identification of the specified uses for which various funds have been assigned.

A general reserve does not have a specific purpose, whereas a special reserve holds funds that are set aside to cover expenditure on specific projects.  In addition special reserves may facilitate the funding of works of an inter-generational nature, capital expenditure in particular, over the most appropriate time period.

The special reserves and their respective balances (surplus/(deficit)) in place at the end of the 2017/18 financial year are as follows:

Land Management Reserve

370,094

Awanui River Reserve

(861,974)

Kaihu River Reserve

90,365

Whangaroa Kaeo Rivers Reserve

127,630

Whangārei Urban Rivers Reserve

(9,606,486)

Infrastructure Facilities Reserve (Marsden Point Rail Link)

(2,814,161)

Recreational Facilities Reserve

27,518

Property Reinvestment Fund Reserve

18,443,917

Equalisation Reserve

954,319

Hātea River Reserve

175,617

Investment and Growth Reserve

2,184,603

Approved Carry Forwards Reserve

187,145

Kerikeri-Waipapa Rivers Reserve

453,198

Kaitāia Bus Service Reserve

38,412

Whangarei Heads Pest Management Reserve

546

Infrastructure Investment Fund Reserve

12,129,210

Whangārei Transport Reserve

(144,569)

Emergency Services Reserve

148,736

Mid North Bus Reserve

87,768

LIDAR Project Reserve

546,934

Capital Subsidy Reserve (Ticketing System)

67,017

Total Special Reserves

$ 22,605,291

 

Some special reserves earn, or are charged interest depending on their closing balance being in deficit or surplus.  Our current protocol is for reserves in surplus of $50,000 or greater earn interest at 5% (being the budgeted rate in the Long Term Plan (LTP)).  Reserves in deficit are charged interest at 4.12% (being the average cost of external borrowing).

A description of the purpose of each reserve, the transfers from and/or to the reserve for the year, and the closing balance of each reserve as at 30 June 2018 is provided below.

 

Land Management Reserve

The Land Management Reserve was created to allow council to set aside unutilised Land Management rates for the purpose of funding projects in future years.  In addition, the Land Management Reserve can be utilised to fund emergency events such as remedial storm expenditure on a case by case basis, thereby reducing the need for borrowing in the event of an emergency.

The operational reserve movements of ($335,790) from the Land Management Reserve constitute funding contributions towards the Environment Fund of $108,351, council’s LIDAR contribution of $100,000, and other land management projects of $127,439.  The capital reserve movements constitute funding contributions towards a Freshwater Improvement Fund project of $22,388 and the Awanui River flood scheme emergency preparedness capital of $51,744.  This produces a closing balance of $370,094.

In 2018/19 $352,778 is committed to come from this reserve for Freshwater Improvement Fund projects and a portion of the Awanui River flood scheme emergency preparedness costs.  Taking these future commitments into account the estimated reserve balance at 30 June 2019 is $17,316.

 

Awanui River Reserve

The Awanui River Reserve was created to hold any targeted Awanui River Management rates collected and unspent in any given year to cover any future funding shortfalls for river works required as part of the Awanui River Flood Management Scheme.

In the 2017/18 financial year the Awanui River Management project had an operating surplus of $45,489.  Capital expenditure of $212,951 was incurred with $126,605 of depreciation funding transferred from the Infrastructure Investment Fund (IIF) producing a closing book and cash reserve deficit of ($735,368).

 

Whangaroa Kaeo Rivers Reserve

The Whangaroa Kaeo Rivers Reserve was created to hold any targeted Whangaroa Kaeo Rivers Management rates collected and unspent in any given year to cover any future funding shortfalls of river works required as part of the Whangaroa Kaeo Rivers Flood Management scheme.

In the 2017/18 financial year there was an operating surplus of $57,642 resulting in a closing reserve balance of $127,630.  Unused accumulated depreciation of $17,357 is held in the IIF resulting in a closing cash balance of $144,987.

 

Whangārei Urban Rivers Reserve

The Whangārei Urban Rivers Reserve was created in the 2011/12 year to hold any targeted Whangārei Urban Rivers Management rates collected and unspent in any given year to cover any future funding shortfalls of river works required as part of the flood risk reduction project for the Whangārei CBD.

The operating surplus of $364,324 has been transferred to the reserve.  This produces a deficit/overdrawn balance of ($9,606,486).  Adding the unused accumulated depreciation held in the IIF gives a cash balance of ($9,484,075).

Infrastructure Investment Fund (IIF) Reserve

The IIF Reserve was established to stabilise the impact of irregular large infrastructure projects on council’s income and capital requirements.   It will help to spread the costs of such projects.  The fund is also intended to provide more flexibility around when such large capital intensive projects can commence.

The balance of the reserve reflects the balance of funds held in the IIF.  During the 2017/18 year $272,826 is proposed to be transferred into the reserve representing reinvestment of gains achieved above budgeted levels.  The IIF Reserve also holds $139,767 of unutilised accumulated depreciation and $1,068,841 of capital repayments collected and held to repay external borrowings.

 

 

Kaihu River Reserve

The Kaihu River Reserve was created to hold any targeted Kaihu River Management rates collected and unspent in any given year to cover any future funding shortfalls for river works required as part of the Kaihu River Flood Management Scheme.

In the 2017/18 financial year there was an operating surplus of $10,914 transferred to the reserve producing a closing balance of $90,365.

 


 

Kerikeri–Waipapa Rivers Reserve

The Kerikeri–Waipapa Rivers Reserve is set up to hold any targeted Kerikeri-Waipapa rates collected and unspent in any given year to cover any future funding shortfalls of river works required as part of the flood risk reduction project for the Kerikeri-Waipapa area.

The Kerikeri–Waipapa targeted rate was discontinued in 2017/18 resulting in an operating deficit of ($14,195) which has been transferred from the reserve.

 

Infrastructure Facilities Reserve

The Infrastructure Facilities Reserve was created to set aside any targeted Regional Infrastructure rates collected and not fully utilised in any given year for the purpose of funding future infrastructure projects. This reserve consists of the cost of capital, holding costs, and council’s share of the costs for the designation asset associated with the Marsden Point Rail Link (MPRL) Joint Venture project.

The operating surplus of $707,734 and council’s share of the designation asset of ($3,065,482) have been transferred into the reserve producing a closing balance of ($2,814,162) overdrawn.

 

Recreational Facilities Reserve

The Recreational Facilities Reserve was established to set aside any targeted Regional Recreational Facilities rates collected and not fully utilised in any given year for the purpose of funding the Northland Events Centre. 

During the 2017/18 year the surplus Targeted Regional Recreational Facilities rates of $968,925 has been transferred to this reserve resulting in a closing surplus reserve balance of $27,518.

 

Property Reinvestment Fund Reserve

The Property Reinvestment Fund (PRF) Reserve was created to enable proceeds from property sales to be set aside for reinvestment at a future date.

During 2017/18 this reserve recognised $7,404,089 of property sale proceeds and $9,368,246 of property purchases.  In addition, it is proposed that $453,130 of PRF gains are reinvested generating a closing balance of $18,443,917.

 

Equalisation Reserve

The Equalisation Reserve was created to set aside council’s forestry net income arising in any harvesting year.  This reserve is intended to provide future funding of council’s general activities by allowing council to use these funds for any council activity to smooth future rating increases.  It is further intended that this fund be used to fund the cost of forestry operations in non-harvesting years.

A total of $434,284 is required from the Equalisation Reserve to cover LTP costs, the Rogan legal fees, the Awanui River flood scheme emergency preparedness carry forward, and forestry operations.  These movements resulted in a closing balance of $954,319.  This closing balance is largely in line with the 2018–28 LTP opening position of $846,000, suggesting there is an adequate balance to provide the necessary funding signalled in the 2018–28 LTP.

 

Hātea River Reserve

The Hātea River Reserve was created to set aside a component of the council’s Services Rate ($1.50+GST) specifically levied across the Whangārei constituency to ensure funding is immediately available in the event dredging of the Hātea River is required.

This year there was an operating surplus of $11,767 transferred to the reserve producing a closing reserve balance of $175,167.

 

Investment and Growth Reserve

The Northland Regional Council Investment and Growth Reserve was established in 2011/12.  The reserve was created to set aside investment income to fund activities and projects that contribute towards the economic well-being of Northland.

 

 

Approved Carry Forwards Reserve

The Approved Carry Forwards Reserve was set up to record operational projects for council that have not been completed during the current year and need to be carried forward to the next financial year.  This is the subject of agenda item 6.1.  At 30 June 2018 the closing balance of the projects proposed to be carried forward is $187,145 (excluding LIDAR which has been carried forward into its own reserve).

 

Kaitāia Bus Service Reserve

The Kaitāia Bus Service Reserve was created to hold any targeted Kaitāia Transport rates collected and unspent in any given year to cover any future funding shortfalls of Kaitāia bus service.

The operating surplus of $8,094 has been transferred to the reserve producing the closing reserve balance of $38,412.  This closing balance will be utilised when setting the 2019/20 targeted Kaitāia Transport rate.

 

Whangārei Heads Pest Management Reserve

The Whangārei Heads Pest Management Reserve was created to hold any targeted Whangārei Heads Pest Management rates collected and unspent in any given year to cover any future funding shortfalls in the Whangārei Pest Management programme.

 

This year there was a deficit from operating of ($12,943) transferred from the reserve producing a closing reserve balance of $546. This will be spent in 2018/19 on traps for stoat control in the Whangarei Heads area.

 

Whangārei Transport Reserve

The Whangārei Transport Reserve was created to hold any targeted Whangārei Transport rates collected and unspent in any given year to cover any future funding shortfalls in the Whangārei bus and total mobility programmes.

In 2017/18 Whangārei Bus made a deficit of ($133,876) and Total Mobility made a surplus of $46,390.  This resulted in $87,486 being transferred out of the reserve making the reserve balance a deficit of ($144,569).  This deficit will be taken into account when setting the 2019/20 Whangārei Transport rates.

 

During 2017/18 two projects were not completed.  The timetable displays and maintenance project of $25,750 were delayed due to regional ticketing system delays.  The Citylink CPI claim of $22,000 is still uncertain.  Any costs relating to these two projects are now expected to be incurred in 2018/19 and will be funded from this reserve.

 

Emergency Services Reserve

The Emergency Services Reserve was created to hold any targeted Emergency Services rates collected and unspent in any given year to ensure all collected rates go to emergency services in the future.

The closing balance of $148,736 represents three years of targeted rates collected (and adjusted for non-collection) and not allocated to date.

 

Mid North Bus Reserve

The Mid North Bus Service Reserve was created to hold any targeted Mid North Transport rates collected and unspent in any given year to cover any future funding shortfalls of the Mid North bus service.

The operating surplus of $55,948 was generated during the year and we refunded $112,015 to ratepayers who had been rated and were outside of the rating area.

 

LIDAR Reserve

The LIDAR Reserve was created to hold any LIDAR contributions as this project is run over a number of years and includes funding from seven parties.

The current unspent funding of $100,000, has been transferred to the reserve.  The reserve balance at 30 June 2018 is $546,934, consisting of $496,934 of council funding and $50,000 of Land Information New Zealand (LINZ) funding.

 

Capital Subsidy Reserve

There is $67,017 of subsidy received held in this reserve to partially offset future depreciation costs associated with the Regional Integrated Ticketing Information System (RITIS).

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Dave Tams

Title:

Group Manager, Corporate Excellence

Date:

14 August 2018

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                        item: 6.4

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Regional Rates Collection for 2017/18

ID:

A1094292

From:

Simon Crabb, Finance Manager

 

Executive Summary

Council received $22.8M of its 2017/18 rate strike, representing 92.2% (2016/17 92.8%), with the average three year current collection rate rising to 92.5% (2016/17: 91.9%). 

$720K of rate arrears were collected in 2017/18 representing 17.3% of the arrears balance.  This was lower than the corresponding 2016/17 levels of $766K and 19.8%.

The overall level of outstanding rates owed to council, as presented in the 2017/18 Annual Accounts, is $3.02M (2016: $2.95M), with council holding a provision of $2.43M or 80.4% (2016/17 $2.39M, 81%) to offset the prospect of not collecting these rates.

 

Recommendation

That the report ‘Regional Rates Collection for 2017/18’ by Simon Crabb, Finance Manager and dated 6 August 2018, be received.

 

Background

Confirmation of council’s rates transactions and outstanding rate balances as at 30-6-2018 are provided by each district council as part of the year-end Annual Report process. 

 

Attachment 1 is the Rates Reconciliation Statement for the year ended 30 June 2018.  This reconciliation summarises council’s rate strike, cash received, remissions, write-offs, penalties charged, and includes the Māori Freehold Land impairment adjustment that are all accounted for when calculating council’s annual rates revenue and outstanding rate arrears in our year-end accounts.

 

2017/18 current year rates

In 2017/18 council received $22,784,394 representing 92.2% (2016/17: $22,531,271, 92.8%) of the annual rates strike.  The average current rates collection rate over the past three years has risen to 92.53% (2016/17: 91.9%).

·     Graph 1 over the page presents the level of current rates received per district council over the past six years.

 

2017/18 total outstanding rate arrears

As at 30 June 2018, council’s total outstanding rate arrears in its year-end accounts is $3,022,207.  This reflects an increase of $71,286 from last year’s balance of $2,950,921.

Rate arrears (including penalty arrears) collected in 2017/18 totalled $719,626 representing a collection rate of 17.3% (2016/17: $766,475, 19.8%) excluding the MFL impairment adjustments.  The average rate arrears collection rate over the past three years has reduced to 20.7% (2016-17 22.5%).

 

In dollar terms the Far North District Council collected $384,604 (2016/17 $360,046) of its rate arrears. Whangārei District Council collected $170,434 (2016/17 $221,439) noting that, less than 20 General Title properties contribute to their outstanding arrears.  Kaipara District collected $164,587 (2016/17: $184,934) noting that they did not chase arrears for some time throughout the year while the Rogan court case was proceeding. 


 

Graph 2 presents the rate arrears collection rate per district council over the past six years.

 

 

Rating impairment required under IPSAS 23

The Accounting Standard IPSAS 23 governs the recognition and measurement of rating revenue and this standard stipulates that revenue is recognised when it is probable that council is going to receive payment.

Due to our historical experience of non-payment of rates on Māori Freehold Land, it was considered necessary (and confirmed as necessary by Deloitte) that the 2017/18 rates revenue struck on Far North Māori Freehold Land (MFL) should be reduced and a corresponding reduction made to the provision for doubtful debts expense.  The overall effect is lower revenue, lower expenditure and no impact on the bottom line for the year.  The amount of the MFL adjustment for 2017/18 is $377,087 which is largely in line with last year’s adjustment of $375,494.

 

Māori Freehold Land (MFL)

The table below presents the amount of MFL rates collected compared to the amount struck in 2017/18, the amount of arrears collected during the 2017/18 year, and the overall balance of outstanding MFL rates owing to council at 30 June 2018.  The Far North figures are taken from the FNDC report in Attachment 3 and exclude MFL impairment adjustments.  Kaipara did not supply figures for this table by the agenda deadline.

Maori Freehold Land (MFL) Rates 2017/18

Current MFL Rates Struck*

Current MFL Rates Collected

MFL Rate Arrears Collected

MFL Rate Arrears Closing Balance

Whangārei District Council

164,296

(127,066)

(38,821)

158,368

Far North District Council

606,062

(200,443)

(33,026)

2,768,763

Kaipara District Council

-

-

-

-

TOTAL

$ 770,358

$ (327,509)

$ (71,847)

$ 2,927,131

* including current rate adjustments

Provision for rate doubtful debts at 30 June 2018

Attachment 2 presents the provision for doubtful rates calculation at 30 June 2018.

The rationale behind the rates doubtful debt calculation is:

·   All outstanding rate arrear penalties are 100% provided for.

·   All other rate arrears are provided for by the three year average non-collection percentage specific to each district council.

·   The IPSAS rating revenue impairment is removed from the provision for doubtful debts, as it is already accounted for as reduced revenue.

Based on the above rational, the total provision for rate doubtful debts at 30 June 2018 is $2,430,735 representing 80.4% of the total arrears balance (2016/17 $2,393,521, 81%).  The 2016/17 provision included 100% of the Kaipara rate arrears from 2012–2016 as we awaited the Rogan case judgement.  This requirement is no longer necessary, and the basis of the Kaipara provision has reverted back to their three year average non-collection rate of 56.84%

 

Far North District Council Revenue and Collections Quarterly Report 30 June 2018

Attachment 3 is a report provided by FNDC on the actions in place to collect current rates and rate arrears.  This report reflects the balances in the Far North District Council rating database.  As such it excludes the accumulated MFL rating impairment adjustment made in council’s accounts.  Far North District Council staff are in Auckland on 21 August 2018 and unable to attend the NRC meeting.  Any questions for FNDC in respect to this agenda item can be relayed via NRC staff

Attachments

Attachment 1: 2017-18 Rates Reconciliation Statement

Attachment 2: 2017-18 Provision for Doubtful Rates Calculation

Attachment 3: 2017-18 Far North District Council - Revenue and Collections Quarterly Report to 30 June 2018  

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Dave Tams

Title:

Group Manager, Corporate Excellence

Date:

10 August 2018

 



Council Meeting  ITEM: 6.4

21 August 2018Attachment 1

PDF Creator



Council Meeting  ITEM: 6.4

21 August 2018Attachment 2

PDF Creator



Council Meeting                                                                                                                       ITEM: 6.4

21 August 2018                                                                                                                                                               Attachment 3

Item: 

MEETING:          FINANCE COMMITTEE – NORTHLAND REGIONAL COUNCIL

 

Name of item:            REVENUE AND COLLECTIONS QUARTERLY REPORT

                                    30 June 2018

 

Author:                          Nuku Jones, Manager Financial Accounting

 

Date of report:               06 July 2018

 

Document number:       A2115255  

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of the report is to provide quarterly reporting to Northland Regional Council on action to collect current rates and rate arrears, and to provide information on how collection is tracking against targets.

 

1)         Background:

 

This document has been prepared to highlight the actions taken by Far North District Council to manage the collection of the Northland Regional Council’s rates and to reduce the monies outstanding.  This report is prepared as at the end of the fourth quarter of the financial year 2017/18 and provides a comparison between the 2016/17 and 2017/18 rating years.

 

2)         Discussion and options

 

·    During the past quarter the team have continued to

Focus on completing the mortgage demand process. Final demands were issued to each bank and all arrears are in the process of being paid by the mortgagees. The process will be finished in mid July.

Audit existing collection types to ensure minimum repayments are being met.

Increase phone communications with those in arrears with no collection type in place.

Review accounts with collection agencies to ensure any long standing arrears are brought back to Council’s debt collection team to proceed with the next appropriate course of action e.g. abandoned land or legal collection processes.

 

·    The ongoing promotion of the Internal Affairs Rates Rebates Scheme in day to day communications with Ratepayers and regular meetings with relevant community organisations is another key focus.

 

 


Collection Data

A breakdown of the current and arrears outstanding debt is summarised in the following table:

 

NRC Outstanding  Debt as at 30 June  2018

 

General Title

Maori Freehold Land

Total

Rates Strike to June 2018

7,538,974

688,183

8,227,157

Rates Adjustments/ Current Penalties/Rebates

-24,283

-82,121

-106,404

Current Rates Collected to 30 June 2018

-7,039,109

-200,443

-7,239,552

Current Rates to be collected

475,582

405,619

881,201

 

 

 

 

Arrears

716,990

2,119,390

2,836,380

Arrears Penalties

72,361

276,780

349,141

Less Arrears Collected

-351,579

-33,026

-384,605

Arrears to be collected

437,772

2,363,144

2,800,916

 

 

 

 

Total Debt to be collected

913,354

2,768,763

3,682,117

 

 

A detailed analysis of arrears that identifies the debt by collection status is provided in the table below.

 

 
Council’s remission policies

Council’s remission policies are designed to recognise the unique nature of the Far North with its significant areas of unoccupied Maori freehold land. Overall the policies address issues of financial hardship and the protection of areas of land with particular conservation or community values. The following table shows the instance of remissions for each policy and the financial impact of these remissions.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 6.5

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Reinvestment of Gains Earned on Council's Externally Managed Funds

ID:

A1093948

From:

Simon Crabb, Finance Manager

 

Executive summary

At 30 June 2018, council had $47.7M invested in four Externally Managed Funds.  All of these funds exceeded their target rate of return, generating more investment gains (revenue) than budget.

 

After deducting investment fees and the budgeted amount for general funding, it is recommended that all the available residual gains are reinvested (recapitalised).  This approach is recommended to strengthen the capital base and generate greater future returns.

 

Externally Managed Fund

Actual

17/18

Total Gains

Budgeted

17/18

Total Gains

Recommended

17/18

Reinvestment

Budgeted

17/18 Reinvestment

Community Investment Fund

$1,158,124

$864,000

$1,158,124

$0.00

Property Reinvestment Fund

$1,910,199

$1,575,898

$453,130

$118,361

Infrastructure Investment Fund

$589,897

$329,331

$272,826

$0.00

Short Term (Working Capital) Fund

$292,931

$167,016

N/A

N/A

 

In addition, depreciation funding collected and earmarked for future renewal capital expenditure and rates collected and earmarked for future debt repayments are recommended to be transferred into the Infrastructure Investment Fund.  This approach is proposed to preserve and track such funding until it is required to finance any future capital renewal expenditure or repay borrowings.

 

The recommendations in this report have been incorporated into the Draft Financial Result, however, councillors will have an opportunity to modify the reinvestment proposals at the August council meeting.

 

Recommendation(s)

1.         That the report ‘Reinvestment of Gains Earned on Council's Externally Managed Funds’ by Simon Crabb, Finance Manager and dated 3 August 2018, be received.

2.         That $1,158,124 of Community Investment Fund gains earned in 2017/18 is reinvested into the Community Investment Fund.

3.         That $453,130 of Property Reinvestment Fund gains earned in 2017/18 is reinvested into the Property Reinvestment Fund.

4.         That $272,826 of the Infrastructure Investment Fund gains earned in 2017/18 is reinvested into the Infrastructure Investment Fund, and that $106,614 of net depreciation funding and $1,068,841 of accumulated debt repayment funding are transferred into the Infrastructure Investment Fund.

Community Investment Fund (CIF)

The CIF generated $1,158,124 of gains in 2017/18, equivalent to a return of 9.2% for the year, exceeding its target rate of return by 4.2%.

 

Council’s position when preparing the 2018–28 Long Term Plan was that up to 7.5% of the gains derived from the CIF would be reinvested back into the CIF, and anything over 7.5% would be presented to council for a decision to either reinvest into the CIF, or include in the Investment and Growth Reserve (IGR).

 

It is proposed that the entire $1,158,124 is reinvested back into the CIF.

 

If council decides to reinvest only 7.5% back into the CIF, then the CIF closing balance will be $13,975,000 and $183,124 will be added to IGR.  Council should note that, by way of resolution, they have the flexibility to transfer monies from the CIF into the IGR to fund future economic development projects should it be desirable to do so, as long as the balance of the CIF does not fall below $12.5M.

 

The budgeted CIF gains for 2017/18 was $864,000 and there was no budgeted reinvestment.  When preparing these budgets, it was signalled that $221,310 of CIF gains would be utilised as general funding.  This general funding is no longer required as a larger than anticipated dividend was received from Marsden Maritime Holdings Limited.  Furthermore, the original plan to re-direct the remaining CIF gains to the IGR has since been revised during the latest LTP process.

 

Table 1 summarises the proposed recommendation:

 

Assuming there is no transfer from the CIF, the closing IGR balance at 30 June 2018 is $2,184,603.  This is largely in line with the 2018–28 LTP budgeted opening position of $2,160,270, suggesting there is an adequate balance to undertake the economic development projects signalled in the 2018–28 Long Term Plan

 

The IGR reconciliation presented in Table 2 over the page also summarises the proposed recommendation that there are no CIF gains transferred into the IGR.

 

 

 

 

Table 2.

 

 

Property Reinvestment Fund (PRF)

For the 12 months to 30 June 2018, the PRF generated $1,910,199 of gains, equivalent to a return of 10%, exceeding its target rate of return by 3%.  After using $1,457,068 to fund investment fees and the budgeted general funding contribution there are residual gains available of $453,130.

 

It is proposed that the entire $453,130 is reinvested back into the PRF, compared to a budgeted reinvestment of $118,361

 

Table 3 over the page summarises this recommendation.

 

Infrastructure Investment Fund (IIF)

For the 12 months to 30 June 2018, the IIF generated $589,987, equivalent to a return of 7%, exceeding its target rate of return by 1.2%.  After utilising $317,071 to fund investment fees and the budgeted general funding contribution, there are residual gains available of $272,826.

 

It is proposed that the entire $272,826 is reinvested back into the PRF.

 

To preserve the component of targeted rates collected and earmarked to repay external debt, it is proposed that $1,068,841 is transferred into the IIF and held until the next infrastructure loan is due for repayment in August 2020.  Furthermore, it is recommended that $106,614 (including $32,999 from 2016/17) of net infrastructure depreciation funding collected and earmarked for future renewal capital works is transferred into the IIF.

 

Table 4 over the page summarises this recommendation.

 

 Considerations

1.      Options

2.                                           

No.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

Reinvest gains derived from the CIF, PRF and IIF in accordance with the presented recommendations

Maintain an equilibrium between building a capital value in an endeavour to protect future spending power and providing sufficient operational funding to pay for budgeted work programmes.

There is no additional   general funding available to pay for any additional council work programmes and/or projects.

2

Reinvest a lower level of gains derived from the PRF, CIF and IIF

Gains derived from Externally Manged Funds become available as   general funding to pay for additional council work programmes and/or projects.

The growth in fund balances are reduced and council’s future spending power is at risk of being eroded by inflation.

The staff’s recommended option is 1.

2.      Significance and engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, this decision is considered to be of low significance because it is part of council’s day-to-day activities and is in accordance with the approved Treasury Management Policy.

3.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

The activities detailed in this report are in accordance with council’s Treasury Management Policy and the 2018–28 Long Term Plan, both of which were approved in accordance with council’s decision making requirements of sections 76–82 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Further considerations

4.      Community views

The impact investing in externally managed funds has been consulted on with the community through the 2018–28 Long Term Plan consultative procedure, in accordance with s82 of the Local Government Act 2002.

5.      Māori impact statement

Targeted consultation on the council’s intention to invest in externally managed funds was undertaken with iwi as part of the 2018–28 Long Term Plan consultation process, using existing relationship channels.

6.      Financial implications

Investment strategies carry different risk profiles and are subject to different return volatilities.  The returns from managed funds can fluctuate over a given time and period and historical returns do not necessarily form the basis for forecasted future returns.

7.      Implementation issues

There are no implementation issues that council needs to be aware of.

 

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Dave Tams

Title:

Group Manager, Corporate Excellence

Date:

10 August 2018

  


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 7.1

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Investment and Growth Reserve: Changes to the Criteria and Procedures for the Allocation of Funding

ID:

A1084450

From:

Darryl Jones, Economist

 

Executive summary

The purpose of this paper is to obtain council approval on changes to the criteria and procedures for the allocation of funding from the Investment and Growth Reserve (IGR).  These changes are requested by Northland Inc. to allow them greater ability to make use of the opportunities provided by central government’s Provincial Growth Fund.  Staff recommend that council adopt the proposed changes. 

 

Recommendation(s)

1.         That the report ‘Investment and Growth Reserve: Changes to the Criteria and Procedures for the Allocation of Funding’ by Darryl Jones, Economist and dated 9 August 2018, be received.

2.         That council approve the new criteria and procedures for the allocation of funding from the Investment and Growth Reserve contained in Attachment 2 pertaining to Item 7.1 of the 21 August 2018 council agenda.  

 

Background

At its meeting on 20 February 2018 council agreed many changes to the criteria and procedures for allocating funding (criteria) from the Investment and Growth Reserve (IGR).  These changes included: delegated authority to Northland Inc. Limited (Northland Inc.) for the allocation of funding for business case assessments; a clearer description of what constitutes a business case assessment eligible for funding through this IGR category; and an increase in the annual cap that can be spent on business case assessments (up from $200,000 to $300,000).  The criteria are available on council’s website: https://www.nrc.govt.nz/Your-Council/Economic-development/investment-and-growth-reserve/.

At its July 2018 meeting, the Board of Northland Inc. agreed to formally request that council consider making further changes to the criteria (Attachment 1).  Northland Inc. are requesting that the description of what can be funded through the Business Case Assessment category be expanded to include work in developing and planning for the success of projects and not just proving projects through a business case assessment.  The possibility of making these changes to the criteria was raised by Northland Inc. at the council workshop held on 12 June 2018.  The main reason for proposing these changes is to allow Northland Inc. greater ability to make use of the opportunities provided by central government’s Provincial Growth Fund (PGF). 

 

Considerations

1.      Options

 

No.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

Agree to change the description of projects that can be funded through the business case assessment funding category as proposed by Northland Inc.

Provides Northland Inc. with a greater ability to assist projects applying for funding to the PGF.

Reduces focus on getting projects to investment ready stage.

2

Not support the proposed changes to the criteria

Maintains focus on undertaking business case assessments.

Limits Northland Inc.’s ability to support projects applying for funding to the PGF at current levels.

 

The staff’s recommended option is Option 1.  Attachment 2 contains the proposed changes to the criteria and procedures to implement the request from Northland Inc.  Staff recommend that the name of the funding category be changed from Business Case Assessments to Project Development to more accurately reflect the work that can be funded through this category.  Staff also recommend that these changes be reviewed as part of the development of the next Statement of Intent for Northland Inc.

2.      Significance and engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, this decision is considered of low significance when assessed against council’s Significance and Engagement Policy and is provided for in council’s Long Term Plan 2018–2028.  It is part of council’s day to day activities.  This does not mean that this matter is not of significance to tāngata whenua and/or individual communities, but that council is able to make decisions relating to this matter without undertaking further consultations or engagement.

3.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

 The decision is consistent with policy and legislative requirements, and does not present any significant risks to council. 

Further considerations

4.      Community views

The community has not been specifically consulted in recent times with regard to the IGR and the criteria.  They were, however, included within the Consultation Document prepared for the Long Term Plan 2018–2028.  Some submitters indicated support for council being involved in economic development while some others raised concerns about council's role in economic development, including the funding of Northland Inc.  Some considered that council should be putting more money into ventures that create employment rather than Northland Inc.

5.      Māori impact statement

There are no known specific impacts on Māori over and above those impacts on the wider community.

6.      Financial implications

There are no financial impacts associated with the proposed changes to the criteria.

7.      Implementation issues

The allocation of business case assessment funding from the IGR has already been delegated to the Board of Northland Inc. through the council decision in February 2018.  No implementation issues are envisaged.

 

Attachments

Attachment 1: Proposed amendments to the IGR Business Case Assessment category requested by Northland Inc. (July 2018)

Attachment 2: Investment and Growth Reserve: Criteria and procedures for the allocation of funding dated 21 August 2018  

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Jonathan Gibbard

Title:

Group Manager - Governance and Engagement

Date:

14 August 2018

 


Council Meeting  ITEM: 7.1

21 August 2018Attachment 1

 Investment

 

 

 

Subject:                                  Investment & Growth Reserve: Proposed Changes to Business Case Assessment Criteria

Report by:                             Vaughan Cooper, GM Investment & Infrastructure

Dated:                                    July, 2018

Commercial in Confidence:         No

Recommendation:
That NRC be requested to amend the Business Case Assessment Category within the Investment and Growth Reserve to support activity across three areas; developing projects, proving projects and planning for success of projects.

 

Background to Investment & Growth Reserve Criteria

During 2017 the four Northland councils undertook a joint review of their economic development activities, including tourism and destination marketing services. This review, prepared by MartinJenkins, was undertaken to ensure compliance with the requirements of section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002.

 

Amongst a number of recommendations, the review suggested that the operation of the Investment and Growth Reserve (IGR) could be improved by:

·          The IGR should be refocused to support impact investments (and associated feasibility studies and business cases) as the economic development rationales and benefits from commercial projects are limited.

·          Prioritising the pipeline of projects to focus on those with the greatest potential impact and public benefits, aligned with regional economic development priorities. ·

·          Enabling the Northland Inc Board to make decisions on feasibility and business case applications, up to an agreed maximum (e.g., $100,000), with NRC officials’ providing advice as part of the process. ·

·          Introducing guidelines and templates for feasibility studies and businesses cases to ensure that additional and wider economic benefits are clearly assessed and specified.

 

As a result of the review, NRC proposed changes to the IGR criteria in late 2017 and adopted new criteria in February 2018.  In summary, the changes to the new criteria where:

·          Removal of the ability for council to make loan or equity investments from the IGR;

·          Providing greater clarity about what projects can and cannot be funded from the IGR;

·          Providing greater strategic direction to the use of the IGR;

·          Tighter controls on what can be funded as part of business case assessments; and

·          Delegated authority to Northland Inc for the allocation of funding for business case assessments.

 

National Context

A new policy development within Central Government has seen introduction of the Provincial Growth Fund – which is intended to lift productivity potential in the provinces.  Its priorities are to enhance economic development opportunities, create sustainable jobs, enable Māori to reach their full potential, boost social inclusion and participation, build resilient communities, and help meet New Zealand’s climate change targets.  The fund is initially targeted at priority regions (labelled as surge regions) of which Northland is one.  It is exciting times as central government focuses on the regions but it is also clear that the policy settings within which Northland Inc operates are likely to continue to evolve.

 

Supporting applications to PGF

The new IGR Criteria were developed at a time when we did not fully appreciate the Provincial Growth Fund and what is required of the region to maximise access to the fund.  A lot has been learnt since the inception of the fund and we believe there is an opportunity to improve our processes.

 

To date, Northland has been very successful with PGF applications and the region has received approximately $75 million in funding to date.   However a significant portion of this has been attributed to projects that have been in the making for several years, including many  which were part of the Northland Economic Action Plan.  This highlights the significant amount of time and resource required to develop and support significant projects.  It also highlights the opportunity to bring significant funding into the region.

 

The PGF has presented councils and their CCOs some challenges in dealing with the volume, complexity and interdependencies in developing investment-ready business cases to the PGF.  One of Northland Inc’s core competencies is in facilitating and coordinating complex multi-party Economic Development projects. The most effective use Northland Inc in this new environment is to play to that strength.

 

The current objective of IGR Criteria is to provide a fund that enables council to make strategic investments that lift the long-term growth of the Northland economy.  In relative terms, the ability of Council to make strategic investments has been vastly overtaken by the ability of the Provincial Growth Fund.  It is fair to say that the pipeline of projects for the IGR has been completely overtaken by the pipeline for the PGF.  Whilst there will still be projects that require supplementary funding from the IGR (remember that the IGR will only fund up to 33% of the project value), every project is now focusing on the PGF as it has the potential to fund projects at 100%.

 

Equally the Business Case Assessment category within the IGR is to provide funding support to evaluate and assess the viability of potential projects so as to make them investment ready. This was clearly directed at ensuring projects were de-risked for Council to invest in. 

 

Northland Inc is spending a significant amount of its time supporting projects to apply to the PGF for funding.  This includes:

·          Acting as clearing house for initial ideas

·          Assisting clients to understand and navigate the PGF process

·          Ensuring projects are of sufficient robustness to apply to PGF

·          Assisting with completion of feasibility studies and business cases to support applications

·          Supporting and editing applications (both Expressions of Interest and full funding applications)

·          Supporting projects that receive funding through to being operational.

 

As the focus has now moved to ensuring projects can be successful in applying to the PGF we feel the business case assessment category needs more flexibility to support projects through this process.

 

It is important to remember that the PGF is a significant but likely short-term opportunity that may never be repeated.  We have a relatively short period of time to maximise the opportunity and ensure that Northland benefits as much as possible.  We need to really focus on the pipeline of applications to the PGF and support them to be successful.

 

There are three key areas that we are experiencing significant demand for:

·          Developing the project – Independent expert advice on concept development and pre-feasibility studies

·          Proving the project – Independent expert advice on Feasibility, Business Case, Economic Impact Analysis

·          Planning for success – this is to ensure that funding recipients have the right structures, resources and elements in place to deliver against milestones and outcomes. For the avoidance of doubt - this is not intended to fund ongoing capability or delivery functions once a project is operational. 

 

Within the current IGR criteria, it is possible to support the second area (proving the project) but not possible to support the other two. 

 

Why shouldn’t PGF pay for this activity?

Technically the PGF can fund activities related to proving the project and managing the project.  However the process to gain access for funding this type of activity is significantly longer than the IGR Business Case Assessment process (delegated to NI Board) and increasingly we are seeing the PGF not willing to support this activity without a robust concept document and or pre-feasibility report – areas which it has struggled to fund to date.  This is particularly relevant in commercial deals where the private sector needs assistance to become investment ready and the complexity of debt/equity deals, for example, need more work and specialist advice for the business and the PGF. 

 

All of the advice coming from central government is that the processes for the PGF are going to get more robust, require more evidence and will be tighter on what pre-investment activity can be supported as part of an application.  

 

Workload for Northland Inc

Northland Inc has experienced a significant increase in workload as a result of the PGF and does not have the immediate capacity to re-allocate resources to support this workload.  As a result, Northland Inc is part of an application to the PGF by Economic Development New Zealand (EDNZ) to increase the portfolio/project management and business analysis capacity of EDA’s across the country.  This support cannot come soon enough. The intention is to use this PGF funding, if approved, to create a project management support unit within Northland Inc. 

 

Recommendation

Recommend that NRC be requested to amend the Business Case Assessment Category within the Investment and Growth Reserve Criteria to support activity across three areas: developing projects, proving projects and planning for success.

 


Council Meeting  ITEM: 7.1

21 August 2018Attachment 2

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 7.2

21 August 2018

 

 

TITLE:

Te Taitokerau Māori and Council Working Party (TTMAC) -  Proposed Amendment to Ngā Kupu Pānga | Terms of Reference

ID:

A1097831

From:

Rachel Ropiha, Kaiarahi - Kaupapa Māori

 

Executive Summary

At the May meeting of TTMAC, there was a recommendation to amend the Ngā Kupu Pānga|Terms of Reference (TOR) to better reflect that the non-elected members of TTMAC were not a representative mechanism of Taitokerau iwi and hapū, and that advice and recommendations they make to council are based on information provided by staff.  This report provides TTMAC recommendation to council for amendments to the working party terms of reference.

 

Recommendation(s)

1.         That the report ‘Te Taitokerau Māori and Council Working Party (TTMAC) -  Proposed Amendment to Ngā Kupu Pānga | Terms of Reference ’ by Rachel Ropiha, Kaiarahi - Kaupapa Māori and dated 13 August 2018, be received.

2.         That council supports the Te Taitokerau Māori and Council Working Party (TTMAC) -  Proposed Amendment to Ngā Kupu Pānga | Terms of Reference .

 

Background

An amended version of the TOR was presented to the July meeting of TTMAC, which endorsed the following text to be inserted under the Ngā whainga|Purpose section of the current TOR:

 

“Te Taitokerau Māori and Council Working Party members can provide advice based only on information presented.  Council acknowledges that iwi and hapū representative members’ advice does not usurp the mana of iwi and hapū of Taitokerau to make decisions and representations to council on issues of importance to them.”

 

There was one further recommendation, to add names of hapū who have since joined TTMAC to the Ngā Tāngata|Membership section.  Staff note, though, that the membership section of the TOR reflects those groups who have been a part of TTMAC since its inception.  To add new members as they join would be inconsistent with the intent of this section, which is to recognise those who committed to the kaupapa of TTMAC since its establishment. 

 

However, staff also noted an anomaly in this section and suggest the following minor amendment. Under the Ngā Tāngata|Membership section it currently states that TTMAC is made up of five elected members and 25 non-elected members.  The non-elected members are made up of one member from each of the nine Mandated Iwi Authorities, one member from each of the hapū Treaty settlement entities, and one member from each of those tāngata whenua groups involved since TTMAC’s inception.

 

Te Roroa has been included in both the list of Treaty settlement groups and in the list of tāngata whenua groupings.  It is recommended that Te Roroa be removed from the list of tāngata whenua groupings.

 

The proposed changes to TTMAC’s TOR are highlighted and attached for council’s consideration.

Considerations

1.      Options

 

No.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

Endorse the change as described in the agenda item ‘Te Taitokerau Māori and Council Working Party (TTMAC) -  Proposed Amendment to Ngā Kupu Pānga | Terms of Reference ’ dated 13 August 2018.

Recognises TTMAC is a mechanism for advice only, and that Te Roroa are members via their Treaty settlement.

Nil

2

Decline the suggested change described in the agenda item ‘Te Taitokerau Māori and Council Working Party (TTMAC) -  Proposed Amendment to Ngā Kupu Pānga | Terms of Reference ’ dated 13 August 2018.

Nil

It may be assumed that TTMAC is the voice of Māori for Taitokerau.

Clarifies that Te Roroa have a Treaty settlement and are members in this capacity.

 

The staff’s recommended option is option one.  The changes are minor administrative changes which clarify that TTMAC is a conduit of information and not a representative body, and that Te Roroa are recognised as having a Treaty settlement. 

2.      Significance and engagement

While this does not trigger council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, this is a significant issue for hapū and iwi in that it recognises mana whenua by asserting that TTMAC is a conduit for information.  It also recognises Te Roroa as members of TTMAC through their Treaty settlement.

3.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

The decisions recommended in this report are compliant with council’s policies and legislative responsibilities.  There are no known risks to council from making these administrative amendments to the working party terms of reference. 

Further considerations

Being a purely administrative matter, Community Views, Māori Impact Statement, Financial Implications and Implementation Issues are not applicable.

 

Attachments

Attachment 1: TTMAC Nga Kupu Panga | Terms of Reference with proposed changes highlighted  

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Jonathan Gibbard

Title:

Group Manager - Governance and Engagement

Date:

15 August 2018

 


Council Meeting  ITEM: 7.2

21 August 2018Attachment 1

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 7.3

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Amendment to Delegations

ID:

A1092309

From:

Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager

 

Executive summary

This report recommends an amendment to the delegations given to officers regarding the lodging of submissions.  In detail, the amendment proposed would enable the Executive Leadership Team to lodge submissions on behalf of the Northland Regional Council, subject to an assessment of political significance.  It is anticipated that this amendment would improve the efficiency and expediency of council’s submission processes.

 

The report also seeks the retrospective approval of council for the NRC submission lodged on the Ministry for the Environment’s draft National Planning Standards.  Due to the short timeframe for submissions (by 17 August 2018), formal approval could not be sought by full council.  Hence the submission was presented to the Planning Working Party for feedback and lodged by the Chief Executive.

 

Recommendations

1.         That the report ‘Amendment to Delegations’ by Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager and dated 30 July 2018, be received.

2.         That the ‘Miscellaneous Delegation’ section of the Northland Regional Council Delegations Manual be amended as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.         That council retrospectively approve the submission (included as Attachment 1 pertaining to Item 7.3 of the 21 August 2018 council agenda) on the draft National Planning Standards issued by the Ministry for the Environment.

 

Background

Council regularly lodges submissions on a range of topics, discussion documents and legislation with a view to representing council’s interests.  Many of the submissions relate to the day to day operations of council, but currently there is no clear delegation as to which of these submissions require full council approval.  To add to the complexity, in many cases the timeframes to lodge submissions do not align with that of the council meeting calendar so seeking formal approval can be problematic.  Again, there is no clear process in place when this occurs.

This report aims to remedy this situation by seeking council approval to delegate authority to the Executive Leadership Team to lodge submissions on behalf of the Northland Regional Council; provided the subject of the submission is deemed to have low political significance and/or of an operational nature. 

 

However, full (formal) council approval would remain for all submissions that are deemed to be politically significant.  In the event timeframes are such that formal approval cannot be sought then it is proposed that the Executive Leadership Team may lodge a submission on behalf of council provided a draft is circulated to members for comment and the submission is retrospectively approved by council at the next council meeting. 

 

‘Political significance’ is not defined but will be assessed on a case by case basis by the Executive Leadership Team including, but not limited to, the sensitivity and level of risk associated with a matter. 

 

For the avoidance of doubt, this does not supersede existing delegations for specific council officers to submit submissions under explicit sections of the Resource Management Act 1991, the Building Act 2004, and the Crown Minerals Act 1991.

 

To ensure councillors are kept informed of all submissions, it is proposed that a summary of any submission under delegated authority be circulated to elected members prior to being lodged.  Furthermore, all submissions lodged under delegation to be reported in the next Chief Executive Officer’s report.

 

Retrospective approval sought

Council currently has a live example where it was not possible to attain formal council approval prior to lodging a submission on the National Planning Standards (released by the Ministry for the Environment). 

 

These standards aim to make Resource Management Act plans simpler to prepare, and easier for plan users to understand, compare and comply with.  The standards focus on aligning the structure, form, e-delivery and some common content of RMA plans.  The closing date for submissions on the standards was 17 August 2018 which meant that formal approval of council could not be sought prior to lodging the submission.  The draft submission was presented to the Planning Working Party on 8 August 2018 for feedback, with the submission subsequently lodged by the Chief Executive. 

 

Retrospective approval is now sought from council (please refer to Attachment 1 for a copy of the submission).

 

 

 

 

 

Considerations

1.     Options

1.                                           

No.

 

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

 

Delegate authority to the Executive Leadership Team to lodge submissions.

· Avoids the need for council approval for insignificant matters.

 

· Clearly defines the process (for both council and staff) for lodging submissions.

· Improves the efficiency and expediency of the submission process.

·       None identified.

2

 

Do not delegate authority to the Executive Leadership Team to lodge submissions.

· Councillors are involved in every submission lodged by council.

· Submission timeframes often don’t align with council meetings, making it difficult to achieve formal council approval in a timely manner.

· Tying up councillor time with insignificant and/or operational matters.

 

The staff’s recommended option is to delegate authority to the Executive Leadership Team.

2.      Significance and engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, this decision is considered to be of low significance when assessed against council’s significance and engagement policy because it is part of council’s day to day activities. 

 

3.      Further considerations

Being a purely administrative matter, policy/risk management/legislative compliance, community views, Māori impact statement, financial implications and implementation issues are not applicable.

 

Attachments

Attachment 1: Submission on draft National Planning Standards  

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Jonathan Gibbard

Title:

Group Manager - Governance and Engagement

Date:

2 August 2018

 


Council Meeting  ITEM: 7.3

21 August 2018Attachment 1

 


Submission

To:                 Ministry for the Environment

By email: planningstandards@mfe.govt.nz

 

By:             Northland Regional Council

On:                 Draft National Planning Standards June 2018

 

Introduction

1.    The Northland Regional Council (council) is grateful for the opportunity to comment on the draft standards.

 

2.   We are supportive of the principle of standardising plans and their content. The submission focuses on implementation issues as we see them for the National Planning Standards (the standards), and aspects we would like retained.

 

3.   The key concern we have is the cost of implementing the standards and opening plan content to challenge. As currently proposed, our assessment is that implementing the standards is likely to require many consequential changes beyond those allowed by Section 58I, RMA, which means these changes would need to be made via a Schedule 1 process. This will result in costs to council to run the process and defend plan content – even though we won’t be changing the effect of the content.  We believe it’s a significant waste of ratepayer’s money to pay for a process that doesn’t change the effect of our RMA documents. We estimate this cost could be up to $280,000 – which is about 1% of the rates council collects.

Submission

Timeframe for implementing

4.   While we are heartened to see an extension from five years (as previously signalled) to seven years to implement the standards, we would prefer that we didn’t have to implement the standards until the next 10-year review of the relevant planning document.  Implementing the standards as part of the 10-year review will significantly reduce the costs of implementation (assuming there is a raft of consequential changes requiring a Schedule 1 process). 

 

5.   Our Regional Policy Statement (RPS) was made fully operative in May 2018.  A seven-year deadline (2026) will be two years before the RPS is due for its review.

 

6.   The council notified the Proposed Regional Plan for Northland (a combined regional plan) in 2017 and council decisions are likely to be released in early 2019.  Assuming significant appeals, it’s likely the Proposed Regional Plan won’t be operative until 2021 at the earliest.  This means the Proposed Regional Plan will only be five years old before it needs to be changed to implement the standards. 

 

7.   If we are required to implement the standards before the 10-year review date of the RPS or regional plan, we’d likely include this with another Schedule 1 review. This will reduce some of the costs of the Schedule 1 process for implementing the standard (particularly the process costs), but there will still be potentially significant costs associated with the time and effort of defending challenges to content.  It’s difficult to provide an accurate estimate of this cost, but assuming there would need to be significant changes to our RPS and Regional Plan, a best guess is that it would be between $60,000 - $100,000 for the RPS and between $120,000 and $180,000 for the Regional Plan (including labour).

Flow on of changes from RPS

8.   Something to be mindful of is that changes to the RPS (from implementing the standards) may have a flow on to local plans.  The flow on effect is unlikely to be from the direct implementation of the standards - it will be from the potential changes to provisions that are opened to challenge resulting from the Schedule 1 process to deal with consequential changes. 

 

9.   The preference would be to amend the RPS first before territorial authorities amend their plans.  According to the draft standards, all the Northland local territorial authorities will be required to amend their district plans within five years of gazettal.   This would mean the RPS should be amended within 3-4 years.  However, as discussed, we would much prefer to wait until the RPS is due for its 10-year review.

 

10. A solution would be for the implementation of the standards in territorial plans to be delayed until the conclusion of any Schedule 1 consequential amendments of the RPS.

 

Definitions and metrics

 

11. We are supportive of having nationally consistent definitions and metrics. However, we have some concerns about implementing them.

 

Schedule 1 vs Section 58I

 

12. In many instances, the inclusion of definitions and metrics will not be like for like.  This means that if councils want to include definitions but not change the effect of rules (in particular), changes will need to be made to rules.

 

13. For example, the draft standards have a definition for earthworks:

means any land disturbance that changes the existing ground contour or ground level

14. The draft standards also define land disturbance:

means the alteration to land, including by moving, cutting, placing, filling or excavation of soil, cleanfill, earth or substrate land

15. The Proposed Regional Plan for Northland defines earthworks as:

The mechanical disturbance of the surface of the land by excavation, cutting and filling, blading, ripping, contouring, or placing or replacing earth, but does not include:

1.    the placement of cleanfill material, or

2.    land preparation, or

3.    construction, repair, alteration or maintenance of bores, or

4.    the maintenance of walking and other recreational tracks, or

5.    the placement of roading aggregates during road and track works, or

6.    digging post holes, or

7.    planting trees.

 

16. The notable difference between the two definitions is the list of excluded activities. If we didn’t want to change the effect of the rules for earthworks, we’d need to amend the earthworks rules to ensure they don’t capture the list of excluded activities.  We don’t think it should be necessary to make this type of change using a Schedule 1 process but it’s not clear that such a change is anticipated by Section 58I(3)(d)[1].

 

17. Section 58I(3)(d) requires “…any consequential amendments to any document as necessary to avoid duplication or conflict with the amendments”.  Relating this back to the earthworks example, we think it would be a stretch to say that the rule changes “are necessary to avoid duplication or conflict” with the inclusion of the definition of earthworks.  The wording of the rules for earthworks does not duplicate or conflict with the definition of earthworks.

 

18. As stated previously, we’d like to make these types of changes without using the Schedule 1 process.  The solution is to amend Section 58I or to allow a longer timeframe to implement so changes can happen at the same time as the RMA required 10-year review of plan and policy provisions.

Minimising the scope of the Schedule 1 process

19. There is a risk that the increased process costs for councils to incorporate the definitions and metrics will mean that councils may look for ways to minimise the cost of the Schedule 1 process.

 

20. A significant driver of Schedule 1 costs is the scope of the changes and therefore the opportunity to challenge provisions.  The greater the scope of the changes, the more likely people will challenge it and councils (and others) must spend resources defending it.  So, if we had to make the changes to the earthworks rules to address the exceptions, it would allow anyone with a concern with the rules to challenge any aspect of the rules – even though we have no intention of changing the scope of the rules.

 

 

21. If councils are forced to undertake a Schedule 1 process to incorporate the definitions before the 10-year review then one option they may consider is doing it in a way that would avoid opening the rules to challenge.  One way of doing this would be to do a plan change to change the word ‘earthworks’ in the operational plan to an alternative name, for example, ‘land modification’.  There is still a risk that someone could argue that by changing the name in the rules, it opens the ability to challenge any part of the rules, but the risk would be a lot less compared to changing the rules to address the exceptions.

 

22. The draft standards state the prescribed definitions apply to synonyms. The Oxford dictionary defines a synonym as:

A word or phrase that means the same as another word or phrase in the same language

23. It could be successfully argued that changing the word ‘earthworks’ to (for example) ‘land modification’ would mean the definition is not ‘the same’, given the revised definition excludes a list of activities. Perversely, this could result in a situation that there is even more variation in the terms used in plans to describe activities than there currently is (at least in the short term). The approach may only be a stop gap measure until the 10-year review (or the relevant provisions are subject to a plan change for other reasons) at which time the definitions in the standards would be incorporated. This is not necessarily an option that we would use, however, it is worth noting that it is an option that any council could adopt.

 

Timing of Schedule 1 process vs 58I process

 

24. Another issue we foresee is that if the insertion of the definitions leads to changes in the way the rules effect activities, then the Schedule 1 changes to the rules will need to happen before the insertion of the new definitions.  This is because the insertion of the definitions will be immediately operative, whereas any consequential changes requiring a Schedule 1 process wouldn’t be operative until any challenges are resolved.

 

25. Using the earthworks example; if the definitions were inserted before the Schedule 1 process concluded, then the earthworks rules would apply to the exceptions, which may mean, for example, consent would be required for activities that are intended to be permitted, or vice versa.  A Schedule 1 process may take, for example, two years, which means it would need to start at least two years before the cut-off date for implementation to avoid this situation. 

 

26. A solution would be to have a mechanism to exempt the insertion of a definition into an operative plan if a plan change is notified to address consequential changes resulting from the definition.

A full package of mandatory content

27. As highlighted with the earthworks example above, the goal of achieving consistency with the definitions may not be achieved and is likely to be costly for councils to implement.  If the planning standards are to prescribe content, then we think it should be the whole package of content.  So, using the earthworks example, the standards could prescribe the definitions and the suite of rules (and possibly policies and objectives) for all earthworks and land disturbance activities.  Councils would then have two choices – either to adopt the content as prescribed without a Schedule 1 process, or to vary the standardised content via the Schedule 1 process.  Accompanying the standardised content should be a section 32 evaluation.  If councils want to vary the standardised content, they would do a s32AA evaluation, that is, the focus would only be on the variation and councils would have the section 32 to use as the reference for the s32AA evaluation.

 

 

 

Mandatory headings and matters addressed

 

28. The standards prescribe mandatory section headings and then set out the matters to be included in each section if the matters are addressed in the plan and/or policy statement.  We therefore understand the direction to mean that if the plan includes a prescribed matter it must go into that section, and that the plan and/or policy statement doesn’t have to include the matter if it isn’t addressed in the document.  We support this approach (assuming our understanding is correct).

 

29. We also assume councils may include additional matters into the prescribed sections. In other words, councils are not constrained to just the matters listed for the section.  Again, we support this.

 

30. A minor point – it’s not clear what happens where the plan contains none of the matters listed.  For example, there is a mandatory heading for “Evaluation and monitoring” but our Proposed Regional Plan doesn’t contain any such content.   Would the heading be included but with no content or, because there is no content, can we exclude the heading?  If the heading must be included then our approach in this situation would be to include the text “Not included” or the like.  We suggest it be made clear that the heading only needs to be included if there is content under it. 

 

Themes

 

31. We are comfortable with the themes prescribed for RPS’s.  The themes generally align with the themes of our current RPS.

 

32. We do however have some concerns with the themes for regional plans, particularly as they apply to rules. The themes generally make sense as they would apply to policies, but not for rules.  Our view is that there should be an option for rules to be packaged by activity. 

 

33. Most people interact with a plan via the rules with an activity in mind – not a theme.  Also, rules are written for an activity – that’s what the RMA requires.  The most efficient and effective way is to package them by activity.

 

34. Packaging rules by themes is going to result in a lot of cross-referencing and a considerable amount of confusion about where best to locate rules and which sections to cross reference from.  The draft guidance material states:

For example rules relating to protecting biodiversity in wetlands, can be in the water chapter, the ecosystem and indigenous biodiversity chapter and in the relevant catchment chapter. However best practice is that the rule should only be written once (to avoid confusion and possible typos) and cross-referenced as many times as needed.

 

35. The example could also include ‘the coastal environment’ and ‘landscape, landforms and natural character’ chapters.  Each wetland rule would have four or five cross-references.  This is just one example – multiplying this across a plan, it will result in hundreds of cross-references.  All of this is unnecessary if the rules were packaged by activity without the need to cross-reference to the themes.

 

Electronic accessibility and functionality standard

36. Instruction 16 in Table 18 requires regional coastal plan provisions to be identified (Section 64, RMA).  While it is a minor issue, we don’t support this because:

·      It is not a legal requirement of the RMA;

·      We’re not aware of any benefit to plan users; and

·      Identifying the coastal marine area provisions for the purposes of the Minister of Conservation’s sign-off is an administrative issue and can be addressed outside the plan.

 

37. If it’s to be retained, then the reference should be amended to “the parts that relate to the coastal marine area” to reflect the wording of Section 64(3), RMA.

 

38. Instruction 3 in Table 19 requires regional plans to be “…spatially integrated with GIS system, allowing click to drill through different map layers and specific rules that apply to particular properties or activities and infrastructure services.”  While we do not envisage any major problem implementing this, we question the value of this functionality for users of regional plans.  Unlike district plans, most of the regional plan rules have no geographic variation.  It’d mean that for any one location most of the same plan rules will be applicable.  It’s a bit different in the coastal marine area where there are zones and overlays, but as the vast majority is not in private title, we don’t envisage there would be much demand for this functionality.

 

Chapter form standard

39. Instruction 3 of the Chapter form standard, says:

“Chapters within Part 2 – Tangata Whenua, Part 3 – District-Wide Matters and Part 4 – Area-Specific Matters must use the order of headings below.”

 

40. We understand that the Part 2 – Tangata whenua is the only relevant part applicable in instruction 3 to a regional plan or regional policy statement. We understand this to mean that Part 2 – Tangata whenua must include all the headings as prescribed.  However, it’s not clear whether content must be included under each heading as the requirement is only that we “must consider” the inclusion of the relevant content.  We could be in a position where we are required to have the heading but there is no content under it.

 

41. Instruction 4 says;

“Unless otherwise stated, regional policy statement chapters, regional plans chapters and combined plan chapters may contain headings in the order provided.”

42. We assume this means that unless otherwise stated (and we cannot find anywhere where it is stated) it is up to the council whether it chooses to include one or more of the headings.  We support this.

 

43. Similarly, instruction 5, 6 and 7 (for example) say that “Local authorities must consider whether…”.  We interpret this to mean that council can choose whether to include the relevant content – which we support.  However, there doesn’t seem to be any direction as to how we would demonstrate that we have considered whether the relevant content is to be included.  Without any direction, our approach would likely be to provide advice to council and get a council resolution.

 

44. Table 26 “Rule table” requires setting out the activity status when compliance with the rule is not achieved.  We have some concerns with this – which we’ll highlight using the following example of a rule from our Proposed Regional Plan:

 

 

45. Firstly, it’s not clear what a non-compliance is versus being beyond the scope of the rule.  Referring to the example, clearly if the structure doesn’t comply with clauses 16-18 then it’s a non-compliance.  But what about an existing structure that doesn’t come within the scope of clauses 1-15? Is a jetty more than 10m2 (for example) considered to be a non-compliance?

 

46. Secondly, there could be many activity statuses depending on which rule requirement is not complied with, for example, depending on what zone the structure is in, whether it’s in an area of outstanding natural character or not, and the type of structure. 

 

47. Our preference would be to remove the requirement to set out the activity status when compliance with the rule is not achieved.

 

Mapping Standard

 

48. It’s not clear whether a symbology set will be provided to councils.  We assume it will be (to ensure consistency), and in that case, it will need to be compatible with council systems (in our case ArcGIS).

 

Signed on behalf of the Northland Regional Council by:

Malcolm Nicolson (Chief Executive Officer)      Dated: 15 August 2018

 

Northland Regional Council
Private Bag 9021
Whangārei Mail Centre
WHANGĀREI 0148


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 7.4

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Amendment to Elected Members' Expenses and Allowances Policy

ID:

A1093600

From:

Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager

 

Executive summary

This report provides an overview of the Remuneration Authority’s review of remuneration setting for local government members and the new approach going forward.

 

The report also presents the Northland Regional Council’s ‘Elected Members’ Expenses and Allowances Policy’ (the policy) which has been amended to give effect to the first tranche of changes implemented through the Local Government Members (2018/19) (Local Authorities) Determination 2018 which took effect from 1 July 2018.

 

Recommendations

1.         That the report ‘Amendment to Elected Members' Expenses and Allowances Policy’ by Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager and dated 2 August 2018, be received.

2.         That council notes the revised Elected Members’ Expenses and Allowances Policy (included as Attachment 1 pertaining to Item 7.4 of the 21 August 2018 council agenda.

 

Background

The Local Government Act 2002 (Schedule 7, section 6) stipulates that the government appointed body, the Remuneration Authority (RA) must determine the remuneration allowances and expenses payable to elected members.

Over the past two years the RA has issued a discussion document and sought the input from a broad range of stakeholders to fully understand how the role of local government members has changed and to determine the appropriate criteria when setting the remuneration for elected members.

The detailed paper setting out all the policy changes and the reasons for them is available on the RA’s website www.remauthority.govt.nz but the key conclusions from the review were:

·        The new system would continue to be based on a council size index but the size index has been revised to include extra sizing factors relevant to the responsibilities of regional authorities.  The final list of factors to be used to measure the relative size of regional councils is as follows:

-      Population;

-      Total operating expenditure;

-      Total assets;

-      Geographic size (includes land and marine/water area); and

-      Public passenger transport boardings.

·        The RA has created a local government pay scale using the parliamentary remuneration as a comparator.

·        The adjustments to remuneration will be applied in three tranches; the first in the 2017/2018 determination, the second in the 2018/2019 determination and the final after the 2019 elections.

 

 

·        Effective immediately:

-      The RA will continue to determine the remuneration of the Chair of the regional council; based on the council rank on the size index.

-      Upper limits have been set by the RA on the purchase price of the regional chairperson’s vehicle.  These do not apply to existing vehicles.

-      The travel time allowance has been amended as follows:

Regional council chairpersons are now deemed by the RA to be full time; hence they are no longer eligible to receive the travel time allowance.

If an elected member lives outside the local authority area and they travel on local authority business to and from the member’s place of residence, the member can only claim the travel time allowance when travelling within the boundary of the local authority area.

A cap of eight hours has been placed on the amount of travel time that can be claimed within a 24 hour period.

·        Following the 2019 local elections each council will be allocated a remuneration pool reflecting its rank in the size index.   Each council will make a recommendation on the appropriate remuneration for base councillor salary and for positions of responsibility.  The RA will normally apply the recommendations but will reserve the right to intervene if it sees reason to do so.

 

Considerations

1.      Options

The report serves to ensure that council formally acknowledges the changes that the Remuneration Authority is making to its approach to setting remuneration for local government elected members.  The Local Government Act 2002 stipulates that local authorities must give effect to the remuneration allowances and expenses as set by the Remuneration Authority.  There is no option.

2.      Significance and engagement

Being a purely administrative matter this is deemed to be of low significance.

3.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

The report complies with the Local Government Act 2002 and the requirement for local authorities to give effect to the expenses and allowances set for elected members by the Remuneration Authority.

Being a purely administrative matter, Community Views, Māori Impact Statement, Financial Implications and Implementation Issues are not applicable.

 

Attachments

Attachment 1: Revised Elected Members' Expenses and Allowances Policy  

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Jonathan Gibbard

Title:

Group Manager - Governance and Engagement

Date:

14 August 2018

 


Council Meeting  ITEM: 7.4

21 August 2018Attachment 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


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 7.5

21 August 2018

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        

 

TITLE:

Environment Fund Overallocation

ID:

A1093651

From:

Duncan Kervell, Land Manager

 

Executive summary

This report requests approval of an over allocation of 20% of the Environment Fund budget to ensure withdrawals and underspends are accounted for to enable full use of available budget and delegated authority for the Farm Plan Manager to have approval for up to $20K to manage the Environment Fund.

 

Recommendation(s)

1.         That the report ‘Environment Fund Overallocation’ by Duncan Kervell, Land Manager and dated 2 August 2018, be received.

2.         That for 2018/19 council approves an overallocation of the Land/Biodiversity component of the Environment Fund budget ($1.032M) by up to 20% ($207K).

3.         That council delegates authority to the Farm Plan Manager to co-approve Environment Fund applications of up to $20K in conjunction with the NRC Chairman’s (or nominated replacement) co-approval of projects.

 

Background

Year to date $900,000 of the Environment Fund budget has been prepared for the first delegated authority approval round, for 150 projects for land management and biodiversity.  $140,000 has already been allocated to over 60 projects for biosecurity, with a second approval round to be held later in the year for the remaining $60,000.

 

The remaining land/biodiversity balance of the Environment Fund of $132,942.00 is over-subscribed and there are over 50 land/biodiversity projects awaiting processing.

 

The final reconciliation of the 2017/18 Environment Fund showed underspends and withdrawals of $210,557.00 which equated to 25% of the total 2017/18 budget.  Withdrawals and underspends happen for a variety of reasons (for example a wet summer, individual personal circumstances changing, lack of fencing contractors, changing farming priorities during the year) and are difficult to manage. 

 

Accordingly, this paper requests an Environment Fund overallocation of 20% ($207K) of the 2018/19 Environment Fund land/biodiversity budget.  The financial considerations section in this report describe why a 20% overallocation is considered preferable to 25%.  A 20% overallocation represents a five year average of underspends and withdrawals.

 

A 20% overallocation would raise the amount of the land and biodiversity component of the Environment Fund available to allocate from $1,032,942 to a total of $1,239,530.   In addition to this, procedures are being further reviewed to attempt to reduce the number of landowners withdrawing and underspending their allotted Environment Fund applications. 

 

This year the Farm Plan Manager will take on the responsibility of managing the Environment Fund and requires delegated authority from council to co-approve projects of up to $20K in conjunction with the NRC Chairman’s co-approval of projects.

Considerations

1.      Options

 

No.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

Provide an over allocation based on 20 % of total 2018/2019 land/biodiversity Environment Fund budget

Ensures greater utilisation of the Environment Fund budget by reducing the impact of withdrawals and underspends and ensures more work is done to improve water quality and biodiversity outcomes.

If withdrawals and underspends are less than 20 % then there will be an unfavourable variation to year end budget. 

2

Decline the 20% overallocation

None

The withdrawals and underspends mean that the total Environment Fund budget is not utilised at the end of the financial year and less work is done to improve water quality and biodiversity outcomes.

 

The staff’s recommended option is option 1.

2.      Significance and engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, this decision is considered to be of low significance when assessed against council’s Significance and Engagement Policy because it has previously been consulted on and provided for in council’s Long Term Plan and/or is part of council’s day to day activities.  This does not mean that this matter is not of significance to tāngata whenua and/or individual communities, but that council is able to make decisions relating to this matter without undertaking further consultation or engagement.

3.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

 The activities detailed in this report are in accordance with council’s 2018–28 Long Term Plan which was approved in accordance with council’s decision-making requirements of sections 76–82 of the Local Government Act 2002. 

 

The primary risk that we aim to mitigate is the underutilisation of the Environment Fund budget caused by underspends and withdrawals.  There is also a financial risk, and this is outlined under consideration 6 below.

 


 

Further considerations

4.      Community views

Being a purely administrative matter, community views are not applicable.

5.      Māori impact statement

Being a purely administrative matter, Māori impact statement is not applicable.

6.      Financial implications

There is the potential of an unfavourable variation to year end budget if withdrawn or underspent projects are less than the recommended overallocation of 20%.

 

The following table demonstrates different scenarios and their financial implications.

 

No.

Scenario

Situation 

Financial implication

1

Current scenario

No additional overallocation of budget is authorised.

The Environment Fund budget is underspent due to withdrawals and underspends.  If this were 20% of the land/biodiversity Environment Fund budget, this would result in a favourable variation of $207K.

2

Worst case

20% additional budget is allocated to account for withdrawals or underspends, but no withdrawals or underspends occur. 

$207K unfavourable variation to land/biodiversity Environment Fund budget.

3

Most likely scenario

Based on the five year average of 20% of underspends and withdrawals, it is likely that close to 20% of the total budget will be withdrawn or underspent.

Limited variation to budget.  For example, a 5% variance to the land/biodiversity Environment Fund budget would be $52K.

 

If an unfavourable variance to budget occurs, then this would need to be serviced from any potential year end surplus or subsequent years’ Environment Fund (that is any overspend will go against an Environment Fund reserve to be repaid in the following year from the Environment Fund budget).  However, the 20 % five year average for underspends and withdrawals indicates that a substantial unfavourable variance to budget is unlikely.

 

7.      Implementation issues

Being a purely administrative matter implementation issues are not applicable.

 

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Bruce Howse

Title:

Group Manager - Environmental Services

Date:

08 August 2018

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 7.6

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Inter-regional Marine Pest Pathway Plan – Discussion Document

ID:

A1094333

From:

Don McKenzie, Biosecurity Manager

 

Executive summary

The purpose of this report is to seek council approval to develop a discussion document outlining the threat of marine pests in the upper North Island and to seek feedback on a range of potential measures to limit their spread – this would primarily focus on the option to develop an inter-regional marine pest pathway plan under the Biosecurity Act.  This consultation project is a partnership between Northland Regional Council, Auckland Council, Waikato Regional Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council, and the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI).  The proposal to embark on a discussion document of this nature was endorsed by the Upper North Island Strategic Alliance (UNISA) in late 2017.

The project would take the form of a discussion document and supporting information and targeted engagement with stakeholders, tāngata whenua and the public as needed.  This consultation project would be run at the same time in the four participating regions with (as far as practical) consistent engagement and communications processes.  Feedback received would inform decisions on marine pest management options in the four regions which could potentially lead to the development of an inter-regional marine pest pathway management plan under the Biosecurity Act 1993 (essentially a joint marine pest pathway plan across the four participating regions).  The discussion document would not be a statutory process but would fulfil many of the consultation requirements if a regulatory mechanism under the Biosecurity Act 1993 (such as an inter-regional marine pest pathway plan) was to be progressed.

It is recommended that council authorise development of a draft discussion document and supporting information (in conjunction with the project partners).  The draft discussion document, supporting information and outline of the consultation would be brought to council for approval prior to being publicly released for feedback (parallel approval processes would occur within other partner councils and UNISA would be updated as to progress).

 

Recommendation(s)

1.         That the report ‘Inter-regional Marine Pest Pathway Plan – Discussion Document’ by Don McKenzie, Biosecurity Manager and dated 6 August 2018, be received.

2.         That council approves the development of a draft discussion document outlining the threat of marine pests and potential responses and associated supporting information.

3.         That the draft discussion document, supporting information and outline of the consultation programme be brought to council for consideration and approval prior to being released for feedback. 

 

Background

The threat of marine pest incursions is particularly high in the coastal waters of northern New Zealand.  This has been evident with the recent spread of pest species such as Mediterranean Fan Worm.  Northland’s coastal waters are particularly susceptible to incursions of marine pests given the range of habitats available, relatively benign climate and the high number of visiting and resident vessels that are a vector for spread.  Northland also has significant cultural, natural heritage and economic values that are potentially impacted by marine pests.  These issues are also faced by neighbouring regions such as Auckland, Waikato and Bay of Plenty, which in combination with Northland accommodate the majority of New Zealand’s vessel movements.

Controlling marine pests once established is extremely difficult and preventing their arrival is far more cost-effective – this is one of the reasons council recently developed a marine pest pathway plan targeting the movement of ‘fouled’ vessels.  However, preventing the spread of marine pests is likely to be far more effective if a coordinated multi-region approach is adopted – there are also likely to be efficiency gains in implementation.  The concept of an inter-regional marine pest pathway plan has therefore been identified as a means to address the issue.

Pathway plans are a mechanism available to regional councils under the Biosecurity Act 1993.  They provide the ability to regulate activity that risks spreading pests rather than the pest itself (e.g. a rule on vessel hull fouling like those recently developed in Northland) – this is a more effective means of addressing risk than traditional pest management plans, which rely on pest presence or controlling the sale, distribution or release.  The Biosecurity Act also provides for one or more councils to jointly prepare a pest management plan or pathway management plan that applies across regions (an inter-regional pest or pathway management plan), but requires that each council approve the procedural steps set out in the Act and each council has discretion over how costs are allocated in their respective regions.

A project to undertake initial scoping and consultation was endorsed by UNISA in late 2017.  This project would take the form of a discussion document and supporting information and targeted engagement with stakeholders, tāngata whenua and the general public.  This would be coordinated across the participating regions and consultation and communications approaches would be consistent as is practical allowing for regional nuances.  The feedback received would inform the identification of management options and potentially the development of an inter-regional marine pest pathway management plan under the Biosecurity Act 1993.

The project has been discussed in detail at the Top of the North Biosecurity Group with partners being Northland Regional Council, Auckland Council, Waikato Regional Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council with support from MPI.  There is potential for other agencies to also participate.  It is anticipated that the discussion document and supporting information for each region could be released late 2018 and the feedback period run over the summer months to coincide with the peak recreational boating season – the timing has yet to be confirmed but ideally the consultation would start late January 2019.  Costs of producing the discussion document, the supporting information and running the engagement process are estimated to be in the order of $15,000 for each council and MPI (excluding staff time) – a total of approximately $75,000.  Feedback received would be reported to UNISA and partner councils early 2019.  Options for the management of marine pests could be assessed and decisions made on next steps at that point. 

The project would be aligned as far as possible with the national process to ensure it has applicability and utility across New Zealand – this ensures the project can be adopted in other regions and/or incorporated into national pathway planning by central government in the future. 

It is recommended that council approve development of the draft discussion document and supporting information in partnership with MPI and participating councils.  This material, with an outline of the consultation programme, would be brought back to council for approval prior to public release. 


 

Considerations

1.      Options

No.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

Do nothing (e.g. await national pathway plan).

No costs associated with consultation.

·      Delay in cross-council measures to address marine pest spread.  

·      No understanding of stakeholder/community views on the matter.

·      Greater risk of new pest incursions.

 

2

No discussion document – start statutory process for inter-regional marine pest pathway plan.

Shorter timeframe and statutory methods have earlier effect.

·      Risk consultation does not meet requirements of the Biosecurity Act.

·      Risks strong negative reaction from communities if not given opportunity to comment prior to formal process.

·      Feedback may identify unforeseen issues/problems or opportunities.

3

Release discussion document with supporting information and engagement programme.

·      More confidence in management options (tested in consultation).

·      Greater stakeholder/ community understanding of issues and options (better buy-in).

·      More confidence consultation meets requirements of Biosecurity Act if statutory options pursued.

·      Costs (estimated at $15,000 per partner – $75,000 total).

·      Delay in statutory process/ legal effect of rules (if pursued).

 

 

Staff recommend option three on the basis it provides greater confidence in selecting management options, better meets consultation requirements of the Biosecurity Act 1991 (in the event a statutory approach is pursued), and is likely to achieve more buy-in from stakeholders/communities.


 

2.      Significance and engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, this decision is considered to be of low significance when assessed against council’s significance and engagement policy because it does not commit significant resources or result in regulatory change.  This does not mean that this matter is not of significance to tāngata whenua and/or individual communities, but that council is able to make decisions relating to this matter without undertaking further consultation or engagement.   

3.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

Being a non-statutory consultation process, the decision to develop a draft discussion document does not present any policy or legislative issues and the consultation process likely to follow is considered good practice.  For similar reasons, risks are considered to be low.

Further considerations

4.      Community views

While Northland communities have an interest in marine biosecurity, the development of a draft discussion document does not result in any regulatory or financial initiatives with material effect on Northland communities.  If progressed, the discussion document would provide an opportunity for the community to express their views.

5.      Māori impact statement

While Māori have an interest in marine pest management, the development of a draft discussion document does not have any substantive regulatory or financial implications with material effect on Māori.  Therefore, no consultation in relation to this matter is proposed or required.  Also, if progressed, the discussion document would provide an opportunity for the community to express their views.

6.      Financial implications

The development of a draft discussion document and supporting information can be met with existing budgets.

7.      Implementation issues

Coordinating the timing and content across four regions will present some implementation issues, however, careful project management should ensure these are managed.

 

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Bruce Howse

Title:

Group Manager - Environmental Services

Date:

08 August 2018

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 7.7

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Representation Review 2018 Final Proposal

ID:

A1094685

From:

Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager

 

Executive summary

This document acts as a ‘placeholder’ for the report ‘Representation Review 2018 Final Proposal’.  This was not included in the main agenda due to Representation Review Deliberations being held on 13 August 2018 and insufficient time to formalise the outcome of these into a report to council.

The report will be sent out to members under separate cover.

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Chris Taylor

Title:

Governance Support Manager

Date:

07 August 2018

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 7.8

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Northland Walking and Cycling Strategy

ID:

A1096093

From:

Darryl Jones, Economist and Jon Trewin, Policy Analyst

 

Executive summary

The purpose of this report is to present to council a final version of the Northland Walking and Cycling Strategy for adoption.  The strategy has been compiled with input from Northland’s district councils, Northland Inc., the Walking Access Commission, the Department of Conservation, NZTA, and with the support of Craig Wilson, a consultant with Quality Tourism Development Limited.  The Regional Transport Committee approved the strategy at their 8 August 2018 meeting with the recommendation to present it to council for adoption.  Adoption of the strategy will give support to Provincial Growth Fund applications and applications to other funding streams for regional walking and cycling projects.

 

Recommendation(s)

1.         That the report ‘Northland Walking and Cycling Strategy’ by Darryl Jones, Economist, and Jon Trewin, Policy Analyst and dated 8 August 2018, be received.

2.         That council adopts the final version of the Northland Walking and Cycling Strategy 2018 as set out in Attachment 1 pertaining to Item 7.8 of the 21 August 2018 council agenda.

 

Background

Council has led the development of a region-wide walking and cycling strategy in collaboration with Northland’s district councils, Northland Inc., the Walking Access Commission, the Department of Conservation, NZTA, and with assistance from Craig Wilson, a consultant with Quality Tourism Development Limited.  Staff have been meeting regularly for over a year and a half to share information on walking and cycling initiatives and the progress of their respective walking and cycling strategies.  The regional strategy has been developed to tie together the goals and aspirations of the district strategies and present a cohesive regional picture.

The strategy has been presented to council at previous workshops (in July 2018).  Since then further development on the strategy has been undertaken to progress it into a finalised state (Attachment 1)

This final version of the strategy was approved by the Regional Transport Committee on 8 August 2018, giving the strategy regional support at the governance level by representatives of district councils and the NZTA.  However, the strategy is primarily a Northland Regional Council document (albeit developed in close collaboration with partner agencies) and therefore requires to be adopted by council.  The adopted strategy will provide a regional context to support applications to various national funding streams.

The most immediate priority is using the strategy to leverage access to the Provincial Growth Fund as walking and cycling (along with other transport projects) are eligible for funding for feasibility studies and to meet construction costs.  The Northland Mayoral Forum have endorsed the development of the Northland Walking and Cycling Strategy as a means to access the Provincial Growth Fund.  Central Government has also indicated that the development of such a strategy is a useful way of drawing together and supporting multiple bids for walking and cycling projects across the region.

Considerations

 

No.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

Council adopts the Northland Walking and Cycling Strategy

The strategy provides a cohesive regional vision that will support regional walking and cycling project bids.

None

2

Council does not approve the Northland Walking and Cycling Strategy

None

Project development and bids will continue but may be less successful without reference to the cohesive vision in the regional strategy.

Singular bids to the Provincial Growth Fund without an underpinning strategy appear to have been less successful.

 

The staff’s recommended option is Option 1.

 

1.      Significance and engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, this decision is considered to be of low significance when assessed against council’s significance and engagement policy.  This does not mean that this matter is not of significance to tāngata whenua and/or individual communities, but that council is able to make decisions relating to this matter without undertaking further consultation or engagement.

In addition, the community at large has not been widely consulted on the strategy for the following other reasons:

·        The strategy is a tying together of district walking and cycling council priorities to support district council national funding bids.  The walking and cycling strategies have, or are being, publicly consulted on (KDC last year, WDC in June 2018, and FNDC in the future).

·        Decisions to commit local funding on walking and cycling will still need to be taken at the LTP/Annual Plan level.

·        The regional council has undertaken targeted consultation with district councils and other interested parties (DOC, WAC) to ensure alignment of objectives and priorities between national, regional and district strategies.

·        The public have been informed on progress on the development of the strategy by including the draft in the June Regional Transport Committee agenda and the final version in the August 2018 agenda.

 

 

 

2.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

No policies or specific legislative compliance matters have been identified that are relevant to this issue and the decision being made.  Risks associated with adopting this strategy are deemed to be low.

Further considerations

3.      Community views

From previous consultation on, for example, the Regional Land Transport Plan, Long Term Plans and district-wide walking and cycling strategies, the public have been very supportive of developing walking and cycling routes.  The decision is likely to impact positively on the community at large by leading to a greater uptake of walking and cycling opportunities in the region.

4.      Māori impact statement

The implementation of the strategy has the potential for positive effects for all local people including Māori . The strategy reflects the aspirations of district walking and cycling strategies which have been developed with Māori involvement.  The regional strategy also includes several actions to involve Māori in the implementation of the strategy, including the development and promotion of trails as well as ensuring their sustainability.  Māori involvement will be particularly important to ensure the delivery of the actions in the strategy.

5.      Financial implications

There are no direct financial costs from approving this strategy.  Approving the strategy may however give funding bids to central government funding sources a greater chance of success.

6.      Implementation issues

The implementation of the strategy will be undertaken through a multi-agency response.  Decisions on the commitment to the local share of funding for projects will still need to be made through the LTP/Annual Planning process.

 

 

Attachments

Attachment 1: Northland Walking and Cycling Strategy - Final  

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Jonathan Gibbard

Title:

Group Manager - Governance and Engagement

Date:

14 August 2018

 


Council Meeting  ITEM: 7.8

21 August 2018Attachment 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


 

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


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 7.9

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Treatment of Whangārei Harbour Board Land

ID:

A1093537

From:

Alicia Jurisich, Property Officer

 

Executive summary

In April 2018, a member of the public approached the Northland Regional Council (‘council’) as he believed the land neighbouring his belonged to council.  After further investigation and legal advice, staff became aware this neighbouring land remained in the name of the Whangārei Harbour Board.  While the land should have been, and could be now, vested in council ownership, for practical reasons Whangārei District Council (‘WDC’) has formally requested that the land be vested in their ownership.

This matter was presented to the Property Subcommittee on 8 August 2018 to consider whether the land should be vested in either council or WDC.  It is the subcommittee’s view that the land be vested in WDC as it is unlikely to provide a return to the investment property portfolio, could potentially become a ‘cost burden’ to council and would be of benefit to WDC.

 

Recommendation(s)

1.         That the report ‘Treatment of Whangārei Harbour Board Land’ by Alicia Jurisich, Property Officer and dated 2 August 2018, be received.

2.         That the Chief Executive Officer have delegated authority to advise the Whangārei District Council of the following:

a.         That full council approve the subject land being, Lot 3 DP 27784 and Lots 46 and 64 DP 18256 of NA978/260 and NA603/162, be vested in the Whangārei District Council;

b.        That Whangārei District Council cover all of council’s legal as well as any other related costs to the transfer; and

c.         That a discussion be held with Whangārei District Council’s Chief Executive Officer to negotiate an appropriate level of benefit to council.

 

Background

Earlier this year a member of the public contacted council regarding land neighbouring his, being Lot 3 DP 27784 and Lots 46 and 64 DP 18256 of NA978/260 and NA603/162 (‘subject land’).  The subject land is a total area of 32,390m².  The land commences at Riverside Drive and is situated adjacent to Mackesy Road.  The member of the public was advised by a local surveyor that the subject land belonged to council.  This person now requires access through the subject land in order to gain access to his own.  Please see the following map identifying properties.

RED: Whangarei Harbour Board land; Green: Land owned by the enquiring member of the public

 


 

The subject land is sloping and covered in trees.  The land is situated below Mackesy Road and above Whangārei District Council (WDC) land – an image of which is below:

 

Residential houses and Mackesy Road on ridge

Subject land - steep covered in trees

WDC flats for parks and recreation

 

Titles confirmed the subject land remains in the Whangārei Harbour Board’s (‘WHB’) name.  WHB land should have been vested in the Northland Harbour Board (‘NHB’) on 1 September 1965.  Legal advice was obtained and council staff were advised that as at the dissolution of the Northland Harbour Board in 1989[2], the subject land should have been vested in the Northland Regional Council.  In short, principals for the vesting of all NHB land were as follows:

i.          Land which was a reserve, or used for recreational purposes or adjacent to any harbour or the sea vested in Whangārei District Council;

ii.         Land which was used for port activities vested in Northland Port Corporation (NZ) Limited; or

iii.        The balance of land vested in the Northland Regional Council.

On this basis, a legal advisor confirmed the subject land should be vested in the NRC.

Prior to council making an application for transmission of land, the WDC contacted NRC staff to advise they believed the subject land should be vested with them.  A formal letter was presented to NRC on 2 July 2018 from WDC’s Manager of Parks and Recreation.  She requested consideration by council that the subject land should all, for practical reasons related to the development of the adjoining land, be in the ownership of WDC.  The main reasons were as follows:

a.         Order principal ‘adjacent to any harbour or the sea’:

             In this case, the land is separated from the former harbour edge by a 10-foot-wide Crown Reserve.

b.         Except for a small area at the northern section of the subject land, it is otherwise identified as a high instability hazard and includes at least one active slip.

c.         Land to the west of the subject land is owned by WDC as recreation reserve.  The filling of this land is currently underway to create an active recreation space which includes sports fields and associated infrastructure.  Filling could extend over the Crown Reserve onto lower levels of the subject land to avoid retaining structures or banked slopes (following b. above).

 

Considerations

1.                                   Options

No.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

Retain the subject land and apply for transmission

·    Additional land into NRC’s Investment Property portfolio.

·    Legal fees for application for transmission.

·    Cost of current works and future maintenance, insurance and rates.

·    Likely not to be rentable.

·    Possible legal fees for ‘neighbour’s’ access i.e. easement over title.

2

Agree the subject land should be vested in WDC

·    Status quo - no extra administration or costs.

·    Assists WDC’s future recreational facility adjacent to the subject land.

·    No gained asset.

 

Both the staff and Property Subcommittee’s recommended option is option 2.  The subject land is unlikely to provide a return to the investment property portfolio and could potentially become a ‘cost burden’.  Funds will be required both upfront and regularly in the future if retained.

2.      Significance and engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, this decision is considered to be of low significance when assessed against council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

The distribution of NHB land was decided upon in the Reorganisation Order dated 1989.  The receivership of such land would then be a part of council’s property investment portfolio.  The change of land ownership therefore being an investment property related matter.  Consequently, public consultation is not required. 

3.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

The receiving of this report is provided for in council’s Investment Policy adopted in March 2018.  Any acquisition or disposal of property investments requires council approval. 


 

Further considerations

4.      Community views

Regarding property investment, the wider community/ratepayers are not significantly affected and then positively as council prudently invests in such properties which return a rental yield. 

The vesting of the subject land in WDC has the potential to benefit the community, supporting the neighbouring future recreational facility, and ensuring council is not burdened with further costs. 

5.      Māori impact statement

Council has previously consulted on the managing of its property portfolio in successive Annual and Long Term Plans.  There were no specific concerns raised from Māori or iwi groups in respect of proposals. 

6.      Financial implications

No implications as the recommendation is that there be no cost to council.

 

 

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Phil Heatley

Title:

Strategic Projects Manager

Date:

13 August 2018

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                item: 7.10

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Biosecurity Operational Plan 2017-2027 - Sustained Control Diseases (Kauri Dieback) Update

ID:

A1098442

From:

Don McKenzie, Biosecurity Manager

 

Executive summary

Operational plans for regional pest and pathway plans are a statutory requirement of the Biosecurity Act 1993.  This agenda item describes the updated operational plan for section 8.1 Sustained Control Diseases in the Northland Pest and Pathway Management Plan 2017–2027.

 

 

Recommendation(s)

1.         That the report ‘Biosecurity Operational Plan 2017-2027 - Sustained Control Diseases (Kauri Dieback) Update ’ by Don McKenzie, Biosecurity Manager and dated 14 August 2018, be received.

2.         That council approve the Biosecurity Operational Plan 2017-2027 – Sustained Control Diseases (Kauri Dieback).

 

 

Background

The Northland Pest and Pathway Management Plan 2017–2027 was adopted in full by council on 21 June 2018 and ordered to come into force on 1 July 2018.

Rules concerning kauri dieback were appealed through the Environment Court, which resulted in improvements being made to the rules for kauri dieback.

Having made the plan, and in accordance with section 100B of the Biosecurity Act 1993, a management agency (the council) must:

(a)    prepare an operational plan within three months after the commencement date of the Regional Pest Plan;

(b)   review the operational plan annually;

(c)    decide on appropriate amendments to the operational plan, if necessary; and

(d)   make copies of the operational plan and every amended version available to the public at cost.

The attached Appendix 1 sets out an updated high level operational plan for section 8.1 - Sustained Control Diseases (kauri dieback) of how the Northland Pest and Pathway Plan 2017–2027 will be implemented and reported upon for this section.

 

 


 

Considerations

1.      Options

 

No.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1

Council approves the operational plan

Operational activities to reduce the risk of kauri dieback disease spreading will be accelerated.

Nil

2

Council does not approve the operational plan

Nil

Delays in operational activities could mean statutory deadlines are not being met and actions to prevent disease spread are delayed.

 

The staff’s recommended option is Option 1.

2.      Significance and engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, this decision is considered to be of low significance when assessed against council’s Significance and Engagement Policy because it has previously been consulted on and is part of council’s day to day activities.  This does not mean that this matter is not of significance to tāngata whenua and/or individual communities, but that council is able to make decisions relating to this matter without undertaking further consultation or engagement.

 

3.      Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

 The decision is consistent with policy and legislative requirements under the Biosecurity Act 1993.

Further considerations

4.      Community views

Kauri dieback is an issue which is receiving considerable public attention and the operational plan reflects how staff intend to work with landowners and the wider public to ensure engagement and the objectives of the management plan are met.  Community consultation was undertaken during the process of making the regional pest and pathway plan and further consultation regarding the implementation of the agreed objectives and rules is not required at this stage. 

5.      Māori impact statement

The implementation of the operational plan has the potential for positive effects for Māori and landowners generally.  In particular, the operational plan sets out the intention to increase the number of council supported community pest control programmes and partnerships which will include Māori landowners and provide support and guidance where needed to support Māori initiatives to reduce the risk of kauri dieback spreading.

 

 

6.      Financial implications

Council contributes $88,000 towards the National Kauri Dieback programme annually and 3.3 FTE has been allocated to implement the operational plan.  Additional budget of $200,000 specifically for the purposes of managing kauri dieback is provided in the Long Term Plan.

 

7.      Implementation issues

The development of a national kauri dieback pest plan led by the Ministry for Primary Industries is in preparation which may establish new objectives and rules.  However, the making of this plan is predicted to be two years away – staff are involved in high level discussions concerning this plan and public consultation, led by MPI, is underway.  At this early stage there are no conflicting implementation issues foreseen.

 

Attachments

Attachment 1: 2018-08-21 Attachment 1 - Biosecurity Operational Plan 2017-2027 Update Sustained  

Authorised by Group Manager

Name:

Bruce Howse

Title:

Group Manager - Environmental Services

Date:

15 August 2018

 

 


Council Meeting  ITEM: 7.10

21 August 2018Attachment 1

Sustained Control Disease (Kauri Dieback)

Sustained control disease and pathogens are generally managed through regulatory and non-regulatory biosecurity programmes.

 

The Kauri Dieback programme is a multi agency programme involving the Ministry for Primary Industries, Department of Conservation, Northland Regional Council, Auckland Council, Waikato Regional Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council and Tangata whenua.

 

Approximately $358,000 3.3 FTE is allocated to sustained control disease / biosecurity partnerships.

 

Council contibutes $88,000 directly towards the Kauri Dieback programe annually.

 

Total number of sustained control disease species: 1

 

Objectives:

·   For the duration of the Pest Plan, prevent the spread of kauri dieback to reduce impacts on biodiversity, cultural and economic values in Northland.

·    Ensure coordination with other government agencies and the Department of Conservation to achieve the Pest Plan objectives.

 

Aims: Over the life of the RPMP this operational plan has the following aims:

·    To maintain a complete record of the full distribution and severity of kauri dieback in Northland.

·    To increase public knowledge and skills, and encourage people to take action to help reduce the spread of kauri dieback.

·    To ensure that measures taken under the Pest Plan are complementary to inter-regional and national approaches to kauri dieback.

·    To utilise scientific and technological advancements to help reduce the spread of kauri dieback including Matauranga Māori.

 

Regulatory programmes include:

·    Enforcement of rules relating to sustained control disease species.

 

Rule 8.1.1

1. Authorised persons will determine whether a property is "high risk" by having regard to:

·      Site status - Is it a confirmed or likely site?

·      Site location - Is it close to known kauri dieback site(s)?

·      Vectors - Is there a high likelihood of spread to or from the site?

·      Any other relevant factors.

 

2. Where the property is identified as "high risk", an approved kauri dieback management plan

shall be prepared by the authorised person in consultation with the occupier / owner /

manager / user (as relevant).

 

3. The minimum criteria for an approved kauri dieback management plan are contained in

Appendix 3 of the Northland Regional Pest and Marine Pathway Management Plan

2017-2027.

 

4. Land owners / occupiers / managers / users (as relevant) within Northland must

implement the approved kauri dieback management plan to reduce the risk of kauri

dieback spreading.

 


 

Rule 8.1.2

Every person who sees or suspects the presence of KDB must report it to appropriate management agency

 

·    Development of high-risk kauri dieback management plans.

·    Council staff and/or their contractors will visit all places on private land suspected of containing Kauri Dieback to undertake further assessment or testing.

 

Non-Regulatory services include (not limited to):

·    Develop and support community pest control programmes (CPCA).

·    Develop and suppport biosecurity environment fund projects.

·    Develop and support significant biosecurity partnerships (NRC-KiwiCoast Partnership and Māori).

·    Support community and landcare groups.

·    Provide advice about how to manage sustained control species.

·    Support, attend and provide public pest control workshops.

·    Provide selected pest control materials.

·    Manage contractors relating to sustained control species.

 

Key performance indicators:

·    100% of high-risk sites have management plans.

·    Respond to requests / incidents within 5 working days.

·    Increase in number of NRC supported community led pest control programmes (Increase by 10% per annum).

·    All exemptions to any rule are reported.

·    Increase in awareness of sustained control species.

·    Increase in hectares of high-risk KDB areas protected by fencing.

 

Council staff will develop an annual Kauri Dieback Work Plan describing a schedule of works for key activities relating to council’s kauri dieback programme.  This will include operational activities relating to the ongoing groundtruthing of priority aerial surveilance risk sites, requests from public and other engagement and educational opportunites.  This will be updated annually.

 

Kauri dieback management plan – minimum criteria (RPMP Appendix 3)

 

All kauri dieback management plans developed under this RPMP must contain the following criteria:

 

1. Description (site name, site location, soil sample numbers and other identification details)

2. Plan objectives to prevent or minimise the spread of kauri dieback

3. Risk factors

a)      Proximity to other kauri;

b)      Proximity to other infected sites

c)      Vectors to infection;

4. Measures to be adopted:

a)      Vector risk mitigation i.e. phytosanitary measures, access limitations, control of feral animals, any otherdetils steps;

b)   Obligation of landowner, occupier, manager, user as relevant;

c)   Parameters and measures to ascertain wheather objectives are being acheived;

5. Monitoring and review

 

 


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 8.1

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Chair's Report to Council

ID:

A1093067

From:

Bill Shepherd, Chairman

 

Purpose of report

This report is to receive information from the Chair on strategic issues, meetings/events attended, and correspondence sent for the month of July 2018.

 

Recommendation

That the report ‘Chair's Report to Council’ by Bill Shepherd, Chairman and dated 8 August 2018, be received.

 

Strategic issues

Local Government Conference and Regional Sector preconference tour

The Local Government New Zealand Conference was hosted by the Christchurch City Council in Christchurch on 15 July 2018.

Traditionally the member councils of the Regional Sector Group have a preconference tour looking at some of the local issues being dealt with by nearby regional councils.  The tour was hosted this year by Environment Canterbury.

Many of Canterbury’s water and soil issues are very different from ours in Northland.  However, seeing how they are dealing with their challenges helps us to understand the thinking that they have applied to meeting those challenges.  Canterbury’s water mainly comes from Alpine sources in major rivers and aquifers.  Their soils are gravel filled and porous, and as a result, nutrients leach very quickly into the groundwater.

One of the techniques that may have a direct application in the Aupouri Peninsula is their ‘aquifer recharge’ programme.  Essentially the technique requires construction of large gravel bottomed ponds, channelling excess irrigation into those ponds and allowing it to soak into the soil, thus recharging the aquifer.

Rubbish

Recent publicity surrounding the impact of plastics in our oceans and landfills has heightened community concerns about our use of plastic and the amount of ‘rubbish’ we generate.

Without wishing to downplay the impact of such solid waste it is important that we do not lose sight of the other aspects of the ‘rubbish’ that human activity generates.  In speaking to a couple of community groups recently I have taken the opportunity to encourage them to recognise that rubbish is way more than just solid waste. 

Human impact on the environment is not just about farmers either, it is about our whole community!  The way we manage our wastewater (urban sewerage and stormwater), dump solid waste like used tyres and appliances, introduce pests and biosecurity challenges, ignore the need to properly clean our footwear when we go into Kauri forests, breed and release pigs into the wild, transmit marine pests on the hulls of vessels, and so on and so on….  All these human activities have a ‘rubbish’ affect on our environment.

The need for vigilance from your Regional Council has never been more important!

From a personal perspective, I am really delighted with the community support that we have received for the big step up in environmental protection work that we signalled in our Long Term Plan.  We have received a few enquiries from ratepayers noticing the significant increase in rates when they have received their invoices, but to be fair we have actually received less than we would normally expect to receive.  Just another signal of the community’s support for what we are trying to do on their behalf.

Meetings/events attended

During this period, I attended the following meetings/events/functions:

·        Meetings attended with the council’s CEO, Malcolm Nicolson:

o   Representation Review Community meeting, Maungatapere.

o   Kaipara District Council Mayor, Dr Jason Smith, and Acting CEO, Curt Martin – office space in the proposed new Dargaville office.

o   Attended the Regional Sector Tour and Local Government New Zealand Conference along with Councillor Penny Smart.

o   Shane Lloyd, Wayne Hutchinson, Sue Dobbie, Councillor Justin Blaikie, and Darryl Jones, Economist  – to discuss a funding shortfall for Manea Footprints of Kupe at Opononi.

·        Regular fortnightly Northland Mayoral Forum teleconference calls.

·        Andy Grant, Operations Engineer, Whangārei District Council – support for application for provincial development money.

·        Tupu Ake launch – Te Puna o Te Mātauranga Marae, NorthTec.

·        Councillor Penny Smart and I participated in a Kaipara Moana site visit – joining Minister Andrew Little, representatives of Ngāti Whatua, Auckland Council, Kaipara District Council, Whangārei District Council, and the Crown out on the Kaipara Harbour.

·        Guest speaker at goodGround Real Estate breakfast meeting.

·        Attended the Mangawhai Harbour Restoration Society AGM held at Mangawhai Heads.

·        Extension 350 update meeting with Councillor Penny Smart, and from Northland Inc. David Wilson, Vaughan Cooper, and Luke Beehre.

Correspondence

During July I sent out the following correspondence:

Date

Addressed To

Subject

04.07.18

Sir Hekenukumai (Hector) Busby

Dr Gordon Hosking

Samara Nicholas

Millan Ruka

Richard Shepherd

Congratulatory letters on Queen’s Birthday honours

11.07.18

Sheryl Mai

Mayor

Whangārei District Council

Support in principle – Provincial Growth Fund – EOI –Hikurangi Swamp


 

12.07.18

Robert and Lohnet Murray

Tai Tokerau Honey Ltd

Congratulatory letter on winning Tai Tokerau Māori Business of the Year 2018 and Excellence in Environmental Management and Awareness

30.07.18

Don McKenzie

Biosecurity Manager

Northland Regional Council

Complimenting the Biosecurity team on the Highly Commended award received at the Air New Zealand Excellence Award for Environmental Impact presented at the Local Government New Zealand Conference

 

  


Council Meeting                                                                                                                  item: 8.2

21 August 2018

 

TITLE:

Chief Executive’s Report to Council

ID:

A1092549

From:

Malcolm Nicolson, Chief Executive Officer

 

Executive summary

To update the council on recent activities and progress on achieving council priorities.

 

Recommendation

That the report ‘Chief Executive’s Report to Council’ by Malcolm Nicolson, Chief Executive Officer and dated 21 August 2018, be received.

 

8.2.1 Highlights

Air New Zealand EXCELLENCE Award for Environmental Impact

The LGNZ EXCELLENCE Awards recognise and celebrate outstanding leadership and impact across community, infrastructure, environment, economic development, and arts and culture within local government.

The Local Government Air New Zealand EXCELLENCE Award for Environmental Impact (highly commended) was presented to our chairman at the annual conference for the marine biosecurity team for outstanding contribution to safeguarding our marine environment. Read more about the awards here http://www.lgnz.co.nz/news-and-media/2018-media-releases/innovative-northland-council-projects-highly-commended-in-lgnz-excellence-awards/.


NZ Biosecurity Institutes Annual NETS Conference

Two members of the NRC team have won two out of three National Awards at the NZ Biosecurity Institutes Annual NET Seminar which was held in Nelson in July.

The Dave Galloway Innovation Award which was designed to recognise innovation in Biosecurity and creativity was won by Cameron Bunton as an acknowledgement of his contribution to the council’s PestControl hub and its ongoing improvement.

The Peter Ingram Award which is given to a member of the Biosecurity Institute who has successfully undertaken or enable others to achieve, relevant to pest plant education, control or management was awarded to Sara Brill for her enduring work with communities to improve weed awareness and weed action

 

8.2.2 CEO’s Office

SHARED SERVICES

The four Councils recently met for a stocktake of current projects that are currently ‘in train’ including four waters, IT services, provision of GIS in a single viewer, and LIDAR.

 

SENIOR MANAGEMENT APPOINTMENTS

Deputy CEO

As part of the ongoing evolution of the organisation's leadership capabilities in order to strengthen the senior management team's ability to effectively and efficiently deliver the recently approved LTP, I am very pleased to announce that Bruce Howse has been appointed to the role of Deputy CEO.

Bruce will retain his current role as Group Manager – Environmental Services but with the appointment of a Deputy GM – Environmental Services he will have the support to carry out his extended responsibilities. As Deputy CEO, he will work with me on organisational overview initiatives and operational duties and fill in for me when necessary.

 

Deputy Group Managers

Further to the announcement made at the end of last week, I am pleased to announce the following appointments to Deputy Group Manager positions:

·    Sue Brookes Deputy GM – Customer Service -Community Resilience

·    Carol Cottam Deputy GM – Corporate Excellence

·    Tess Dacre Deputy GM – Regulatory Services

·    Duncan Kervell Deputy GM – Environmental Services

The position of Deputy GM for Governance and Engagement has been held off until an appointment has been made for the Manager – Maori Engagement role. This new role came out of the LTP.

 

COUNCIL PROPERTY UPDATE

Commercial & Industrial

· Agreement for the purchase of a Kaitāia CBD property settled on 9 August.

· Agreement for the purchase of a Whangārei CBD property settled on 9 August.

· Agreement for the purchase of nine Whangārei CBD properties adjacent to other council freehold titles settled on 14 August.

Current Legal Proceedings

Department

Description

Status

Consents

To construct a boardwalk as part of a coastal walkway in Back Bay, Mangawhai Estuary

Mediation held on 10 April 2018.  Parties made a confidential agreement with further mediation being adjourned until 30 June 2019.

Consents

Seventeen (17) groundwater takes for horticultural irrigation at Houhora, Motutangi, and Waiharara

A pre-hearing meeting for the Environment Court is scheduled for 10 August 2018 to clarify the appellants and section 274 parties.  All parties have agreed to mediation.  Court direction is to be provided after the pre-hearing meeting.

 

8.2.3 Corporate Excellence

Fraud Declaration

I am not aware of any fraud nor am I investigating any incidence or suspected incidence of fraud at this time.

 

Finance

The draft financial result for the year ending 30 June 2018 is a $21K surplus compared to the budgeted surplus in the Annual Plan of $26K.

In arriving at the surplus of $21K, $64K has been deducted to represent the unspent operational budgets proposed to be carried forward and used to fund the completion of operational projects in 2018-19. A further $68K has also been deducted to represent the unspent operational budgets already approved to fund capital projects.

The draft result does not include $1.8M of non-cash revaluation gains on council’s property and forestry assets. After accounting for these non-cash revaluation gains and removing the special reserves movements, the statutory accounts will present a total Comprehensive Revenue and Expense (bottom Line) of approximately $4.3M. A full explanation of material variances to budget will be included in the Annual Report document, which will be presented to council for adoption on 20 November 2018.

This is a provisional result and there may be further adjustments and amendments as the year-end reconciliations are reviewed by senior staff and the statutory accounts are prepared.  There may also be amendments arising from council decisions.

Deloitte begin their three-week on-site audit on 27 August 2018, with weekly debrief meetings scheduled that Geoff Copstick will attend.

8.2.4 Regulatory Services

Proposed Regional Plan

Hearings are scheduled to start on 28 August 2018.  There will be about 15 days of hearings held in Kaitāia, Kerikeri, Whangārei and Otiria Marae.

A separate hearing for genetically modified organisms (GMO) submissions will start on 30 October 2018 in Whangarei and run for 2-3 days. 

Staff released their recommendation reports for the main hearings on 6 July 2018.  The recommendation the report(s) for the GMO hearings will be released mid September 2018.

The deadline for receiving evidence from submitters for the hearings was 10 August 2018.


National Planning Standards

See Item 7.3.

 

Zero Carbon Bill - Consultation

The Ministry for the Environment released a discussion document on potential legislative change to set targets for reducing green-house gas emissions by 2050 and establishment of a climate change commission. Council lodged a submission on the discussion document under the signature of the CEO after circulation to councillors for comment.

 

Land use and subdivision applications

During July 2018, 15 non-notified resource consent applications were received from the district councils.  No comments have been made at the time of writing.

 

Consents in Process

During July 2018, a total of 57 Decisions were issued.  These decisions comprised:

 

3

Moorings

 

 

7

Coastal Permits

 

 

1

Air Discharge Permits

 

 

6

Land Discharge Permits

 

 

2

Water Discharge Permits

 

 

30

Land Use Consents

 

 

2

Water Permits

 

 

6

Bore Consents

 

 

 

The processing timeframes for the July 2018 consents ranged from:

 

§ 232 to 3 calendar days, with the median time being 28 days;

§ 145 to 3 working days, with the median time being 20 days.

 

39

Applications were received in July 2018.

 

Of the 95 applications in progress at the end of July 2018:

 

26

were received more than 12 months ago (most awaiting further information);

14

were received between 6 and 12 months ago (most awaiting further information);

55

less than 6 months.

Appointment of Hearing Commissioners

No commissioners were appointed in July 2018.

Consents Decisions and Progress on Notified Applications in Process, Objections and Appeals

The current level of notified application processing activities at the end of July 2018 is (by number):

 

§ Applications Publicly/Limited Notified During Previous Month

0

§ Progress on Applications Previously Notified

5

§ Hearings and Decisions

2

§ Appeals/Objections

2

 

Compliance and State of the Environment monitoring

The results of compliance monitoring for the period 1 – 31 July 2018 (and year-to-date figures) are summarised in the following table and discussed below.

 

Classification

Total

Full compliance

Non-compliance

Significant non-compliance

Not exercised during period

Air discharges

12

9

2

0

1

Coastal permit

69

51

12

0

6

Discharge permit

63

48

13

0

2

FDE – Discharge permit

38

28

7

3

0

FDE – Permitted activity

32

27

1

4

0

Land use consent

48

32

6

0

10

Water permit

243

173

52

0

18

Total

505

368

93

7

37

Percentage

 

72.87%

18.41%

1.39%

7.33%

YTD

505

368

93

7

37

 

Air discharges

A total of 36 air quality related environmental incidents were received, 25 of which related to burning and smoke nuisance and six to odour nuisance.

Continuous ambient PM10 monitoring results for June 2018 for the Whangārei and Marsden Point airsheds, and Kaikohe, showed that compliance was met with the National Environmental Standards for Air Quality (NESAQ). PM2.5 monitoring results for Whangārei were within the Ambient Air Quality Guideline value. 

 

Coastal

The majority of consents monitored during the reporting period related to coastal discharges (treated municipal sewage, boat ramp cleaning and boat maintenance facilities) and dredging. 

Routine water quality sampling of the Whangārei, Bay of Islands and Kaipara harbours and southern estuaries (Mangawhai, Waipū and Ruakākā) was carried out.

 

Hazardous substances

·     Four incidents involving the discharge of hazardous substances and 29 enquiries regarding contaminated land were received and responded to.

·     211.3 kg of hazardous wastes was disposed of. 

New safety procedures for staff undertaking hazardous waste disposal have been developed and implemented. Controlled Substance Licence training has also been completed to ensure that staff can safely and legally handle waste substances used in pest control operations.

The Northland Regional Council and Whangarei District Council received a letter from the Minister for the Environment regarding the solvent processing operation at Ruakaka. Both councils are working together with government agencies to address site management issues and intend to provide a joint response to the letter.

 

Discharge and land use monitoring

Routine compliance monitoring of discharge and land use consents continued during the period.

·     Council staff attended a Hikurangi Swamp Working Group meeting, hosted by WDC. There were no issues raised for NRC.

Since 1 May 2018 (when the National Environmental Standards – Plantation Forestry came into effect), NRC has received 82 notices of activities. The majority of these were for harvesting, which has created considerable work load for council staff.

 

Farm Dairy Effluent (FDE) Monitoring

FDE inspections commenced on 16 July 2018.  This is about a month earlier than normal, with the early visits being made to winter milking farms. A total of 876 farms will be visited by the FDE contractor or council staff prior to Christmas. To date about 8% of these have been visited and reported on.  The results for consented and permitted activity farms are tabled below and compared with those for the same period last year.

 

Consented FDE discharges

A total of 38 consented farms have been visited and reported on, which is about 6% of the total consented farms to be visited.

Full Compliance

Non-Compliance

Significant Non-Compliance

This Year

Last Year

This Year

Last Year

This Year

Last Year

28

0

7

0

3

0

74%

0%

18%

0%

8%

0%

 

Non-consented FDE discharges

A total of 32 non-consented farms have been visited and reported on, which is about 15% of the total non-consented farms to be visited.

Full Compliance

Non-Compliance

Significant Non-Compliance

This Year

Last Year

This Year

Last Year

This Year

Last Year

27

0

1

0

4

1

84%

0%

3%

0%

13%

100%

 

Environmental incidents

There were no incidents recorded during the reporting period which resulted in a significant environmental impact.

 

Enforcement

Abatement and infringement notices

The following notices were issued during the period:

Offence / Activity

Number of individual offences

Abatement notice(s)

Infringement Notice(s)

Burning and smoke nuisance

3

1

2

Coastal structure

2

2

1

Farm dairy effluent discharges

1

1

1

Discharge contaminant to water

1

 

1

Disturbance to foreshore

1

 

1

Total

8

4

6

 


 

Other Enforcement

Dumping and burning of demolition waste Kaikohe

Charges have been laid against two companies, two individuals (associated with the two companies) and a land owner for the dumping and burning of demolition waste near Kaikohe.  Statements of evidence are required to be delivered to the defence by 3 September 2018.  The case has been adjourned to 10 October 2018 for a “Case Review Hearing”.

 

8.2.5 Environmental Services

16.       Land Management

Environment Fund Update

The first project funding approval round is set for 7 August 2018 with 166 projects totalling $915,829.


Farm Water Quality Improvement Plans (FWQIP) – 2018/19

This financial year 30 FWQIP’s have been commenced and 2 have been completed.


Upper Hātea

18 environment fund grants have so far been applied for this financial year, covering fencing, planting and troughs. 

 

Monitoring done by the Whitebait Connection with community and school groups in the Waitaua catchment (funded for 2 years by WDC) has found some water quality issues at two sites in particular.  These will be investigated over the coming weeks.  WDC funding for on-going monitoring of these extra sites has been withdrawn, however this work is deemed to be really beneficial for understanding the issues in the catchment, so the monitoring will be continued for the next financial year at least.

 

Flyger Road Nursery expansion

Nursery expansion planting was completed in late July and took a period of 4 1/2 weeks to complete.  This is our largest planting undertaken yet with close to 40,000 stems of poplar and willow planted across the new expansion blocks and the existing nursery to fill in gaps where previous plantings had failed.  The majority of all the poplar planted this season are of the Kawa clone variety which were sourced from the existing nursery during the recently completed harvest.   Shrub willow plantings were also increased this year to keep pace with projected demand.

Approximately 400 stems of poplar and willow varieties were obtained via the NZ Poplar and Willow Trust breeding group at no cost. Many of which are new varieties to Northland which will be first evaluated in the nursery and then trialled at selected sites in Northland.


Soil Conservation Plant Material Supply

Supply of soil conservation plant material from the Flyger Road nursery finished August 1. Again, new systems and assistance and the wider land team all played a role in distributing material out to clients across the region in good time.  This year provisonally 6,551 poplar and 1162 willow poles were supplied to landowners.


 

BIODIVERSITY

FIF Dune Lakes Project

Iwi partnerships

A hui was held at the Ngāi Takoto office in Kaitāia on 26 July 2018 including representation from Te Aupōuri, Ngāi Takoto, Te Rarawa and Te Hiku Iwi Development Trust.  The objective of the hui was to seek consent to proceed with herbicide operations at Ngāi Takoto and Te Aupōuri-owned lakes.  Both project partners agreed to proceed.  Contact has also been made with Ngāti Kuri for agreement to undertake herbicide operations at a lake under their co-ownership with Te Aupōuri. 

 

Pest survey

The exotic fish and water-weed survey closed in July and analysis of the results is underway. Response rates appear in the following table.  This information will be added to biological data from the 100 lake ecological surveys and NIWA Freshwater Fish Database.  Note that some surveys covered more than one waterbody/property.

 

 

Wetlands

Staff provided advice on a range of wetland and biodiversity issues including:

·    Northland coastal wetland planting guide for DOC;

·    Advice on wetland and riparian clearance rules; and

·    Protection and enhancement of kahikatea stands and wetlands at both Waipū estuary and Tinopai coastal wetland.

 

One biodiversity plan was completed (Onewhero Bay) and two Environment Fund applications submitted (Tapuaetahi Inc. and Waipoua River Headwaters) for wetland/riparian protection. 

A survey of rare mudfish was carried out in the Kerikeri Airport gumland (Top Wetland #19) and fencing projects are currently in progress with Land Management Advisors for Kaipeha Swamp (Top Wetland #10) and Wairahi Swamp/Lake Taeore (Top Wetland #52).


Integrated Kaipara Catchment Management Group (IKHMG)

A meeting of the IKHMG Management Sub-committee was attended. A business plan and work plan developed recently identifies the need for additional support staff to implement the plan’s actions.  The IKHMG is investigating an application to the Provincial Growth Fund transitional funding. 

The IKHMG quarterly hui is scheduled for Thursday 23 August at the Kaiwaka Sports Pavilion and it is expected that there will be significant central government representation e.g. Office of Treaty settlements.  The key note speaker will be Danielle Johnson on Social Dimensions of Climate Change in the Kaipara Catchment.  A workshop on community aspirations for restoration of Kaipara Moana is also planned.  Councillor Smart has indicated she will attend and there is an opportunity to extend the invite to other NRC staff and councillors.

CoastCare

The Taipa CoastCare dune restoration project has been running successfully for ten years however, erosion has narrowed sections of the restored dune, making the land behind vulnerable and increasing maintenance requirements.  Earlier this year approval was given to move the barrier fence landward to widen the dune and increase its resilience.  This work has started this winter with two blocks widened landward, weeded and planted out with a mixture of native dune plants provided through the Environment Fund. 

 

A dune planting day with Whangarei Primary School students was attended at Pataua North.  The event was one of several organised by Tahi Honey and QEII National Trust to restore the health and function of the dunes in the covenanted area with a focus on improving conditions for the threatened dune plant Pimelea villosa (sand daphne).  Plants were provided through the NRC Environment Fund and QEII National Trust and some were grown by Tahi Honey staff in their onsite shade house.


BIOSECURITY

Biosecurity Threats/Incursions

Mycoplasma bovis

Councils Biosecurity Incursion Management Officer is continuing to assist the Ministry for Primary Industries with the management of ten Northland farms, six of which have been issued with Notices of Direction (NoD), one with a Restricted Place Notice (RPN) and three farms have had their notices revoked due to the properties being declared disease free following testing.  The restrictions (NoD and RPN) are in place while ongoing surveillance for M bovis is being carried out which restricts the movement of stock and other risk good onto and off the property. 

 

The Government along with the dairy and beef industries have agreed that an attempt will be made to eradicate M bovis. There is only one strain of the disease present in New Zealand which indicates a single source of infection.

 

Currently, the disease is still not widespread with 39 infected farms nationwide and approximately 233 out of 20000 farms (1%) under some form of restriction.   Latest updates can found at the link below:

https://www.mpi.govt.nz/protection-and-response/responding/alerts/mycoplasma-bovis/


Marine Biosecurity

Following the recent incursion of Mediterranean fanworm in Opua divers have been in the area conducting an intensive survey and have removed so far a total of 88 individuals. The average fanworm tube length is 305mm with the largest being 745mm. Conditions are poor as visibility is often low and currents strong. Divers have now been asked to stand down temporarily as discussions will take place with Ministry for Primary industries and key stakeholders regarding the next phase of management for the area. To date approximately $100,000 has been spent on the response.


Biosecurity Partnerships

Kiwi Coast – NRC Partnership – Monthly Update

The Department of Conservation’s 2017 Kiwi Call Count Report has confirmed kiwi populations are either stable or increasing at almost all sites with good dog control and sustained predator control on the Kiwi Coast, with close to 40 kiwi calls per hour recorded at a Bay of Islands site. 

 

Analysis of the Northland 2017 kiwi call count data showed the number of kiwi calls per hour increased in the Northern and Southern areas, and that the Eastern Area again had the highest kiwi call rates in Northland. The highest kiwi call rate was recorded at the Marsden Cross listening station, at an average of 38.8 kiwi calls per hour!

 

These results buck the national trend identified by the Kiwis for Kiwi Trust in 2014 of a 2% decline per annum in kiwi populations nationwide, and show the hard work being carried out by all the community, iwi and hapu led kiwi recovery projects involved in the Kiwi Coast is paying off. 

 

Feral Pigs

Staff are continuing to receive regular requests for assistance from landowners to manage and control feral pigs throughout Northland.   Two community meetings were attended this month largely generated by community wanting action on feral pigs and to discuss the risks feral pigs (and the pig hunters chasing them) pose in regard to the spread of kauri dieback.

 

The first meeting held in Waimamaku was called by Te Roroa and DOC kauri coast to provide feedback of results from a pilot pig control programme that was carried out in Waipoua 18 months ago. This pilot programme used contractors and employed local hunters and hunters which followed a biosecurity hygiene protocol used in Waitakere’s by Auckland Council and Ark in the Park.

 

Biosecurity staff also attended a hui called by mana whenua at Takahiwai to discuss options for feral pig control in the Takahiwai forest.  An overview of kauri dieback, its distribution and how it spreads was given as well as advice on hygiene protocols that should be used by all users of the forest to reduce the risks of spreading the disease into Takahiwai.

 

The group is also interested in having a more holistic view of pest control in the Ngahere Forest at some stage with a goal of reintroduction of species like kiwi and oi (shearwater sea bird). Staff are supporting mana whenua to develop a community pest control plan to address a range of pests and work towards restoring the Takahiwai Forest.

 

RIVERS

Priority Rivers

Work

 General Status

Comments

Awanui

OpEx

0% complete

Tender is posted on GETS and Closes 24 Aug

Awanui

CapEx 

5% complete

Work is progressing with Bell’s Hill Bench

Kaihu

OpEx

0% complete

Tender is posted on GETS and Closes 31 Aug

 

LTP Projects

Rivers

Comments

Awanui

Asbestos removal from the Firth Concrete site has been completed.  Demolition of the buildings is underway, followed by concrete breaking and work that can be completed in wet weather. 

Detailed design work for the Bell’s Hill Bench and Te Ahu -Fast Track bank stabilization work is progressing.  Resource Consenting for these works is also progressing.  

Matangirau

A meeting is scheduled with FNDC to define roles.  

Kawakawa - Taumarere

Communication plan has been developed with NRC Comms Team

Whangarei

The team is progressing with notices to the land owner to conduct survey and geotech work.

Panguru

A working group meeting is scheduled for 9 August. Channel maintenance works done in May / June appear to have been well received by the community.

 

NATURAL HAZARDS

Work Streams

% complete

Comments

Regional LiDAR Project

5%

Delivery of 726 km2 of LIDAR data in and around the Awanui catchment has been completed. A copy has been dispatched to LINZ, and the engineering consultants working on the flood model, and Preliminary Scheme design.

 

The contractor, RPS, is concluding a contractual agreement with an NZ based aviation company to complete capture of the region.

Priority Rivers Flood Hazard Maps

85%

Waipu and Paparoa catchment flood mapping is due to be delivered in August. The next release of flood mapping information will be for these catchments, together with the Kerikeri catchment.

Awanui Flood Model

 

20%

Data transfer from NRC to the engineering consultants working on the flood model and the Preliminary Scheme design is virtually complete.

 

In house modelling, have given a better understanding of the overflow of SH-1 and this information is being shared with the consultants working on Awanui projects.

 

HYDROLOGY

Hydrology Team & Water resources Work Programme:

The hydrometric station health and safety mitigation work has been completed at the below sites:

·    Mangakahia Gorge water level station.

·    Kaihu Gorge water level station

·    Ngunguru at Dugmores Rock water level station

·    Maungaparerua water level station

·    Whakapara water level station

 

July ended as a notably dry month with monthly totals well down on what would normally be expected.  NIWA has recently indicated a possible shift to El Nino conditions this summer.  The winter rainfalls totals will be monitored closely as 40% of Northland annual rainfall is received in winter.

 

 

8.2.6 Governance And Engagement

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Investment and Growth Reserve – Projects

Project

July update

Future developments/ reporting

Extension 350

Fourth quarter 2017/18 report due in July.

 

Resources Enterprise Limited (REL)

Continue to engage with directors.  Lack of progress is disappointing and indicates an elevated risk.

Continue to engage with directors.

Hundertwasser Art Centre (Whangārei)

None.

Awaiting provision of project plan and other conditions associated with first payment.

Kawakawa Hundertwasser Park Centre (Te Hononga)

None.

Prepare funding agreement between council and the Trust.

Extended Regional Promotion

None.

Report for the six months ended June due in mid-August 2018.

Twin Coast Cycle Trail (TCCT)

None. 

Awaiting further progress reports and associated invoices to complete funding commitment.

Demand assessment for new water storage

Developing application for PGF funding; meet with various tangata whenua, workshop with councillors. 

Application submitted. 


Investment and Growth Reserve – Business case funding by Northland Inc.

Since the decision taken at the February 2018 council meeting to allocate responsibility for funding business case assessments to Northland Inc., the following business cases have been supported.

·    April: Whangārei CBD Hotel development and Marine vessel haul out opportunity

·    May: Ngawha Springs redevelopment

·    June: Marine sector capability and Russell Museum redevelopment

Further business case allocations made Northland Inc will be reported through the CEO report as they occur and at quarterly council workshops with Northland Inc. 


Other activities undertaken included:

·    Northland Walking and Cycling Strategy – workshop discussions with councillors, update project spreadsheet and discussions with forum members. Revised version prepared for RTC meeting on 8 August. (This has been included in the August agenda for approval.)

·    Prepared two submissions: MBIE consultation on International Visitor Conservation and Tourism Levy, and Commerce Commission consultation on deregulation on national roaming service.

·    Key messages for councillor workshop discussion with new board of Northland Inc. 

 

ONLINE CHANNELS

·    Highlights – Biosecurity Week (Shining the light on innovation)

 

Biosecurity Month was reduced to ‘Biosecurity Week’. Working with this year’s theme we promoted the popular Pest Control Hub series, showcased a few of the innovative ways we carry out Biosecurity in Northland and confronted more of the controversial pests we deal with such as Mediterranean Fanworm. As a result, we reached over 53,000 people and engaged with more than 6,000.

 

·    Most popular post on Facebook this month – it was brought to our attention that some people were promoting the fostering of possum joeys (young possums) via social media.
As a result, we published a Facebook post outlining the rules in our Regional Pest and Marine Pathway Plan (Rule 7.3.8) and why possums are Northland’s number one animal pest.

 

Key Performance Indicators

Mar-18

Apl-18

May-17

Jun-18

Jul-18

WEB

 

 

 

 

 

# Visits to the NRC website

29,200

25,000

13,100

17,500

12,800

E-payments made

2

2

6

0

No data

# subscription customers (cumulative)

1,171

1,165

1,173

1,165

1,153

SOCIAL MEDIA (cumulative)