Agenda of Extraordinary Council Meeting

Extraordinary Council Meeting item: 5.1

19 May 2021

TITLE:	Council Deliberations on the Long Term Plan 2021 - 2031 Consultation Document and Supporting Information
ID:	A1434870
From:	Kyla Carlier, Acting Strategy Policy and Planning Manager and Casey Mitchell, Management Accountant
Authorised by Group Manager:	Bruce Howse, Group Manager - Corporate Excellence, on 13 May 2021

Executive summary/Whakarāpopototanga

The purpose of this report is to provide background information and convey to council staff advice and recommendations to support council’s deliberations on the submissions received on the proposals within the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

Council consulted on their Long Term Plan 2021-2031 from 13 March until 16 April 2021. Council’s consultation points were in four main categories:

· Natural environment: addressing water health, managing our catchments, biodiversity, biosecurity (land and marine).

· Community resilience: flood protection, emergency management (upgrading our tsunami warning system and new emergency coordination centre), climate change resilience, improving water resilience, harbour safety and navigation, increasing city link services.

· Regional leadership: Māori partnerships and supporting the work across council.

· Other Decisions: Oruku landing conference and events centre, funding economic development, changes to rates, reviewing financial reserves, updates to policies.

171 submissions were received during the consultation period, one of which received 22 pro-forma submission in support. These have been collated and analysed in relation to the original proposals. This report contains 107 recommendations that relate to the matters contained in the consultation document and supporting information, and other feedback received during the process.

The proposals set out in council’s consultation material amounted to an overall average impact on council’s rates revenue of 19.8%. Alternative options were presented in the consultation material where council had capacity to ‘do more’, at greater cost. Where these ‘do more’ options or any other additional spend is recommended in this report, the recommendation is highlighted and presented in the context of the additional amount this would add to the overall increase in rates revenue.

If council were to carry all recommendations in the report, including those for additional spend, the increase in council’s rate revenue would be 21.04% in 2021/22, 13.98% in 2022/23, and 10.13% in 2023/24.

The percentage increases presented in this report represent increases to council’s rate revenue (how much council collects). The average increase to individual rate bills is variable, and dependent on factors such as land value and targeted rates that apply.

Following deliberations, the final Long Term Plan 2021-2031 will be updated to reflect the decisions made, with final adoption of the plan scheduled for 22 June 2021.

Recommendations

1. That the report ‘Council Deliberations on the Long Term Plan 2021 - 2031 Consultation Document and Supporting Information’ by Kyla Carlier, Acting Strategy Policy and Planning Manager and Casey Mitchell, Management Accountant and dated 16 April 2021, 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 2021-2031.

Options

Options are presented throughout this paper for each decision, as appropriate.

Considerations

1. Environmental Impact

If funded, the work programmes that comprise the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 (that are addressed individually in this deliberations report), will significantly increase council’s ability to respond to environmental issues and opportunities.

The risks and impacts of these proposals have been considered by council over the past six months with staff, by way of a series of workshops.

2. Community views

A comprehensive process of consultation has been carried out to inform the recommendations set out in this report. A summary of this consultation and the feedback received is included in this report to inform council’s decisions on the Long Term Plan 2021-2031.

3. Māori impact statement

The process of consultation included circulation of a pānui inviting feedback on the Long Term Plan proposals to over 300 recipients on council’s iwi and hapu database. The long term plan process involved early engagement with Māori through the Māori Technical Advisory Group during the development of the proposals. The Te Tai Tokerau Māori and Council Working Party has been provided with progress updates.

4. Financial implications

Financial impacts or implementation issues are addressed in recommendations included within this report.

5. Implementation issues

Any implementation issues are discussed on a per-proposal basis in the discussion sections of this report.

6. Significance and engagement

Section 76AA of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) directs that council must adopt a policy setting out how significance will be determined, and the level of engagement that will be triggered. This policy assists council in determining how to achieve compliance with LGA requirements in relation to decisions.

The proposals set out in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document triggered council’s significance and engagement policy, and a comprehensive processes of consultation and engagement has now been carried out. The results of this engagement have been summarised in this document to inform council’s deliberations and decision-making process.

The process of deliberations assists council in achieving compliance with sections 77 of the LGA.

7. Policy, risk management and legislative compliance

Consultation on the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 proposals has been carried out pursuant to sections 93, 93A, 93B, and 93C of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) and in accordance with the special consultative procedure (section 83 of the LGA).

Consideration of submissions through the process of deliberations will achieve compliance with section 77 of the LGA (Requirements in relation to decisions) and with council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, in particular ‘We will consult when we are required to by law, when a proposal is considered significant, and when we need more information on options for responding to an issue’.

Background/Tuhinga

Long Term Plan process

Consultation on council’s Long Term Plan (LTP) 2021-2031 proposals, as set out in the Long Term Plan Consultation Document and supporting information, is now complete. Submissions were received during the consultation period and these have been collated and summarised to assist council in their deliberations. They have also been made available to council and the public online as they were received and provided to council in full in a separate report.

Council officers have reviewed the feedback and provided their advice on each of the topics to be considered by council during the deliberations meeting.

One day has been set aside (19 May 2021) for council’s deliberation on the proposals set out in the Consultation Document, submitters feedback, and any other matters that have been raised during the consultation period.

Following council’s deliberations, council officers will prepare the final Long Term Plan 2021-2031 which will undergo full external audit to ensure that the decisions made by council during deliberations are accurately reflected, and the revised financial statement reflect the assumptions stated in the plan.

Preparing the final plan will involve revising financial information, including rating data provided by the district councils, and new projections for investment income. Should there be any material differences to budgets or rates as a result of these revisions, council officers will highlight these to councillors in advance of the adoption meeting.

Audit is scheduled for 24 May to 11 June. A council meeting to adopt the final plan is scheduled for Tuesday 22 June 2021.

Early engagement overview

Prior to and during development of the proposals set out in the Long Term Plan consultation document, council officers and councillors carried out a period of early engagement with the community. Due to an increase in Covid alert levels, only half of the physical events were able to proceed, with very successful engagement achieved at the Whangārei and Waipu markets, and the Kaikohe ‘Business After Five’ event.

An online early engagement campaign was also carried out, reaching nearly 31,000 people, with 2,900 unique visitors to the web page, and 155 people participating in the online engagement tool.

Council officers also worked with the Māori Technical Advisory Group through a series of workshops during the development of the Long Term Plan proposals, with all input provided to council.

Consultation overview

A period of consultation was carried out on the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document from 13 March to 16 April 2021. A wide range of communication tools were used during this time to promote the proposals and the process.

During the consultation period council officers and councillors ran seven ‘Have Your Say’ events around the region, which presented an opportunity for members of the community to present their views to councillors in person, as well as to better understand the proposals. Events were held in Whangārei (two events), Kerikeri, Otiria, Waipū, Dargaville and Kaitāia. Attendance at these events varied, with over 87 attendees recorded in total.

The ‘Have Your Say’ events were held in place of public hearings, and feedback received at the events was fully recorded, and is provided as attachment 1 to this agenda. Staff have considered this feedback in providing their recommendations to council as part of this report.

Council received 171 written submissions on its Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document. Of these submissions, the majority were about the proposals within the Consultation Document and a range of other issues which have been summarised in this report (the full summary of submissions is provided as attachment 2 to this agenda). In addition 22 pro-forma submissions were received in support of a group submission focussed on environmental protection.

Social media was also used to inform the community of the proposals, and direct people to council’s website to provide formal feedback. Comments were received via social media in response to long term plan posts, which were considered and responded to by staff as appropriate. These comments, and staff responses where provided, have been collated into a social media feedback report, included as attachment 3 to this agenda.

Feedback from the Have Your Say events and social media has been considered by staff in their analysis of the proposals, however these comments do not contribute to the statistical analysis of feedback on proposals. The statistical analysis referenced in the summaries of feedback received rely on written feedback received by way of hardcopy submission form, email, letter, and online feedback via the consultation portal, that were received during the consultation period.

Late submissions

Council maintains a policy of accepting submissions up to four days after the official closing date. The council received several submissions after the consultation deadline Friday 16 April, and incorporated these into the process as they arrived.

Inadmissible submissions

Council did not receive any submissions that were deemed inadmissible due to being illegible or not providing sufficient contact details.

Structure of this report

The Consultation Document set out specific proposals that feedback was invited on, structured around the four main areas of natural environment, community resilience, regional leadership and other decisions. The impact of these and other spend proposed in the Consultation Document was an average increase of 19.8% to councils rates revenue in 2021/22, and between 0.98 and 14.55% across the following nine years. The per-year rates increases that were proposed are set out in the significant forecasting assumptions, in the supporting information document.

Where ‘do more’ options or any other additional spend is proposed in this report, the recommendations are highlighted and presented in the context of any additional amount this would add to the overall increase in rates revenue.

Each of these main consultation topics are outlined below for discussion. Recommendations for each topic are set out together, and are followed by a staff discussion and analysis of the proposals including any alternative options as appropriate, and any impacts on rates if proposals have changed since consultation. This is then followed by a summary of the submissions received in relation to that consultation topic.

Generally there was strong support for what council proposed, and in most cases staff recommend that council support the proposals that were consulted on. However, there are some areas where, as a result of feedback, staff recommend a different approach from what was consulted on. This may result in a recommendation that differs from the approach consulted on, or may introduce a new area of spend. These recommendations are clearly highlighted in this report, and in summary included:

· Additional funding for regional planning

· An amendment to funding of the Kaipara Moana Remediation programme

· Bringing funding for wetland mapping forward

· Bringing funding for a Regional Biodiversity Strategy forward

· Bringing funding for feral deer eradication forward

· New funding for Predator Free Te Taitokerau projects

· Reduction of spending on the Kawakawa flood mitigation stopbank

· Additional funding for climate change resilience

· Additional funding for a zero-carbon transition plan

· Additional funding for community engagement

· Movement of capital spend for customer services to later years

Staff will be available during deliberations to provide clarification on or further explain any recommendations that may not be clear in this report.

8. Changing the structure of rates

Recommendations:

1. That council supports combining the land management rate and the freshwater management rate into one targeted region-wide rate called the ‘land and freshwater management rate’, to continue to be set based on the equalised land value of each rateable unit in the region, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

2. That council supports the re-naming of the civil defence and hazard management rate as the emergency and hazard management rate, to continue to be set based on equalised capital value and number of rating units or separately used or inhabited parts of a rating unit (SUIPs), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

3. That council supports re-naming the current regional infrastructure rate as the regional economic development rate and applying it to activities that support economic wellbeing and community infrastructure via the investment and growth reserve, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion

The proposal to combine the land management and freshwater management rate reflects the current situation where the two rates are calculated in the same way and fund very similar activities, with the link between land management and freshwater management becoming increasingly strong.

Combining the rates does not result in an additional cost, or a change to the way that the rate is set. It is not anticipated that combining the rates will reduce transparency, as both rates are set based on land value and the rating funding impact statement clearly sets out what the rate is collected for. Annual reporting does not break down individual rates.

The proposal to re-name the civil defence and hazard management rate as the emergency and hazard management rate provides for better alignment with the activity at central government level. Expanding the activities funded by the rate to include targeted climate change work appropriately aligns the activity with the rate.

The regional infrastructure rate, which was originally set up to fund the Marsden Point Rail link, has been renamed and re-purposed to the economic development rate. After the occurrence of Covid-19 there was high uncertainty around council’s commercial income which is used to fund economic development through Northland Inc. Making the change in this rate allows us some certainty around the funding associated with economic development and removes the reliance on commercial income solely for this activity.

The rate was previously directed to the infrastructure facilities reserve but now that this reserve has closed, revenue collected through the rate will be directed to the investment and growth reserve.

The majority of feedback received through the consultation process was supportive of the proposed changes.

Summary of feedback received | Changing the structure of rates

Ninety-two of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 46 agreeing with the proposal, 28 disagreeing, 19 neutral and 79 not selecting an option. Of submitters who agreed with the proposal, support was noted for this projecting a more positive image, and renaming the rates.

Of submitters who disagreed with the proposal, support was noted for maintaining the distinction between land and freshwater management rates. Concerns were raised over these things being trivial, that this it is hiding increased costs, that combined rates are not the best for transparency, and there being no framework for Māori. Of submitters who were neutral, concerns were raised over the this being re-marketing and packaging so that rates can be diverted. Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, only one comment stated to rate for what was needed and do the work.

9. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT

Addressing water health

Recommendations:

Providing quality data

4. That council supports the provision of an additional $95,000 in 2021/22 and 2022/23, $30,000 in 2023/24 and 2024/25, and $25,000 each year following, and capital spend of $25,000 in 2021/22, for continuous and automated data collection and processing tools, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

5. That council supports the provision of an additional $73,000 in 2021/22, $79,000 in 2022/23 and $158,000 each year following, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2021/22 and 2023/24 to fund and support additional environmental data management officers, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

6. That council supports the provision of an additional $90,000 in 2023/24 and $89,000 each year following, and $2,200 of capital spend in 2023/24, for a specific hydrology data officer, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

7. That council supports the provision of an additional $35,000 in 2023/24 for the digitisation of historic environmental records, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Monitoring water health and responding to legislation

8. That council supports the provision of an additional $10,000 in 2021/22 and $45,000 each year following, and capital spend of $95,000 in 2021/22, to upgrade the recreational bathing system, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

9. That council supports the provision of an additional $60,000 in 2022/23 and $58,000 each year following, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2022/23, for a junior hydrology officer, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

10. That council supports the provision of an additional $95,000 in 2023/24 and $94,000 each year following, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2023/24, for a freshwater ecologist, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

11. That council supports the provision of an additional $154,000 in 2022/23, and $153,000 each year following, and capital spend of $12,000 in 2022/23 and 2024/25, and $10,000 in 2027/28 and 2030/31, to update the freshwater monitoring networks, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation represents a change to what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document, by removing spend of $71,000 in 2021/22. This is because external funding for this work has not been confirmed. The spend was proposed to be allocated to an additional freshwater monitoring position, starting in 2021/22. The position is now proposed to start in 2022/23. This change has no impact on rates from what was consulted on.

12. That council supports the provision of an additional $167,000 in 2022/23, $244,000 in 2023/24 and $243,000 each year following to upgrade the lake monitoring programme, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

13. That council supports the provision of additional capital spend of $295,200 in 2022/23, $12,960 in 2024/25, $170,840 in 2025/26, $66,800 in 2027/28, $160,000 in 2028/29, $12,960 in 2029/30 and $8,640 in 2030/31 to support the upgrade of the lake monitoring programme.

While this recommendation has no additional impact on rates or budget from what was consulted on, it represents a change to what was proposed, as the capital spend element of the lake monitoring programme was not specifically outlined in the Long Term Plan 2021 – 2031 Consultation Document.

14. That council supports the provision of an additional $115,000 in 2021/22 and $114,000 each year following, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2021/22, for a water resources scientist, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Water resilience

15. That council supports the provision of an additional $79,000 a year from 2022/23, reducing to $44,000 a year from 2025/26, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2022/23 for a groundwater officer, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

16. That council supports the provision of an additional $40,000 a year for a water allocation tool, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

17. That council supports the provision of an additional $50,000 in 2024/25, and capital spend of $155,000 in 2023/24 and $10,000 each year following, for a targeted research and monitoring project to understand freshwater resilience, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

18. That council supports the provision of an additional $100,000 in 2021/22 and $150,000 in 2022/23 for council’s contribution toward the Aupouri aquifer and surrounding surface water project, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

19. That council supports the provision of an additional $160,000 in 2021/22, $232,000 in 2022/23, $235,000 in 2023/24 to 2025/26, $248,000 in 2026/27 and $235,000 every year following for general operating budget to support the step-change in work with resources such as summer students, annual subscriptions for telemetered equipment, training and consultants, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Capital spend only

20. That council supports the provision of capital spend of $113,000 in 2022/23, $292,000 in 2023/24, $12,000 in 2025/26, $178,000 in 2028/29, $105,000 in 2029/30 and $151,000 in 2030/31, to update and relace assets and equipment for coastal water quality and hydrology programmes, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

21. That council supports the provision of capital spend of $60,000 in 2022/23 for new groundwater monitoring stations, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

22. That council supports the provision of capital spend of $80,000 in 2021/22 and $20,000 in 2022/23, for a high-resolution digital river network model, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

23. That council supports the provision of capital spend of $160,000 in 2021/22 for a high-resolution land-use GIS layer enabling limits for freshwater resources to be set at catchment scale, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

24. That council supports the provision of capital spend of $72,000 in 2022/23 and $54,000 in 2023/24 and 2024/25, for the expansion of the hydrometric network including new telemetered flow stations, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Planning and policy

25. That council supports the provision of $80,000 in 2021/22 and 2022/23 for the process of proposing a new coastal occupation charge for structures in the coastal marine area, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

26. That council supports the provision of $250,000 a year from 2022/23 to implement Te Mana O Te Wai, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

27. That council supports the provision of $250,000 in 2021/22 and $255,000 in 2022/23 to cover the cost of making changes to the Regional Plan for Northland in accordance with central government requirements.

This recommendation represents a change to what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021 – 2031 Consultation Document, by introducing an additional $250,000 in 2021/22. The majority of the proposed new spend ($230,000) can be covered by the funding freed up as a result of reducing the provision for uncollectable rates, in consideration of te ture whenua Māori bill. If the recommendation is carried as proposed this would have an additional impact of 0.06% on rates in the first year, above what was consulted on.

Compliance monitoring

28. That council supports the provision of $95,000 in 2021/22, $228,000 in 2022/23 and $226,000 each year following, and $8,800 of capital spend, to expand the compliance monitoring team in response to new requirements from central government, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion

Addressing water health (data, monitoring, resilience and capital)

There was clear support from submitters (about 84% of those that responded) for council to further invest in freshwater resources management, echoing the clear message from the government that more work needs to be done to protect and improve freshwater quality and preserve security of supply. The proposed additional funding will enable council to further develop an understanding of freshwater resources and ensure a more environmentally holistic approach is adopted to deliver robust decision-making and policy development processes. This will provide for the work to enable further improvements to be delivered to Northland’s freshwater resources including rivers, lakes and groundwater.

Planning and policy

The Long Term Plan 2021 – 2031 Consultation Document proposed an additional $255,00 for 2022/23 to fund changes to the Regional Plan in response to new government requirements set out in the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management. However, it has become apparent that additional funding of $250,000 will also be needed in 2021/22 to fund regional planning activities:

· An additional $200,000 is required for costs in defending appeals on the Proposed Regional Plan, which are considerably higher than anticipated (particularly legal costs for preparing for and attending Court hearing). While council has made good progress on resolving appeals, there are still several hearings to go including the estimated three-week hearing for the appeals on fishing controls.

· An additional $50,000 is required proposed for research and/or modelling for preparing the plan change to implement the National Policy Statement for Freshwater. This would be in addition to the proposed $80,000 already budgeted for consultancy services. It will likely be used for research/modelling to assess the effects of different mitigation scenarios on reducing sediment from planted forests, which is a gap in the council’s information. This will put council, tangata whenua and the community in a better position to make informed planning decisions in implementing the National Policy Statement for Freshwater.

To assist in reducing the impact on rate where areas of critical new spend have been identified, it is proposed that new funding of $230,000, that has been made available as a result of reducing the provision for uncollectable rates (resulting from te ture whenua Māori bill), be applied to this proposal. The remaining $20,000 represents an increase to rates of 0.06% in Year 1.

There was considerable support for council to spend more than the proposed $250,000 a year to implement Te Mana O Te Wai (about 40% of those that responded). The purpose of this funding is to assist tangata whenua to be actively involved in council freshwater management activities and to support tangata whenua in undertaking their own freshwater management activities. There is no guidance as to what an acceptable level of funding would be. For now, $250,000 a year from 2022/23 is considered an appropriate balance of providing a significant increase in the council's investment in supporting tangata whenua, while not compromising council's investment in other priorities. It is anticipated the level of funding is something that will be reviewed after a period of implementation.

A decision to approve funding for a plan change for coastal occupation charging does not mean that council has decided to proceed with such a plan change. This is will be subject to a separate future decision.

Compliance monitoring

Feedback indicated general support for compliance monitoring. The additional resources proposed for compliance monitoring will be used to help deliver on central government’s requirement for Regional Councils to maintain or improve fish passage and other statutory requirements in the National Policy Statement (NPS) and National Environmental Standards (NES) for freshwater management.

Summary of feedback received | Addressing water health

Ninety-eight of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 45 choosing the proposed option, 38 choosing another option, 15 choosing none of the above and 73 not selecting an option but still making comment.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, three comments directly related to sewerage spills, two to council only undertaking the essential work regarding addressing water health, and two to keeping the rates increase low/manageable.

Of submitters who chose another option, many noted how important water quality is and its benefits, showing support for increased monitoring, testing and data collection. Some submitters showed support for Te Mana o Te Wai and more iwi/hapū involvement, and for improving water ways having positive impacts on climate change. Submitters also noted issues with allocation, stock, rubbish, wastewater discharges, chemicals and algae blooms.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, comments related to keeping costs down with no additional spend, and support for Te Mana o Te Wai, more lake monitoring and groundwater mapping.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, comments noted the importance of clean water and access to this (including allocation issues), improving water quality and health, increased monitoring, support for community led groups, coordination with other agencies, fencing of water ways, planting more trees and protecting existing trees, and increased regulatory action. Concerns were also raised over the use of chemicals/pesticides.

Managing our water catchments

Recommendations:

29. That council supports the provision of $740,845 a year toward the Kaipara Moana Remediation programme.

This recommendation represents a change to what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document, by increasing the proposed annual cost to ratepayers from $585,000 to $740,845. From 2022/23, this additional cost is able to be fully offset by additional investment revenue. If the recommendation is carried as proposed this would have an additional impact of 0.5% on rates in the first year only, above what was consulted on.

30. That council supports the provision of $311,000 in 2022/23 and 2023/24 to support work in catchments across the region through the environmental fund, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

31. That council supports the provision of $57,000 in 2021/22, $66,000 in 2022/23 and $16,000 in 2023/24, $83,000 in 2024/25, $92,000 in 2025/26, $76,000 in 2026/27, $81,000 in 2027/28, $174,000 in 2028/29, $154,000 in 2029/30 and $162,000 in 2030/31 to support expansion and operations of the poplar and willow nursery, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

32. That council supports the provision of capital spend of $777,000 in 2021/22 and $250,000 in the two years following, and $26,000 a year from 2027/28, to support expansion of the poplar and willow nursery, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

33. That council supports the provision of $50,000 in 2022/23, $80,000 in 2023/24 to 2025/26, $60,000 from 2026/27 to 2029/30, and $40,000 in 2030/31 to support the movement from farm plans to a catchment-based model, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

34. That council supports the provision of capital spend of $12,500 in 2021/22 and 2022/23, and $15,000 in 2023/24 and 2024/25 to support the movement from farm plans to a catchment-based model, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

35. That council supports the provision of $30,000 a year from 2024/25, and capital spend of $250,000 in 2022/23 and 2023/24, to support freshwater farm planning, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

36. That council supports the provision of $230,000 a year up until 2025/26 and then $10,000 each year following, and capital spend of $1,000 in 2021/22 to expand the soil quality monitoring network and fund S-map as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

37. That council supports the provision of $125,000 in 2021/22 and 2022/23, to carry out comprehensive wetland mapping.

This recommendation represents a change to what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document, by bringing forward the proposal from years 2024/25 and 2025/26. From 2022/23, this additional cost is able to be fully offset by additional investment revenue. If the recommendation is carried as proposed this would have an additional impact of 0.4% on rates in the first year only, above what was consulted on.

Discussion:

Improving water quality is a high priority issue for many people. It is widely recognised that land management across catchments is key to improving the quality of water that eventually reaches Northland’s harbours and coasts. Many landowners, tangata whenua, rural industries and central and local government are now focussing on a catchment-wide approach to improving water quality.

The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management 2020 promotes or requires catchment (freshwater management unit) based action plans for areas with specific water quality issues.

Northland has some generic water quality issues such as sediment and bacterial contamination and these problems can be mitigating more effectively by working with groups of landowners in catchment areas, rather than with individual farmers as staff have historically done. will also work in collaboration with other parties to provide advice and funding to help capture the hearts and minds of landowners and ensure remediation action does get done on the land.

A significant portion of the planned work is part of the Kaipara Moana remediation programme, a $300M, decade-long project to restore the health and mauri of the harbour. The ambitious programme is an equal partnership between Kaipara Uri and councils. As part of securing $100M of central government money for the project, council needs to increase its contribution, as does Auckland Council. To enable council’s contribution to the project to be fulfilled and keep the burden on ratepayers low, it is intended that borrowing be used to cover the funding shortfall. This then enable the cost to the ratepayer to be spread over a longer period than the life of the project.

The original proposal for funding the project involved borrowing the full amount of council’s contribution, with the intent of keeping the impact on rates low as possible. Upon receiving legal advice we have remodelled to only borrow the funding shortfall after rate collection. The effect of this is a loss in interest earned and the need to rate slightly higher during the life of the project to cover a portion council’s contribution. This represents an increase of 0.50% per year for the 12 year period.

While some submissions raised concerns about historic use of poplars and willows, new varieties of these trees remain the most cost-effective soil conservation tools available. The council’s poplar and willow nursery is expanding to include varieties that should better tolerate Northland conditions under drier climatic conditions and when extreme weather events will make the soil conservation programme even more important.

Council will continue to support the use of native trees where appropriate, for example in riparian areas and retired marginal pastoral land.

Accurate soil information is essential for achieving community aspirations around reducing sedimentation, improving water health and maintaining versatile soils to support Northland’s rural economy. S-map, New Zealand’s modern digital spatial soil information system, provides comprehensive, quantitative soil information to support sustainable development at various scales and will better inform council’s knowledge on how and where sediment, nutrients, and other contaminants make their way into receiving environments. S-map also provides the basis for revising Land Use Capability (LUC) mapping, resulting in more accurate spatial representation of Highly Productive Land to support land use decision making for both farmers and district and regional planners.

Investing in S-map as outlined in the recommendation will provide Northland with valuable land resource information to assist in addressing issues highlighted by submitters:

· Sustainable, resilient economic growth

· Soil conservation and soil erosion from hill country

· Security of water supply

· Drought resiliency

· Flood prediction

· Improved water quality

· Farm environment planning

New freshwater regulations are complex, so council will also be supporting farmers and industry professionals to ensure consistency in working with the new regional and national rules. One way in which staff will do this is through the provision of digital tools to support the development of Farm Environment Plans.

Wetland protection and restoration is a key requirement of the NPS-Freshwater management and fundamental to enhancing biodiversity and water quality outcomes. However, currently there is no accurate or comprehensive set of wetland maps for Northland. Since the LTP consultation document was released, two wetland mapping projects have progressed in Northland that provide a unique opportunity for council to work alongside these projects to establish for the first time a comprehensive set of wetland maps for Northland. Establishing a consistent robust dataset of existing wetlands across Northland is a fundamental step towards reversing the decline in those wetlands and promoting their enhancement. The required spend represents an increase of 0.40% in Year 1 and 0.40% in Year 2 of the LTP.

Of the 95 submitters who commented on these proposals, 74 submitters either supported council’s proposals or supported council to do more (36 submitters). Based on this continued strong support for council to increase its efforts in this space, staff are recommending that all proposals be supported as they were presented in the consultation document, with the exception that the wetland mapping proposal be brought forward from 2024/25 to 2021/22.

Summary of feedback received | managing our water catchments

Ninety-five of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 36 choosing the proposed option, 38 choosing another option, 21 choosing none of the above and 76 not selecting an option but still making comment.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for increased monitoring and mapping, community/hapū led projects (including funding of these), and protection of drinking water. Concerns were raised over the use of poplars, the effects of forestry, and the proposed rates increase.

Of submitters who chose another option, support was noted for extra funding/support for landowners/communities/hapū, improved water quality, increased planting, and farm plans. Concerns were raised over farming and wastewater, and the enforcement of farming practices.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, support was noted for increased funding for projects, farm plans (and the enforcement of them), planting native trees, and monitoring and mapping. Concerns were raised over deforestation, the use of poplars, the water health and catchment topics being separated, and the proposed rates increase – noting don’t do more, use existing budgets with no increases.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, support was noted for funding equity, riparian planting, the proposed initiatives, a broader focus (not just Kaipara), community education, more use of native species, ongoing investment into remediation of Kaipara Moana, and the protection of soils/existing native vegetation/mature trees. Concerns were raised over algae blooms at Waipū Cove, wastewater discharges, the limited actions council has proposed, and the use of chemicals/pesticides. Comments also noted that the greatest impacts for global warming are in land management.

Biodiversity

Recommendations:

38. That council supports the provision of $82,000 in 2021/22 increasing to $109,000 from 2022/23 onwards, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2021/22, to develop and implement a biodiversity action plan, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

39. That council supports the provision of $85,000 in 2021/22, increasing to $90,000 in 2022/23 and each year following to expand the CoastCare and Taitokerau Coastal Kaitiaki programmes, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

40. That council supports the provision of $20,000 in 2022/23 and $40,000 in 2023/24 to deliver a Regional Biodiversity Strategy.

This recommendation represents a change from what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document, by bringing forward funding from year 2024/25 to 2021/22 and providing an additional $40,000 in year 2022/23. From 2022/23, this additional cost is able to be fully offset by additional investment revenue. If the recommendation is carried as proposed this would have no additional impact on rates, above what was consulted on.

Discussion

A high proportion of comments received were supportive of the proposed options for biodiversity, or indicated a preference to do more.

It is proposed that the Regional Biodiversity Strategy, required by the proposed National Policy Statement (NPS)-Indigenous Biodiversity, will be developed in-house in collaboration with key stakeholders and put out for consultation in 2024/25. This Strategy is for the whole of Northland and will seek to foster inter-agency and community collaborations and alignment of work programmes to ensure more efficient and effective regional biodiversity protection. Given that the NPS Indigenous Biodiversity is envisaged to be released in late 2021, it is recommended that council bring forward its programme to develop the Regional Biodiversity Strategy from Year 4 of the LTP to Year 2, as it’s anticipated that a delay of 3 years to commence the development of this strategy will not align with government regulations nor community expectation. An additional $40,000 is also sought in 2023/24 to provide expert advice and analysis, and support stakeholder engagement. This change represents an increase of 0.06% in 2022/23 and 0.13% in 2023/24.

The biodiversity action plan, and protection implementation, will expand current operational programmes to meet priority actions, including increasing current work to protect and restore wetlands and other priority habitats as well as associated outcome monitoring from 2021-22. Once the Regional Biodiversity Strategy is in place it will help guides these operational programmes. The action plan is not a new regional biodiversity strategy but covers annual implementation workplans to restore sites and is in line with the current draft Northland Regional Council Actions and Ambitions Plan. This new initiative enables the biodiversity team to expand current work programmes in the wetland and biodiversity space in line with landowner demand and community aspirations. Doing more for biodiversity was generally supported by submitters.

Existing kaitiaki ranger programmes in the Far North have demonstrated their effectiveness at reducing environmental damage in coastal areas from activities such as use of vehicles in dunes. This damage is affecting not only the biodiversity values of these areas but also their functioning as natural defences against coastal hazards and threatens culturally significant sites such as middens and burial grounds.

Key to the success of these programmes have been collaboration between agencies and iwi and thorough training and support of the rangers. As well as advocacy work, rangers can be involved in restoration activities such as planting and weed control. CoastCare groups and other volunteers do a lot of restoration work in coastal areas but there are large gaps, especially in less populated areas.

The proposed funding would establish a Kaitiaki Ranger position with the role of supporting and facilitating the establishment of future kaitiaki ranger programmes in hotspot areas around the coast as well as enabling the CoastCare programme to expand. It’s important to note that the funding does not provide for the establishment of a kaitiaki ranger programme but for a staff resource to continue to develop this partnership. Additional funding will need to be secured either through central or local government agencies in the future to support the implementation of future programmes.

There was some strong support in the submissions for implementing expanded kaitiaki programmes, not only to educate beach users but also to undertake restoration work. 45% of those who submitted on the biodiversity section chose the ‘another option’ which included council providing additional funding to support the implementation of a Taitokerau Kaitiaki Ranger Programme.

Summary of feedback received | Biodiversity

Ninety-six of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 38 choosing the proposed option, 44 choosing another option, 14 choosing none of the above and 75 not selecting an option but still making comment.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for regulatory functions only, a biodiversity plan and a regional biodiversity strategy (and starting with these, not taking them further), and prioritising the prevention of further decline of biodiversity and remediating where damage has already occurred. Concerns were raised over algae blooms at Waipū Cove, the rates increase as proposed, the effects of human activities and drought conditions, the use of chemicals/pesticides, forestry, commercial beehives, and rabbits/wild pigs/cats/dogs.

Of submitters who chose another option, strong support was noted for funding iwi-based kaitiaki rangers. Support was also noted for the ranger option to be open for all Northlanders, increased pest plant investment within high value areas, and funding for coastal care work/implantation of the NPS on Biodiversity. Submitters noted that this was essential work (protecting biodiversity).

Of submitters who chose none of the above, support was noted for increased monitoring for implementing and enforcing existing rules, improving service delivery, and Te Mana o Te Wai. Concerns were raised over writing new plans that would not be implemented/enforced, existing strategies not working, the proposed rates increase, and effects of Canadian geese/swans.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, support was noted for funding to protect special sites with high biodiversity values and community led pest-control programmes, alignment with existing strategies in Northland, managing vehicles in coastal areas, development of a biodiversity strategy and action plan, and funding for legal protection of priority biodiversity sites. Concerns were raised over dog control rules, the health of ancient trees, wastewater discharges, and the use of chemicals/pesticides.

Biosecurity - land

Recommendations:

41. That council supports the provision of $110,000 a year to fund low-incidence pest plant work, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

42. That council supports the provision of $438,000 in 2022/23 increasing to $536,000 in 2023/24, $818,000 in 2024/25 and $866,000 from 2025/26, and capital spend of $4,400 in 2022/23 and 2024/25, for the staff and operational costs of Kauri dieback management, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

43. That council supports the provision of $190,000 a year from 2021/22 to 2023/24, increasing to $290,000 a year from 2024/25, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2021/22, to fund work to eradicate feral deer from Northland.

This recommendation represents a change to what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document, by bringing the proposed spend forward a year, and maintaining spend out to 2030/31. From 2022/23, any additional cost is able to be fully offset by additional investment revenue. If the recommendation is carried as proposed this would have an additional impact of 0.6% on rates in the first year only, above what was consulted on.

44. That council supports the provision of $53,000 in 2021/22, $81,000 in 2022/23 and 2023/24, and $162,000 from 2024/25 onwards, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2021/22 and 2024/25, to fund the provision of roles with a focus on supporting community led pest plant work as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

45. That council supports the provision of $100,000 in 2021/22, $200,000 in 2022/23 and $300,000 in each year following to support the Predator Free Te Taitokerau project.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

46. That council supports the provision of $180,000 in 2022/23, $300,000 in 2023/24 and $450,000 each year following to support future Predator Free Te Taitokerau projects.

This recommendation represents a change from what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document by introducing new expenditure in line with ‘another option’ as consulted. This additional cost is able to be fully offset by additional investment revenue. If the recommendation is carried as proposed this would have no additional impact on rates, above what was consulted on.

Discussion:

Ninety–five submissions were received relating to Biosecurity – Land. Over 86% of respondents supported councils proposed actions to increase Biosecurity action with submitters encouraging council to further increase the levels of funding for pest management. Thirty one percent of submitters agreed with council's preferred option to spend $2.5 million to do the essentials, while over 50% of submitters preferring that council step up a gear and go even further.

On the back of this continued strong community support, staff propose accelerating some programmes and /or scaling up existing programmes and levels of service.

Staff propose to move feral deer programme funding forward from year 2 to year 1. This would increase rates by 0.61% in year one and 0.32% in year 4 and would have no additional impact in subsequent years beyond what was proposed in the consultation. Moving this programme forward will have the benefits of accelerating the appointment of a specialised deer officer and upscaling the actions to prevent the further spread of feral deer throughout Northland. In addition to damaging native vegetation, there is the added benefit of eradicating feral deer as they also pose a significant risk to Northland’s kauri forests by spreading the kauri dieback disease.

There was clear support from the community around ensuring that damage from introduced pests is addressed and for increasing community involvement. Staff propose to boost existing biosecurity partnership capacity to support new Predator Free Programmes. Current discussions indicate this will most likely be within the Kaipara catchment. This represents an increase to rates of 0.57% in Year 2, 0.96% in Year 3, and 1.43% in Year 4.

Summary of feedback received | biosecurity - land

Ninety-five of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 30 choosing the proposed option, 52 choosing another option, 13 choosing none of the above and 76 not selecting an option but still making comment.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for eradication of roadside weeds plus provisions for community groups to get involved, eradicating wild pigs in high value areas, concentrating on possums, eradicating wild kiwifruit, prevention of soil-borne pathogens with good hygiene practice, the use of hunters in place of traps, kaitiaki rangers, and encouraging landowners to practice sustainable and eco-friendly land management. Concerns were raised over the proposed rates increase, local authorities not enforcing their own rules and regulations, and the effects of unleashed dogs.

Of submitters who chose another option, support was noted for possum control being priority plus wild pigs (noting leave deer alone), pest free corridors (linking mountains to sea) and community led projects, control of feral cats and educating cat owners, clearing weeds to allow space for plants to address erosion, support for volunteers, better coordination between local authorities, further support for Piroa Brynderwyns, increased support for high value areas, and kaitiaki rangers. Concerns were raised over mitigating climate change, roadside and widespread aerial spraying, creating new problems as we fix existing ones, and the use of chemicals.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, support was noted for doing the essentials and no more, continuing with the current levels of service, and focusing on the framework of Te Mana o Te Taiao with a broad range of perspectives needed. Concerns were raised over existing strategies not working and the proposed rates increase.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, support was noted for promotion/support for responsible cat ownership, a regional biodiversity strategy and action plan, increased resourcing and capacity for pest control, community-led programmes, priority for high values areas, prevention/minimising further incursions, sustainable non-toxic biodiversity care, the Tutukaka Coast being pest-free, and assisting landowners with pest suppression/eradication. Concerns were raised over the loss of biodiversity, disproportionate impacts of climate change on indigenous people, escalation of pest animals and plants, and the use of chemicals/pesticides.

Biosecurity - marine

Recommendations:

47. That council supports the provision of $100,000 in 2021/22, and $25,000 a year from 2022/23 to develop a cohesive approach to managing marine pests with a centralised database, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

48. That council supports the provision of $314,000 in 2021/22 and $124,000 for the three years following to respond to an incursion of Mediterranean fanworm, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Community feedback illustrated strong support (>76%) for the proposed initiatives to reduce risks of new marine pests entering Northland, to facilitate consistent rules across the “Top of the North” and to continue localised eradication efforts for Sabella spallanzanii (Mediterranean fanworm).

The majority of submitters indicated a preference for this work to be either fully or partially funded through an increased charge paid by the owners of moorings, marina berths and ports. Staff maintain their recommendation that this proposal be funded by general rates (option 1). Vessel owners will continue to receive a targeted charge which partially funds council’s vessel surveillance and education programmes; however, localised eradication attempts represent an unpredictable cost burden and, if successful, lead to broad ranging benefits for all Northlanders. Furthermore, the Clean Hull Plan ultimately aims to achieve consistency in marine biosecurity rules and an agreed cost allocation model to fund these programmes across Northland, Auckland, Waikato and Bay of Plenty. Staff recommend awaiting the outcome of this inter-regional process before considering any changes to the current marine user charges.

Staff are currently actively engaging with the Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) seeking to secure Crown funding of $100,000 per year to contribute towards the cost of the fanworm incursion response in the Bay of Islands. The Crown has paid for 50% of this incursion response to date and initial indications are that MPI will continue to co-fund the work. While this response is complex, technically challenging, and the chances of successful eradication is not high, advice from Biosecurity New Zealand along with independent scientists is that there is a fighting chance and continuing the efforts is the best choice at this stage to try and protect the Bay of Islands and the rest of Northland not yet impacted by this harmful marine invader.

If council is successful in securing Crown funding, it is proposed that the $100,000 per year that is saved be re-invested in the Clean Hull Plan by empowering iwi/hapu to upskill and lead implementation efforts in their rohe. Staff anticipate providing professional development pathways for interested kaitiaki to become certified Occupational Divers, free divers, or vessel skippers and recruiting them to survey vessels or conduct marine pest monitoring activities. This will ensure the long-term sustainability of the Clean Hull Plan by building local capability and capacity.

Partnering with industry (e.g. marinas and haul out facilities) is also essential to the success of the vessel database as the Clean Hull Plan is developed, which is accounted for in the proposed funding.

Summary of feedback received | biosecurity - marine

Ninety-three of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 22 choosing the proposed option, 49 choosing another option (1), 12 choosing another option (2), ten choosing none of the above and 78 not selecting an option but still making comment.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for all people paying for this work, not just marine users.

Of submitters who chose another option (1), support was largely for a user pays scheme, eg. boaties / mooring owners / marinas, to reduce the burden on ratepayers. Concerns were raised over marine incursions being likely to increase.

Of submitters who chose another option (2), support was noted for discontinuing to charge boaties for marine pest inspection monitoring, enforcement focusing on large commercial international vessels, and getting marae and hapū to help with monitoring. Concerns were raised over wasting money on trying to eradicate fanworm and that it is impossible to control any incursions.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, support was noted for concentrating on boarder control, user pays, and focusing on the framework of Te Mana o Te Taiao with a broad range of perspectives needed. Concerns were raised over existing pests being unable to be controlled and therefore it’s wasting money trying to, the costs being unfairly pitched towards mooring/boat owners, and the proposed rates increase.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, support was noted for inter-regional collaboration on the spread of marine pest and further work on reducing pest populations and eradication where possible, extra funding for marine biosecurity, further development of inter-regional partnerships, and implementation of precautionary and prohibitive rules around the release of genetically modified organisms in costal marine areas. Concerns were raised over the use of chemicals/pesticides and the use of revenue collected via a biosecurity charge for marine biosecurity inspections.

10. COMMUNITY RESILIENCE

Flood protection - Awanui River flood scheme upgrade

Recommendations:

49. That council supports completing the Awanui River flood scheme upgrade in three years instead of eight, and paying off borrowings for the scheme in 12 years instead of 30, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Staff recommend completing the programme in 3 years and taking advantage of the $8.51 million central government ‘shovel ready’ funding and lower interest rates to repay the debt in 12 years instead of 30. Strong support has been received for the continuation of this programme of work and the cost saving to ratepayers by accepting the Crown contribution and paying the debt off over a shorter period of time.

Summary of feedback received | Awanui River flood scheme upgrade

Eighty-nine of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 49 registering agreement with the proposal, 11 registering disagreement, and 29 being neutral.

Of submitters who agreed, comment was made on the need to protect the community, noting climate change, support for a targeted rate on the area, making the most of central government funding, and the need to consider the lower reaches of the area.

Of submitters who disagreed, concern was raised about building in flood areas, that the eight-year scheme should be sufficient, that the funding model isn’t suitable, and that changes need to be made upstream.

Of submitters who were neutral, comments related to managed retreat and that beneficiaries should pay.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option comment was made about considering broader options and developing wetlands.

Flood protection – Otiria-Moerewa flood mitigation spillway

Recommendations:

50. That council supports the establishment of a new targeted Taumārere rivers management rate, to be set on a uniform basis on each rateable SUIP located within and/or intersects the Taumārere rivers management rate catchment area.

51. That council supports the provision of $219,400 a year to fund repayment of the Otiria-Moerewa flood mitigation spillway, with 70% to be funded by the flood infrastructure rate and 30% by a new targeted Taumārere rivers management rate, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Council established the Taumārere Flood Management Working Group in 2016 and flood mitigation for Otiria and Moerewa was identified as a priority by the committee. The proposed Otiria/Moerewa spillway was proposed as part of the 2018-2028 LTP however it did not receive sufficient community support to proceed at that stage. Since then, staff have worked closely with the Taumārere Flood Management Working Group, Otiria Marae Committee and community leaders to further develop the proposal and the communities understanding and engagement in the process.

Moerewa and Otiria are frequently flooded when heavy rain events occur, with the July 2020 flood further highlighting this vulnerability and further galvanising the community support for the proposed flood mitigation spillway.

The goal is to reduce the risk to Otiria and Moerewa by constructing a spillway that diverts floodwater away from the town, with work proposed to commence in 2021. The total cost of the project is approximately $5.1 million, but with $2.89 million coming from central government, less than half of the cost will need to be covered by ratepayers. It is proposed that this portion will be split, with $1.5 million coming from the region-wide flood infrastructure rate and $630,000 from the new targeted Taumārere rivers management rate. Council’s usual method of funding this type of work is to fund 30% from targeted (local community) rates. However, taking the central government funding ($2.8M) into account, only about 13% of the total cost of works will need to be funded by the targeted rate.

Support has been received from the Taumārere Flood Management Working Group for the Otiria/Moerewa spillway to proceed as proposed. Submissions received in opposition of the work generally addressed the broader catchment context including planning restrictions, re-forestation and re-establishing wetlands. While all worthy long-term aspirations, these approaches will not mitigate flooding in these communities.

Staff recommend proceeding with the Otiria-Moerewa Flood Mitigation Spillway as proposed in the LTP consultation document.

Summary of feedback received | Otiria-Moerewa flood mitigation spillway

Eighty-seven of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 62 registering agreement with the proposal, seven registering disagreement, and 18 being neutral.

Of submitters who agreed, support was noted for both the targeted rate and for the region-wide rate. The importance of protecting the community was noted, particularly in regard to kids getting to school, the economy and connectivity.

Of submitters who disagreed, concern was raised about building on a flood plain, that the funding model isn’t suitable, and that changes need to be made upstream.

Of submitters who were neutral, comment was made about managed retreat and that beneficiaries should pay. Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, comment was made about considering broader options and developing wetlands.

Flood protection – Kawakawa flood mitigation stopbank

Recommendations:

52. That council supports the provision of $550,000 of capital spend in 2024/25 to be borrowed and repaid at a cost of $52,000 a year, to fund deflection bank work at Kawakawa and to be funded 70% by the flood infrastructure rate and 30% by a new targeted Taumārere rivers management rate.

This recommendation represents a change to what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document by reducing the spend from the $1.5 million proposed. If the recommendation is carried as proposed this would have the impact of lowering the rates from what was consulted on, from 2023/24.

Discussion:

Staff have met with local landowners and at their request have developed a flood deflection bank option that will provide lower level of service, but which will not require a stormwater pumping station. Hydraulic modelling suggests that this smaller “deflection bank option” will provide 1:50-year protection to all except the lowest lying machine shop and 1:10-year protection to all shops in this flood prone area. An important part of this deflection bank is that it will not require a storm water pumping station. Staff recommend that this deflection bank work could begin in 2024 and cost of approximately $550,000. This would add $11.45 (including GST) to the targeted rate from 2024, significantly less than the $29.40 originally consulted on.

Staff recommend proceeding with the Kawakawa Deflection Bank recommendation that is supported by the local shop owners.

Summary of feedback received | Kawakawa flood mitigation stopbank

Eighty-six of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 61 registering agreement with the proposal, seven registering disagreement, and 18 being neutral.

Of submitters who agreed, support was noted for the targeted rate and for the region-wide rate. The importance of protecting the community was noted, particularly in regard to keeping state highways open, the cost to the local economy and tourism, and that the stormwater pump is not necessary. A comment was also made that the Kawakawa project should happen at the same time as the Otiria-Moerewa flood works.

Of submitters who disagreed, concern was raised about building on a flood plain, that the funding model isn’t suitable, that changes need to be made upstream, and that the beneficiaries/businesses should pay.

Flood protection - Whangārei flood mitigation project, Tarewa Road flood wall

53. That council supports the provision of $251,000 of capital in 2021/22 for the Tarewa road flood wall component of the Whangārei flood mitigation project, to be repaid at $23,600 a year, and funded 70% by the region-wide flood infrastructure rate and 30% by the targeted Whangārei urban river management rate, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Council established a flood working group in 2009 and the committee has been working through a list of priorities. The Tarewa flood mitigation proposal has been prioritised by the committee. In the July 2020 flood event this was the first spill-point for the Waiarohia stream flooding the surrounding shops before spilling back into the river downstream of the confluence of the Raumanga stream.

Submissions received in opposition of the work generally addressed the broader catchment context including planning restrictions, re-forestation and re-establishing wetlands. While all worthy long-term aspirations, these approaches will not mitigate flooding in these communities.

Staff recommend council support the Tarewa Road flood wall that will provide 50-year flood protection to this area, as proposed in the consultation document.

Summary of feedback received | Whangārei flood mitigation project, Tarewa Road flood wall

Eighty-three of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 51 registering agreement with the proposal, 13 registering disagreement, and 19 being neutral.

Of submitters who agreed, general support for protecting the area was noted. Support was noted for the targeted rate, and the impacts of flooding on the economy and infrastructure was noted. Concern was noted that the next lowest point be identified and landowners notified.

Of submitters who disagreed, concern was raised about building in flood zones, that town will need to retreat at some point, that the funding model isn’t suitable, that changes need to be made upstream, and that users should pay.

Of submitters who were neutral, comment was made about managed retreat and that beneficiaries should pay.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, comment was made about considering broader options and developing wetlands.

Upgrading our tsunami warning system

Recommendations:

54. That council supports the provision of $1 million of capital spend in 2021/22 and 2022/23 to upgrade the tsunami siren network, and $20,000 a year from 2023/24 for testing and maintaining the sirens, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Investigation into the feasibility of a Northland tsunami warning siren network commenced shortly after the 2004 Boxing Day tsunami, and in 2008 agreement was reached with Northpower to design and host the outdoor “ripple control” tsunami sirens on its power supply network. The intent of the sirens was to create a warning device across Northland capable of reaching populations within communities in an efficient and timely manner.

By 2019 the current total of outdoor tsunami sirens in the network reached 202. Northland has the most comprehensive tsunami warning system nationally. The minimum lifespan of a tsunami siren is estimated to be 10 years.

Tsunami hazard risk in Northland is identified in the Northland CDEM Group Plan with either a regional or distant source tsunami being rated as a High risk with a likelihood of occurring between 10-90 years with moderate consequences. A local source tsunami generated off the coast of New Zealand is rated as a Moderate risk with the occurrence being rare > 2000 years, but the consequences are catastrophic. Recent research carried out by GNS raises doubt about whether any natural warning from a long or strong earthquake from a local source tsunami would be felt in Northland, so a natural warning is unlikely.

The existing Northland tsunami siren network is reaching the end of its lifespan in its current format. A large renewal programme will need to commence across the following 3-5 years to upgrade and renew all current sirens.

The benefit to the ratepayers is a reliable, audible, easy to distinguish tsunami warning tool and assist with early warning notification of a tsunami land threat emergency and possible evacuations, ultimately saving more lives.

There is an expectation from the community they will be alerted of a tsunami threat and upgrading the system meets that expectation

In the main submitters have been positive and supportive of the siren network particularly in light of the Keramdec Trench earthquake on 5 March 2021. Several submitters identify that some parts of the Northland coastline do not hear the sirens when activated. The network was never intended to have coverage over the entire coastline, but other “tools” have been used to communicate with less populated areas of the coast where installation of a tsunami siren is not justified.

Summary of feedback received | Upgrading our tsunami warning system

Eighty-seven of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 52 choosing the proposed option, 24 choosing another option, 11 choosing none of the above and six not selecting an option.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for replacing outdated equipment, having a verbal communication included, differentiating sirens from other sirens and for generally learning from the recent tsunami event and updating plans. Specific comments were made about targeted instructions relating to areas and adding flashing alerts to cater to those who are hard of hearing. Concern was raised about those who live close to the sirens, that a plan needs to be in place for after everyone has evacuated, and that development in tsunami zones is limited.

Of submitters who chose another option – don’t upgrade the system – comments noted that mobile phones and other methods of communications should suffice, that the current system works fine, that NZ is at low risk of tsunami, and that there are no sirens in Kerikeri inlet.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, comments noted that mobile phones and other technology is sufficient, that the current system works fine, that users should pay, that NZ is at low risk of tsunami, and lack of sirens at Kerikeri inlet.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, some general agreement with the proposal was noted, and general emergency preparedness discussed. Kaipara District Council noted that they would like to contribute by purchasing and installing replacement sirens in the Mangawhai community.

New emergency coordination centre

Recommendations:

55. That council supports the provision of capital spend of $5.5 million in 2022/23 and 2023/24 for a new joint emergency coordination centre, and $90,000 a year in operating costs, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

The proposed Multi Agency Coordination Centre will be a purpose-built state-of-the-art-facility, for emergency response agencies to come together in a single location to coordinate the response to emergencies in Northland. The centre will also be a business as usual facility for key partner agencies i.e. FENZ, CDEM professionals and Police.

Northland currently does not have any facility that allows a multi-agency response, where agencies can coordinate a response in a dedicated facility. Most other regions in New Zealand have established dedicated response purpose-built centres.

Recent emergency events in New Zealand have required across agency response structures to support emergency responses to affected communities. Working collaboratively across a variety of agencies is now accepted and expected during emergency response.

Northland has had numerous emergency events over recent years that have necessitated coordinated across agency response and recovery activities.

On 5 March this year CDEM, FENZ, Police, St John and councils came together at short notice to coordinate evacuations across Northland after an 8.1 Kermadec trench earthquake. The responding agencies worked together from a temporary Emergency Coordination Centre and the debrief has identified the strengths of agencies physically working together in a common area.

FENZ and New Zealand Police provided submissions in support of the proposal, as did several other individuals. A small number of submitters have expressed concerns about the proposal, mainly about the cost and concerns that existing buildings and arrangements would be suitable to respond to emergencies. The Building Act requires any emergency response facility of this nature of be built to Importance Level 4 (there are No IL4 buildings in Northland ).

Staff recommend that the proposal proceed as consulted. The impact of the spend on rates will be $501,890 from 2023/24. Whangārei District Council are contributing $685,000 to the cost of the project.

While this report seeks approval for the cost of the project to be included in Long Term Plan budgets, decisions on the process including design, costs, and ownership will be brought to council for their consideration and approval at a future date.

Summary of feedback received | New emergency coordination centre

Ninety of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 48 choosing the proposed option, 29 choosing another option, 13 choosing none of the above and eight not selecting an option.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, general support was noted for the proposal and emergency preparedness. Specific comments included recommending that space be incorporated for hospital emergency response staff, funding marae to be able to respond, and specific comments from Fire and Emergency NZ who are involved in the scoping of the site.

Of submitters who chose another option, comments were made that existing buildings should be used for the centre, that technology should be used to connect, and that there should be local centres rather than a central response centre.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, comments were made that existing buildings should be used for the centre, the current setup is sufficient, that technology should be used to connect, that there should be local centres rather than a central response centre, and that the site identified for the building should be used for high-density housing.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, most comments were made in support of the proposal, with some discussing suitability of site. General comments on emergency preparedness and the recent tsunami response were also made.

Climate change resilience

Recommendations:

56. That council supports the provision of $305,000 in 2021/22, $301,000 in 2022/23 and $505,000 in 2023/24 to 2026/27, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2021/22 and $4,400 in 2023/24, for adaptive pathway planning for the region.

This recommendation represents a change to what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document by increasing the spend in 2021/22 from $296,000. If the recommendation is carried as proposed this would have an additional impact of 0.03% on rates in the first year only, above what was consulted on.

57. That council supports the provision of $153,000 in 2021/22, and $174,000 in 2022/23 and 2023/24, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2021/22, for a zero-carbon transition plan and staff resource.

This recommendation represents a change to what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document, by increasing operational spend across all three years. From 2022/23, any additional cost can be fully offset by additional investment revenue. If the recommendation is carried as proposed this would have an additional impact of 0.16% on rates in the first year only, above what was consulted on.

58. That council supports the provision of $182,000 in 2021/22 and $178,000 each year following, and $2,200 of capital spend in 2021/22, to support hapū and marae communities to develop risk management plans and resilience strategies, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

The climate change crisis represents one of humanity’s greatest social and environmental challenges, and council has an important role to play in preparing the region for the challenges ahead. Council’s response will likely include three major work streams: reducing corporate greenhouse gas emissions and facilitating regional emissions reductions; enhancing the removal of atmospheric carbon through the protection and enhancement of natural carbon-sinks such as forests, wetlands and coastal ecosystems; and preparing communities for the projected impacts of climate change by supporting region-wide adaptation planning and implementation. The LTP proposals here will assist council to start work on embedding these work streams across all business units in council.

While many of council’s work programs are already working on solving complex problems, climate change acts as a risk multiplier, making social and environmental stressors more severe. As a transitional program to embed climate change thinking across the organisation, this proposal seeks to employ 3 full-time staff as specialist roles within council for years 1 and 2, and a further 2 additional adaptation-focussed staff in year 3. The availability of staff has resulted in one of these positions being able to be filled immediately, so the first year of funding has been increased slightly to reflect that there will be no recruitment time for this position.

With strong support (77% of submitters) it is recommended that council support increasing the 0.5 FTE position to support council’s development and implementation of a zero-carbon transitional plan to a full FTE position. This would require an additional $50,000 in year 1 and an additional $48,000 in year 2. The impact on rates would be 0.16% increase in year 1 and 0.15% increase in year 2.

While the initially proposed 0.5 FTE role could develop and implement a zero-carbon transitional plan for council, increasing this capacity to a full FTE would enable this to be developed and implemented faster and would add much needed capacity to a very small climate change team. It would also be difficult to recruit a suitably skilled person into a 0.5 FTE role as most people are looking for full time employment.

The roles and associated operational budgets will help embed climate resilience thinking within NRC as well as driving and leading change across the region with Northland’s communities and district council partners.

Overall, staff believe the proposal warrants funding and forms a good basis to build a strong foundation for council’s future climate resilience and zero-carbon work program. Given the changes afoot both in the climate and government climate change legislation, this project puts council in a good position to begin the mahi required.

Summary of feedback received | Climate change resilience

Ninety-two of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 58 choosing the proposed option, 21 choosing another option, 13 choosing none of the above and 14 not selecting an option but still making comment.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for prioritising the issue and council playing their part, electric vehicles and infrastructure, electric marine transport and infrastructure, bans on internal combustion engines, planting, re-instating wetlands, offsetting greenhouse gas emissions, and transitioning to zero-carbon. Concern was noted regarding wastewater systems, roading and other infrastructure being affected by sea level rise, and the impact of climate change on economic stability.

Of submitters who chose another option (don’t do this work), comments noted that climate change is natural, that it’s covered by central government, and that electric buses are not a good option.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, concern was noted about needing to understand climate change, that it is too late, that we are on track without extra spend, that climate change is overstated, that central government should fund and that the primary production sector should be taken in to consideration.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option but still provided comment, support was noted for the proposals, the need to collaborate and coordinate, and the need to lower carbon footprints. Concern was raised about the impact of climate change on water availability and water safety, algal blooms, that waste minimisation is more important than reducing carbon, that a collaborative working group be formed to advise on zero-carbon transition, that land use be considered, and the link with GMOs.

Improving water resilience

Recommendations:

59. That council supports the provision of $500,000 a year to set up a grant scheme for non-reticulated water infrastructure for people in need, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

There was some good support for this in submissions, and the small amount of opposition was mainly arguing that providing household scale water infrastructure was not the Regional Council’s job. However, one of the major reasons for the lack of water resilience of communities not on district council public water supplies, is the lack of any organisation taking responsibility or showing any leadership in improving the situation.

In proceeding with the scheme, Council is showing leadership which has already significantly helped raise the profile of the problem, leverage additional funding and should make a worthwhile start on improving the situation.

Should council approve funding for the scheme, criteria and processes for distribution of the funds will be developed and subsequently brought to council for approval.

Summary of feedback received | Improving water resilience

Ninety-two of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 58 choosing the proposed option, 24 choosing another option, ten choosing none of the above and five not selecting an option but still making comment.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for the scheme, that tanks should be required for new builds and the importance of water as a human right was noted. Concern was noted that the scheme be administered well and that tanks are better than dams.

Of submitters who chose another option, concern was raised that this was not council’s role, that it is central government’s role and that better infrastructure should be provided.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, comments suggested a 50/50 cost share, that infrastructure should be improved, and that the issue needs to be looked at holistically. Concern was raised that the issue should be covered by the three waters reform/Te Mana o Te Wai and that council is not a bank.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, support was noted for the scheme, that the materials be environmentally friendly and locally sourced, and that non water-based sewage be promoted. Concern was raised about future water requirements with growth, that individuals should pay.

Harbour safety and navigation

Recommendations:

60. That council supports the provision of $20,000 in 2022/23 and 2023/24, and capital spend of $70,000 in 2022/23, to replace fixed steel beacons with relocatable plastic buoys as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

61. That council supports the provision of $100,000 of capital spend in 2021/22 for feasibility and design of a new maritime vessel, and $1.5 million of capital spend in 2022/23 to build a new maritime vessel, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

62. That council supports the provision of $14,175 a year as a 35% contribution toward the costs of abandoned and derelict boats, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Overall the submissions on harbour safety and navigation were supportive.

Capital spend to replace steel beacons is a one off cost, and received comments in support. This work needs to be done before the beacons fall over and become a hazard. Staff recommend this work proceeds as planned.

Provision of funds for a new vessel was also supported generally. This vessel is key to the maintenance of navigation aids, oil spill response and pilotage. Failure of this vessel would cause loss of revenue, and risk to council. Investigations into the option of building an electric version of the vessel have found that this is too high-risk for council at this time due to maritime rules and technology. Staff recommend that council proceed with a standard diesel engine power.

A common comment received during consultation was that the cost of dealing with derelict boats should be recovered from the owners. While this happens wherever possible it is most often not possible as the vessel is abandoned, the owners cannot be located or they have deceased.

Acknowledging the element of public benefit gained from managing abandoned and derelict boats, staff recommend that the cost of dealing with these be shared with 35% contributed from the council services rate ($14,175) and 65% contributed from users by way of a charge.

Summary of feedback received | Harbour safety and navigation

Eighty-seven of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 27 choosing the proposed option, 47 choosing another option, 13 choosing none of the above and eight not selecting an option.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for the cost of abandoned boats being covered by owners and that infrastructure be replaced, and concern was raised about an electric vessel and charging time.

Of submitters who chose another option, concern was raised about ratepayers paying of the cost of abandoned boats, and that users should pay, and that the cost should be recovered from the owners of the abandoned boats.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, concern was noted that the maritime vessel did not need to be replaced, that users should pay for the cost of abandoned vessels, and that the cost should be recovered from the owners of the abandoned boats.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, comments supported the proposals, requested upgrades in Mangawhai, and raised concern that boat owners should be able to cover the costs.

Increasing CityLink services

Recommendations:

63. That council supports the provision of $437,000 in 2022/23, $644,000 in 2023/24 and $851,000 in 2024/25 to increase the frequency of the City Link bus service in Whangārei, to be funded by the targeted Whangārei transport rate, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Overall, the direct interest shown in the proposed increase in the CityLink services appears to be limited. The majority of submissions received appear to be directed more toward alternative forms of public transport, the need for more rural services and in some cases free travel.

It is important to note at this time that the other major parties involved in this project, the Whangarei District Council for the implementation of the am peak bus only lanes and NZTA for subsidising both the cost of the bus lanes and the increased services, have yet to formally confirm their commitment.

The above will only be confirmed on the release of the National Land Transport Programme in August 2021. Staff do however recommend that council approve the recommendation to rate for the proposed increase in service.

The matter of investigating the introduction of electric buses into the CityLink service continues to be dealt with nationally. However, with the recent reports from NZTA regarding reduced funding availability, there is uncertainty as to where this matter lies on the government’s list of transport related priorities. If it is a possibility requiring funding input from council, further consultation will be carried out as part of a future planning process.

Summary of feedback received | Increasing CityLink services

Eighty-three of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 47 choosing the proposed option, 25 choosing another option, 11 choosing none of the above and nine not selecting an option.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for improvement of services, light rail to Whangārei and electric buses. Comments were made on the need for more frequent services, bus lanes, more options for rural commuting and cycleways. Concern was raised about public transport and accessibility for disabled and elderly people, and that buses should be free.

Of submitters who chose another option, comments noted that the proposal should be de-prioritised in favour of water quality and flooding issues.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, support was noted for user pays, and comments made that buses are inefficient, that planning should be strategic, that frequency should be increased to see if it is supported, and that cycling should be encouraged.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, comments noted support for regular trains to Auckland, electric buses, public transport in rural areas, strategic thinking for public transport, increased frequency, and that direct routes to Whangārei hospital be added.

11. REGIONAL LEADERSHIP

Māori partnerships

Recommendations:

64. That council supports the provision of $30,000 a year to fund the recently signed Manawhakahono ā rohe agreements as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

65. That council supports the provision of $102,000 a year and capital spend of $2,200 in 2021/22 for a kaiawhina kaupapa Māori (Māori technical advisor), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

66. That council supports the provision of $10,000 a year from 2022/23 to support the development of Iwi and Hapū Environmental Management Plans (IHEMP), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

67. That council supports the provision of $20,000 in 2021/22 and 2022/23 to support the process of introducing Māori seats in the 2022 election as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

68. That council supports the provision of $127,000 in 2021/22, and $138,000 each year following, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2021/22, to further develop and support cultural capacity as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

69. That council supports the provision of $50,000 in 2021/22, and $25,000 each year following to carry out a ‘health check’ of council’s Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi obligations, and $100,000 a year from 2022/23 for implementation, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

70. That council supports the provision of $25,000 a year to increase Te Taitokerau Māori and Council Working Party (TTMAC) members' allowances, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Strong support was received for council’s proposals to increase resourcing to partner with Māori. The proposed projects seek to support greater Māori representation and leadership, and enable tangata whenua to participate more fully in decision making. Council recently signed Mana Whakahono ā Rohe agreements with two hapū, to give tangata whenua more opportunities to be involved in Resource Management Act decisions, and plan to roll these out more widely. As part of this, a fund will enable hapū members to train in resource consents, planning and decision making. Other planned initiatives include improving council’s cultural competency and meeting council’s Treaty obligations, putting more resources into relationship management, employing Māori technical advisors, and professional development for Te Taitokerau Māori and Council (TTMAC) tangata whenua members.

Many of the proposals were put forward and endorsed by TTMAC tangata whenua members and these have been supported by council and now supported through submissions. Of those who submitted on these proposals, 72.73% of responses supporting councils preferred option and staff therefore recommend that council proceed with the proposals as presenting in the consultation document.

Summary of feedback received | Māori partnerships

Eighty-eight of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 64 choosing the proposed option, 12 choosing another option, 12 choosing none of the above and 83 not selecting an option.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for benefits to the whole community, a dedicated Whangaroa Regional Councillor, improving and building relationships with Māori, honouring Te Tiriti o Waitangi, connecting communities/iwi and hapū/decision makers, compensation/assistance for those working hard to do the right thing, help with subdivision on Māori land, and collaboration with Northland Inc.

Of submitters who chose another option, concern was largely raised over treating the community as a whole and not singling one group out, and Māori being capable without needing special assistance.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, support was noted for TOW/central govt money to fund this. Concerns were raised over this being undemocratic, racist, and the lack of detailed framework around it.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, support was noted for greater Māori representation and leadership, creating meaningful relationships and partnerships (and resourcing this), and funding for tangata whenua in RMA participation. Concerns were raised over Māori being singled out and dividing the community.

Supporting the work across council

Recommendations:

Community engagement

71. That council supports the provision of $154,000 in 2021/22, $152,000 in 2022/23 and $225,000 each year following, and $5,600 of capital spend over the first three years, for new positions to support the increased community engagement needs, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation represents a change to what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document by increasing the spend in 2021/22 from $115,000. If the recommendation is carried as proposed this would have an additional impact of 0.12% on rates in the first year only, above what was consulted on.

72. That council supports the provision of $78,000 a year for an Enviroschools support position and in school facilitator, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

73. That council supports the provision $65,000 in 2024/25, $97,500 in 2025/26, and $127,500 each year following for delivering the Enviroschools strategy, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Customer services

74. That council supports the provision of $25,000 in 2023/24 and 2024/25, increasing to $90,000 in 2025/26 and $100,000 every year following, and capital spend of $95,000 in 2023/24 for development and implementation of a regional accessibility strategy as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation represents a change whereby the $95,000 of capital spend is now in 2023/24 rather than in 2021/22 as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

75. That council supports the provision of $10,000 a year, and capital spend of $5,000 in 2021/22 to support the expansion of council’s regional service centre network, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Corporate excellence - Information technology upgrades

76. To fund the implementation and operating of a new enterprise system, that council supports collecting rates revenue of $722,000 in 2022/23 and 2023/24, and $1.12M a year for the following seven years to fund a portion of the project and repay borrowings drawn down to fund any shortfalls, with spend on the project beginning in 2021/22 as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

77. That council supports the provision of capital spend of $20,850 in 2021/22, for the implementation and operating of a new enterprise system, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

78. That council supports the provision of $90,000 a year to increase council's cybersecurity resilience as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

79. That council supports the provision of $134,000 in 2021/22, $252,000 in 2022/23 and $1.4 million in 2023/24, and $700,000 a year after that, to upgrade the specialised regional council database system as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

80. That council supports the provision of $100,600 a year to upgrade the integrated regional information system (IRIS), as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

81. That council supports the provision of $50,000 in 2021/22 and 2022/23, $75,000 in 2023/34 and $100,000 each year following to centralise the data collected through LiDAR (Light Detection and Ranging) surveys as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

82. That council supports the provision of $75,000 in 2022/23 to ensure data is being stored correctly and can be accessed and used easily, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

83. That council supports the provision of $72,000 in 2021/22, and $165,000 each year following, and capital spend of $2,200 in 2022/23 for business and IT resource to support upgrades, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

84. That council supports the provision of $107,000 in 2021/22, $140,000 each year following, and capital spend of $2,200, to build mapping and geographical information capability, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Corporate excellence – other support

85. That council supports the provision of 17,000 in 2021/22, $46,000 each year following, and capital spend of $42,000 in 2021/22 and $84,000 in 2022/23 to ensure sufficient human-resources support and vehicles, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

86. That council supports the provision of capital spend of $250,000 in 2022/23 and $94,000 in 2024/25 for renovations and maintenance of the exterior of council’s Water Street building, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

87. That council supports the provision of capital expenditure of $600,000 in 2025/26, and $4 million in 2026/27 for a regional service centre in Waipapa, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Community engagement

Overall, there is positive community support and feedback for the range of activities delivered by the community engagement team. With strong community support to invest more in caring for water, boosting council’s mahi in pest management and helping communities manage environmental changes; it is imperative council continues to invest in support services that help connect and enable Northland’s communities.

In order to achieve this, the community engagement team needs to be adequately resourced to ensure they can effectively support the business to meet the needs of the community. This means proceeding with the proposals as consulted, and bringing an FTE resource forward by six months from January 2022 to July 2021. The implication of this is an increase from the $115,000 in 2021/22 as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document to $154,000.

Community feedback has also demonstrated acknowledgment of the investment in future generations through the Enviroschools programme. A question was raised about the funding sources of the Enviroschools programme. The Enviroschools programme is supported by the Tomiata Foundation, a charitable trust, which provides funding and considerable resources and professional development.

Customer services

The community has indicated general support for the support services that underpin the delivery of council’s core work. Expansion of the network of regional service hubs, and the development of a regional accessibility strategy, is key to remaining connected to the community and maintaining effective delivery of council’s services. The development of the accessibility strategy will be done in conjunction with district councils to allow strategic integration wherever possible.

Information technology upgrades

Overall the community supported the need for upgrades of information technology systems.

It was also noted that failure to use modern technology systems will result in inefficiencies. A thorough and robust process has been followed to select a modern enterprise system that will enable efficiencies to be realised across the board, releasing capacity to focus on higher value activities. Since consultation further discovery work has been conducted to gain greater certainty on project costs and the recommendations are reflective of the outcome of these investigations.

The work proposed for the enterprise system is to be funded by borrowing, with repayment made for the following eight years, being the most efficient way of funding and will have the least impact on rates. This then means the cost to the ratepayer can be spread over the effective life of the solution. The recommendation for the enterprise system is for the allocation of funds only with separate council approval for the purchase of the system.

The balance of the spend as outlined in the recommendations, inclusive of regional sector collaboration initiatives, securing computer systems along with managing and storing spatial data will support more efficient and effective service delivery.

In their submission, Northland Inc questioned whether they could also use the enterprise system. Once the implementation is completed and the system is operational, opportunities for wider collaboration can be investigated.

Corporate excellence – other support

The other support includes provision of additional vehicles, a 0.2FTE human resource support role, renovations and maintenance of council’s Water Street building. These resources are necessary to help facilitate the growth of council services and work programmes contained within the LTP.

The provision of expenditure for the regional service centre in Waipapa is also necessary to accommodate additional growth of council services and work programmes contained within the LTP and facilitate improved customer service and engagement. While this report seeks support for the cost of the project to be included in Long Term Plan budgets, decisions on the process including design and costs will be brought to council for their consideration at a future date.

Summary of feedback received | Supporting the work across council

Ninety-two of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 65 choosing the proposed option, 15 choosing another option, 12 choosing none of the above and 79 not selecting an option.

Of submitters who chose the proposed option, support was noted for using the current funding of Northland Inc. for this work, this work being essential, a regional disability strategy, the Enviroschools programme, moving with the times, this being positive with local partnerships, a regional ethnic diversity strategy, having minimum requirements for Māori staff, including Northland Inc. in the investment in IT systems, and focusing all financial resourcing on protection of the environment first and foremost.

Of submitters who chose another option, support was noted for council making do with what it had and spending the budget more efficiently, using free open source software, and live streaming in all committee meetings (not just council meetings). Concerns were raised over the clarity of what was being funded, and the necessity of employing more staff.

Of submitters who chose none of the above, support was noted for utilising existing systems, an independent review of staff roles to identify duplications and inefficient processes, a disability strategy to be part of an overall strategic plan, Enviroschools supported through Vote Education, demonstration of the use and purpose of existing funding/budget and working within this, and deferring at least some of this work to keep rates manageable. Concerns were raised over the proposed rates increase and supporting Enviroschools at this level.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, support was noted for lean thinking strategies incorporated into the processes that council have to perform, current staff being more effective or cooperative with the technology to reduce regular running costs and investing in IT systems/more staff/Enviroschools.

12. OTHER DECISIONS

Funding economic development

Recommendations:

88. That council supports the re-naming of the Regional Infrastructure rate to the Regional Economic Development rate, and direct revenue collected through the rate into the Investment and Growth Reserve, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

89. That council supports the closure of the Infrastructure Facilities Reserve, which is at zero balance, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

90. That council supports the re-naming of the Community Investment Fund to the Economic Development Reserve, to provide greater clarity, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Almost two-thirds of those that either agreed or disagreed with the proposal were in support of the proposed changes to the way economic development activities are funded (46/71). Staff remain convinced that the proposed changes are the best way forward. The changes will make it much more transparent as to how council is funding economic development. It also provides a much simpler way for council to increase its funding contribution to economic development in the future should it wish, i.e. increase the regional economic development rate.

Some of the submitters against changing the name and purpose of the regional infrastructure rate took this position because they saw a need for council to contribute to infrastructure investment in the region. This concern is addressed by the decision on reviewing reserves (recommendation XX). Issues regarding Māori economic development are being addressed through development of Northland Inc's statement of intent.

The submission from Northland Inc. asked that council will be open to using more than just gains from the new Economic Development Reserve to contribute to the IGR. The Financial Strategy section of the Support Information relating to council’s LTP 2021-2031 allows council to make discretionary additional contributions from the economic development reserve to the IGR. This is the current arrangement with regard to the CIF and the LTP documentation will allow this to continue with the change in name of the CIF to the economic development reserve.

Northland Inc also request that council consider contributing more to the IGR overtime so that the contribution made by councils to the operational expenses of Northland Inc. can increase to match the funding received by other similar economic development agencies/regional tourism organisations. While staff concur with the analysis regarding relative funding levels, additional funding to support Northland Inc. is not recommended at this time. Council is already proposing a considerable increase in rates revenue in the LTP. Furthermore, should Kaipara District Council and Far North District Council agreed to become joint owners of Northland Inc and make a financial contribution to the IGR, then funding into the IGR will increase by one-third by year six over what council is already contributing. However, if the district councils decide not to become joint owners, the issue of long-term funding of Northland Inc. could be reconsider by council.

Summary of feedback received | Funding economic development

Ninety-four of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 46 agreeing with the proposal, 25 disagreeing, 23 neutral and 77 not selecting an option.

Of submitters who agreed with the proposal, support was noted for this projecting a more positive image, focus on wellbeing outcomes, the development of Pioneer Park into a multi-sport centre, this opening the discussion for greater opportunities than just “infrastructure”, the ongoing contribution to the Investment and Growth Reserve more secure over the long term plus providing a larger portion of funding to this, and providing clarity over what the funds can be used for. Concerns were raised over the lack of advocacy for Māori economic development.

Of submitters who disagreed with the proposal, support was noted for improving sewerage and greywater infrastructure, being people-focused and promoting wellbeing, community investment (as opposed to an economic development fund) and putting social/cultural/environmental wellbeing first (including Treaty relationships and Climate Change). Concerns were raised over protecting the rate for infrastructure needs, the costs involved with changing the name, the funding going towards activities that ratepayers can’t afford to be part of, and there being no framework for Māori.

Of submitters who were neutral, support was noted for leaving economic growth to private enterprises. Concerns were raised over the proposed rates increase.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, support was noted for improved efficiency and economic development in the region, and upholding GMO precautions. Concerns were raised over council funding private businesses through Northland Inc.

Reviewing reserves

Recommendations:

91. That council supports the re-naming of the Infrastructure Investment Fund reserve to the Regional Project Reserve and broadening the purpose of the reserve to enable income from the reserve to contribute to operational spend, and capital to be used for joint projects with central government, other agencies and the private sector, as proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

The regional project reserve will give council the opportunity to co-invest into infrastructure projects of benefit to the Northland community. A local funding contribution is often a requirement of central government investment. The creation of the regional project reserve therefore provides council with a purpose-built in place funding mechanism to make such joint investments.

Northland Inc in their submission note the similarities between the purpose of the proposed regional project reserve and the purpose of the existing Enabling Investment funding category of the Investment and Growth Reserve. Staff concur that robust criterion for the allocation of funds from the regional project reserve needs to be developed to avoid confusion with the IGR ‘Enabling Investment’ funding category, to ensure that the reserve is utilised for the purpose intended, and to assist decision-makers in making funding decisions. A criterion for allocating funding from the IGR was put in place soon after the reserve was established in 2011. Staff recommend criteria be developed for the Regional Project Reserve before any funding is allocated from it. This can be done via a process of workshops with council, with criteria adopted at a formal council meeting.

Summary of feedback received | Reviewing reserves

Ninety-one of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 46 agreeing with the proposal, 23 disagreeing, 22 neutral and 80 not selecting an option.

Of submitters who agreed with the proposal, support was noted for no funding to be given to private investment or development, the name change accurately reflecting the proposed use of the fund, and Northland Inc. being involved in the formation of the process to access the fund and either be consulted or included as part of the decision-making process. Concerns were raised over this fund having the potential to duplicate an existing Northland Regional Council fund that Northland Inc administers access to.

Of submitters who disagreed with the proposal, support was noted for priority to water and sewerage / electric car and boat charging points and maintaining the infrastructure rate.

Concerns were raised over compromising infrastructural needs for economic gain, the proposed rates increase, the broadening of the name meaning it opens to funding not agreed to by ratepayers, and there being no framework for Māori.

Of submitters who were neutral, supported was noted for infrastructure across the region to be prioritised above projects focused on economic development.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, no comments were received.

13. Policies

Rating policies

Recommendations:

92. 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 2021-2031.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Section 102 of the Local Government Act (LGA) requires council to adopt a policy on the remission and postponement of rates on Māori freehold land and enables council to adopt policies on rates remissions and rates postponements. Sections 108 and 109 of the LGA require the policies to be reviewed at least once every six years.

The Far North, Kaipara and Whangārei district councils collect rates on Northland Regional Council's behalf. In order to minimise the marginal cost of collection, and for administrative efficiency, council has previously adopted the rates remission and postponement policies and policy on the remission and postponement of rates on Māori freehold land of each of the three district councils. While these policies differ from council to council, it would be administratively inefficient to adopt uniform policies across the region and then require each district council to apply two sets of policies.

The recommendation supports the council's community outcome of efficient and effective service delivery. The advantage of adopting the policies set by each of the three Northland district councils is that it would be administratively efficient for each district council who administers council’s rate collection in their respective district to only apply one set of policies. Ratepayers will also avoid possible confusion by having a single approach to all of their rates.

The reasonably practicable options are:

· That the council supports the Policies on Rates Remission and Postponement Policies (including the policy on remission and postponement of rates on Māori freehold and) of each of the three Northland district councils, or

· The council establishes its own policies to be applied on a regional wide basis.

Only minor wording changes have made by the district councils during their long term plan process, all of which have no direct impact on Northland Regional Council's rate collection.

Submitters generally supported changes to council policies.

Revenue and financing policy

Recommendation:

93. That council supports the updated Revenue and Financing Policy, to be included in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031.

This recommendation represents a change from what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document, as further updates have been made to the policy since consultation.

Discussion:

The current Revenue and Financing Policy was included in the 2018-28 Long Term Plan and will expire on 30 June 2021. In order to comply with clause 10, Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), it will be necessary to adopt a new Revenue and Finance Policy before adoption of the 2021-2031 Long Term Plan, and this will happen in June this year.

The Revenue and Financing Policy has been prepared in accordance with sections 101, 102 and 103 of the LGA and sets out how council intends to fund its operating and capital expenditure. In setting the Revenue and Finance Policy council is mindful of trying to achieve the right balance in terms of who benefits and who pays for services against affordability and wider social benefits.

The Revenue and Financing Policy was reviewed prior to consultation to keep it up to date and accurate, with some new activity classifications added. Subsequent to consultation the policy has undergone further adjustment to provide additional clarification on council’s ability to borrow to fund large projects.

Submitters generally supported changes to council policies.

Significance and engagement policy

Recommendation:

94. 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 2021-2031.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Council is required to adopt a Significance and Engagement Policy under section 76AA of the Local Government Act 2002. The current policy underwent significant review during development of the last long term plan (2018) and so was only refreshed and simplified as part of the development of this long term plan.

The policy retains the requirement for council to consult before setting any new rate, increasing an existing targeted rate by any amount, or increasing an existing region-wide targeted rate by more than 2% (annually) above what was previously approved. It also retains criteria for other decisions to be defined as 'significant' or 'likely to be significant'.

Submitters generally supported changes to council policies.

Summary of feedback received:

Eighty-eight of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 43 agreeing with the proposal, 14 disagreeing, 31 neutral and 83 not selecting an option.

Of submitters who agreed with the proposal, support was noted for fostering Māori participation, and land use policies/anything associated with this being updated to reflect respect for the mauri of Aotearoa. Concerns were raised over this not doing enough to ensure tangata whenua are able to be active in the decision-making end of council processes.

Of submitters who disagreed with the proposal, support was noted for doing a better job implementing policies instead of rewriting them, and only improving policies. Concerns were raised over there being no framework for Māori.

Of submitters who were neutral, one comment raised concerns about what council is not telling us.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, concerns were raised about the effective “back door” process of amalgamation with FNDC and other district organisations, through Northland Inc, and not being able to find the full reasons for council’s proposed policies.

14. Key performance indicators

Recommendation:

95. That council supports the key performance indicators (measures and targets) as consulted on in the Long Term Plan Consultation Document and supporting information, for inclusion in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

The 31 key performance indicators (measures and targets) included in the supporting information document were developed and reviewed via a robust process over several months. The measures, targets and methodologies that support these were also the subject of external audit. The key performance indicators support council’s levels of service and will be reported annually in council’s annual report, however they are underpinned by a significant number of other measures, reports and analysis, both internal and external, that form part of council’s auditing requirements.

The measures are considered to strike to the right balance between reportability, representation, and practicality, and it is recommended that these be endorsed and maintained.

Summary of feedback received:

Two submissions were received that made reference to performance measures and targets, including that the measure for planning and policy be modified to include consideration of economic development as well as legislative requirements, that the measures and targets for biosecurity are not sufficient. Another submission suggested that emissions targets be established but this was not in the context of feedback on key performance indicators.

Other matters

Council received feedback on a wide range of matters not addressed in the consultation document - this section addresses that feedback.

Where there were a number of submissions providing feedback on the same matter, these have been grouped together and summarised and assessed below. Feedback on matters that didn't fall into one of the groups below are addressed individually in Appendix 1 and recommendation 104.

15. Funding for emergency services

Recommendations:

96. That council continues to support the non-contestable emergency services via the emergency services rate.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

While funding for emergency services was not specifically consulted on, council did receive several submissions on the emergency services rate.

While all the current fund recipients were advised of the process and opportunity to have a say/make a submission, none except for Search and Rescue chose to make a submission in support of their funding needs or allocation. Given that the proposed LTP only specifies the total amount of the ESF, and not the specific allocations it is recommended that council decide on the continuation and total amount of the rate only, and decide on the allocations as a separate process, which could include the opportunity for presentations, and make the allocations in a subsequent council resolution.

Summary of feedback received | Funding for emergency services

Eleven submissions were received in relation to funding for emergency services. The majority requested that Far North and Northland Search and Rescue receive funding from the emergency services rate. One submission supported funding that aligned with water safety including Northland Rescue Helicopters Surf Life Saving, St Johns and Coastguard, and one requested funding for Far North Radio and Sea Rescue.

16. Funding for regional sporting facilities

Recommendations:

97. That council supports continuation of the regional sporting facilities rate to provide funding support to assist the development of sporting facilities across Northland that are of regional benefit.

98. That council allocates funds from the regional 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 within the Kokiri ai te Waka Hourua (2021-2030) strategy document, 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.

99. That staff prepare a paper for the July 2021 council meeting outlining the allocation process and procedures to cover the three years of the LTP 2021-2031.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

While continuation of the regional sporting facilities rate was not specifically consulted on, council did receive several submissions supporting the rate, and none opposing, with a number of capital projects suggested as worthy of support.

Furthermore, Kokiri Ai Te Waka Hourua (2021-2030) - A Strategy for Play, Active Recreation and Sport was published in April 2021. This strategy, resourced by both council and Sport New Zealand, is to be referenced for the next 3-year (2021-2024) sporting facility rate allocation decisions identified as ‘Regional Priority Facility Projects’ on Page 32 to 35 of the document.

Summary of feedback received | funding for regional sporting facilities

Seven submissions were received in support of continuation of the regional sporting facilities rate, and seeking funding for various organisations. Organisations seeking funding included Te Araroa Northland Trust, Bike Northland and Northland Volleyball Association.

17. Northland Inc

Recommendations:

100. 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 21-2031 Consultation Document.

101. That council supports the current list of objectives for Northland Inc. Limited in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 as set out in the Supporting Information to the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Consultation Document.

102. That council will include the key performance measures as set out in the final version of Northland Inc’s Statement of Intent 2021 - 2024 in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document, with the exception of the recommendation on the key performance measures for Northland Inc.

Discussion:

The list of objectives and key performance measures and targets for Northland Inc. Limited set out in the Supporting Information to the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document were based on Northland Inc's draft Statement of Intent 2021-2024.

Subsequent to the development of the Supporting Information council has held several workshop discussions with Northland Inc. Limited on the development of their Statement of Intent (SOI) 2021-2024.

As a result of these discussions, council has given its support for the six objectives that that were included in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document. Agreeing to the current objectives will ensure alignment between council’s Long Term Plan and Northland Inc. Limited’s SOI.

The process of finalising the key performance measures and targets for Northland Inc. Limited is still underway at the time of submitting this report, and will be completed by way of workshop on 1 June. These final performance measures as agreed by council will form the basis of the Statement of Intent for Northland Inc. Limited 2021-2024, and will be included in the final Long Term Plan 2021-2031.

Northland Inc sought additional funding be allocated to fund an economic development strategy. The Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document did not propose any such funding. While staff agree there is merit in preparing a regional economic development strategy, it is not yet clear what the scope of the strategy will be, who would be involved and whether other organisations would contribute funding. Staff are of the view that more work needs to be done in this space before putting a proposal for funding in front of council.

Summary of feedback received:

In their submission, Northland Inc raise concern that no resourcing has been allocated to fund the development of a long-term economic development strategy, and comment that this activity is urgent and should be carried out as soon as possible. The submission noted that as part of the process of becoming a joint CCO, all councils have had the opportunity to feed into Northland Inc’s latest statement of intent, which includes the development of such a strategy in 2020/21. Northland Inc’s submission also suggests that council allocate additional funding that is specific to a Destination Management Plan, to fund support stage, a regional brand strategy (in accordance with S17A review), and development of a regional marketing strategy.

Other submitters raised concern at the need for a review of the operation and funding of Northland Inc, that the funding should be contestable. Submissions on general economic development commented on the need to keep growth sustainable, resilient and local, with some discussion on the impact on Covid-19 on the economy and, in particular, tourism.

18. Grouped Submissions

Recommendation:

103. That council does not make any changes to the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 as a result of submissions on these topics: Transport, District Council Matters, LTP consultation process, Finances and investment, GE/GMO, area-specific concerns, agrichemicals and toxins.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Transport (including rail)

Discussion:

The issues raised in relation to transport have all been raised in the consultation undertaken on both the Draft Regional Land Transport Plan 2021/2027 and the Draft Regional Public Transport Plan 2021/2031 respectively. Deliberations on these transport plans is scheduled for Tuesday 11 May 2021 where these issues will be considered.

Staff recommend that no further amendments to the LTP 2021-2031 are required as a result of these submissions.

Summary of feedback received:

Five submissions made comment in relation to transport but outside of the scope of the consulted topics (CityLink buses). Comments made related to accessible public transport, rural roads, dust, speed limits, decarbonisation, and discussion on rail.

Comments relevant to other councils

Discussion:

This feedback will be passed on to the relevant district council(s) for their consideration.

Summary of feedback received:

Nine submitters raised various issues that are within the functions of district councils and not within the functions of the regional council. Issues included roadside spraying, rubbish, dogs, libraries and other district council amenities, alcohol and freedom camping bylaws, footpaths and water supply.

Finances

Discussion:

Council’s approach to rates and funding is set in the financial strategy and rating policies that are adopted as part of the LTP process. These facilitate an inter-generational approach to funding. The rating mechanism for each individual rate is assessed at the time of setting the rates in accordance with council’s revenue and financing policy, and council applies a land value differential and targeted rates where appropriate.

Council engage an independent financial advisor and have two independent council members on the investment and property sub-committee in an endeavour to invest prudently, and within council’s tolerable risk/return appetite. Council’s annual report presents a consolidated record of expenditure and is externally audited and public available.

Staff note the comment on central government rating policies and salary caps.

Staff recommend that no further amendments to the LTP 2021-2031 are required as a result of these submissions.

Summary of feedback received:

Seven submissions related to financing and investment, with comments made about levels of debt, allocation of funds from subsidies and investments, questioning investment gains and losses, transparency in spending, and salary caps.

Submissions made specific comment on rating increases (modifiers, business differential, indexed inflation rate etc) rating mechanisms such as capital value rating, use of targeted rates, fees etc.

GE/GMO

Discussion:

Long Term Plans do not control or manage the use of GMO. The matter of GMO's has been considered as part of the Regional Policy Statement and Proposed Regional Plan (following resolution of appeals). The Regional Policy Statement includes a policy on adopting a precautionary approach to GMO (Policy 6.1.2). District plans also include provisions on GMOs.

As part of the appeals process relating to the Proposed Regional Plan, council agreed to include provisions regulating the use of genetically modified organisms in the coastal marine area. This was formally done through a consent order signed off by the Environment Court on 05 August 2020 – the consent order is available on the council website: https://www.nrc.govt.nz/media/u0gpwnpj/ge-consent-order-2020.pdf

A budget commitment is not considered necessary as council can participate in proposals for use of GMO through EPA processes and can fund this through operational budgets / by resolution of council if needed. Staff recommend that no further amendments to the LTP 2021-2031 are required as a result of these submissions.

Summary of feedback received:

13 submissions were received, that raised concern about GE GMOs, and requesting that precautionary and prohibitive GE/GMOs wording/policy be included in the LTP, and a budget commitment to address the risks of GE/GMOs/Gene edited organisms.

LTP Process

Discussion:

Staff will carry out a project debriefing after the conclusion of the long term plan which will also look at any shortcomings in the consultation process for future improvements. The consultation process, including timing and consultation content is to a large degree prescribed by the Local Government Act, so the process must work within these restrictions.

Staff strive for continuous improvement of the consultation process, and will work at identifying opportunities for this.

Summary of feedback received:

Ten submitters made comment about the LTP consultation process. Comments were made about the high quality of the consultation document, some topics constituting over consultation, that consultation should be combined with district councils, and that general education on what NRC does is needed. Several submissions raised concern about the notice, timing and locations of public consultations, and the process of making a submission online.

Area specific – algae at Waipu

Discussion:

The Northland Regional Council investigated the February 2021 algal/seaweed bloom in Waipu Estuary and previous such blooms in Bream Bay and Waipu Cove. Council staff have continued to monitor the situation and the estuary appears to have recovered without human intervention and dissolved oxygen levels in estuary waters were within the normal range when last checked.

Following the last major algal bloom experienced in Waipu Cove and in response to ongoing concerns about nutrient concentrations and the algae in Bream Bay/Waipu Cove, the council established a coastal monitoring site at Waipu Cove in 2017 and undertakes water quality sampling and testing at the site at monthly intervals. The council intends to continue with this monitoring and understands that the Waipu Cove Reserve Board will be commissioning the Cawthron Institute to research the issue. The council is likely to response favourably to any reasonable requests for in-kind support to assist that research.

Staff recommend that no further amendments to the LTP 2021-2031 are required as a result of these submissions.

Summary of feedback received:

Three submissions made reference to a specific algae issue that was prevalent at Waipu at the time of consultation.

Area specific – Ngunguru sandspit

Discussion:

In 2011 central government acquired the Ngunguru Sandspit in a land swap arrangement, placing it in public ownership. The remaining hillside bush land, adjacent to the sandspit, was not acquired.

In response to a number of formal approaches since that time, council has declined the option to contribute to the purchase of this adjacent land. Staff recommend that no further amendments to the LTP 2021-2031 are required as a result of these submissions.

Summary of feedback received:

Three submissions commented on ownership of the Ngunguru sandspit and requested funding assistance to purchase and protect the area.

Area specific

Discussion:

The distribution of projects and resources across the region is determined by council based on work priorities, and viability of projects and funding. Some of the projects discussed in submissions overlap with work council currently carries out, and staff work with these groups wherever possible.

The notification of work at Tinopai has been passed on to the appropriate staff. The issue of declaring a waterway as a public road is being addressed through the process of the Regional Land Transport Plan.

Staff recommend that no further amendments to the LTP 2021-2031 are required as a result of these submissions.

Summary of feedback received:

Ten submissions were received that made comment about a specific area. Comments included:

· That there is little focus on the Kaipara

· Seeking more assistance for Kaitaia

· Seeking assistance with Managawhai harbour restoration

· Notification of desire to build a waterfront walkway in Tinopai

· Seeking investment in the Hokianga Harbour

· Raising awareness of Kauri Mountain restoration

· Concern that there are no specific projects planned for Tutukaka

· That the waterway between Opua and Okiato be declared a public road

Agrichemicals and toxins

Discussion:

The discharge of agrichemicals and toxins is controlled by the Regional Water and Soil Plan and the Proposed Regional Plan (PRP), not the Long Term Plan. The proposed new provisions/rules for the discharge of agrichemical contained in the PRP were appealed and the appeals were heard by the Environment Court in late April 2021. The decision on those appeals has not been released, however, it is noted that none of the appellants sought a moratorium on aerial and/or roadside spraying with toxic chemical pesticides.

Staff recommend that no further amendments to the LTP 2021-2031 are required as a result of these submissions.

Summary of feedback received:

Three submissions made comment on agrichemicals and toxins, specifically in relation to drift from chemical sprays for horticulture, and requesting a moratorium on aerial and roadside spraying with toxic chemical pesticides.

19. Individual Submissions

There are a number of individual submission points which did not relate directly to a topic being consulted on and didn't fit into one of the groups of submission points listed above. These individual submission points have been collated and considered by staff, as listed in Appendix 1, and staff recommend that no changes be made to the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 as a result of these submissions.

Recommendation

104. That council adopts staff recommendations outlined in the attached spreadsheet (Appendix 1) as council decisions, and do not make any changes to the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 as a result of these submission points.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

20. Strategic Direction

Recommendation

105. That council supports the community outcomes as set out in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and supporting information document.

This recommendation does not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

Three submissions made reference to council’s vision, mission and community outcomes. One proposed that NRC enact the mission and vision to protect the environment, and the other two emphasised specific outcomes: A strong sustainable regional economy, healthy waters for the environment and people, meaningful partnerships with tangata whenua, and resilient, adaptable communities in a changing climate.

Other submissions indicated support for the work council is proposing to do which are tied back to delivering on council’s strategic direction as articulated through community outcomes. Staff therefore recommend that no changes be made to the strategic direction included in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 supporting information document.

21. Oruku landing conference and events centre

Recommendations:

106. That the resolutions pertaining to the Oruku landing conference and events centre (considered during public excluded) be confirmed in open meeting.

These recommendations do not change what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document.

Discussion:

A report relating to the proposed funding of fit-out associated with the Oruku landing conference and events centre has been included for consideration in the public-excluded section of the meeting. This is due to the sensitive commercial nature of the proposals to be discussed.

Summary of feedback received | Oruku landing conference and events centre

Ninety-three of 171 submitters responded to this question, with 33 agreeing with the proposal, 43 disagreeing, 17 neutral and 78 not selecting an option.

Of submitters who agreed with the proposal, support was noted for the government funding this will secure, this being a valuable asset and great opportunity, a much-needed hotel/conference/international events facility, contribution to Hihiaua Cultural Centre, providing for the future and growth of Northland, the positive effects on the local economy, the synergies with existing buildings (Hihiaua, Hundertwasser), more local jobs, and this being a catalyst for further development. Concerns were raised over the loss of government funding if we don’t support this.

Of submitters who disagreed with the proposal, support was noted for a vibrant meeting place in the city centre, funding going toward Hihiaua Cultural Centre, spending on things that will better serve all of Northland, and the money going towards wastewater infrastructure/cleaning up waterways/protecting the environment/climate mitigation. Concerns were raised over ratepayers funding a development that benefits private businesses, this not being regional council business or a priority, the flood/tsunami zone it’s proposed within, the location further dividing the city, this being another proposal for an events centre, the proposed rates increase, that money is only going to Whangārei not the rest of the region, the limited capacity, the lack of parking, and the uncertainties of such venues considering the pandemic.

Of submitters who were neutral, support was noted for focus on the environment and climate change, sponsorship with naming rights instead, and the tangata whenua of the place deciding whether it’s appropriate. Concerns were raised over the trend towards online considering the pandemic, the location away from the city centre, that individuals don’t benefit and that it is funding economic development.

Of submitters who didn’t chose an option, support was noted for this being funded by Whangārei residents as they get the most benefit. Concerns were raised over this not benefitting all of Northland, selling council’s shares in Northport, this being inappropriate and insulting to ratepayers, and the tsunami/flood zone (considering climate change).

22. Targeted region-wide rate increase

Recommendation:

107. That council supports a total 19.19% average rate increase of the combined council services rate, land and freshwater management rate, pest management rate, emergency and hazard management rate, and flood infrastructure rate in the first year of the Long Term Plan, with projected increases of 0.98 - 13.98% (including inflation adjustments) each year for the next 10 years, with additional increases as resolved elsewhere in this report.

This recommendation represents a change to what was proposed in the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document. The proposed rate revenue increase set out in the consultation material was 19.8%.

Discussion:

The Long Term Plan consultation document set out a proposed total 19.8% average rates increase (an average of $70.69 per rateable unit), of the combined council services rate, land and freshwater management rate, pest management rate, land management rate, emergency and hazard management rate, and flood infrastructure rate.

The total rate revenue increase is made up of work across council’s three main areas of work: natural environment, community resilience and regional leaderships. The decisions within each of these areas formed the bulk of the Consultation Document.

It is important to note that the exact amount that proposed new work attributes to rates is subject to minor change during the three months from approval for consultation to council deliberations, as updates are received on projected investment income and the number of rating units (or SUIPs) in the region, and as funding models are fine-tuned. This, and consideration of the new Te Ture Whenua Maori bill has resulted in a lower increase in rates necessary to achieve council’s preferred option as put forward in the consultation document, from 19.8% to 19.19%. However, some areas of critical new spend have also been identified as outlined in this report, that if carried as recommended, would bring the increase back to the 19.8% as consulted.

Where feedback was received that council should ‘do more’, staff considered options and have set out recommendations for extra work for council to consider.

As noted elsewhere in this report, if council were to carry all recommendations in the report, including those for additional spend, the increase in council’s rate revenue would be 21.04% in 2021/22, 13.98% in 2022/23, and 10.13% in 2023/24.

The exact rate increase resulting from these deliberations depends on what recommendations were carried and what were not. Staff will be available to provide a live update of the impact of recommendations, on the day of deliberations.

Overall, submitters indicated support for the proposed direction of council, but were concerned about the increase to rates as a whole. The majority of submitters agree with the proposed increased spending across each of the council activities that contribute to the total proposed rates increase.

Summary of feedback received:

While the overall increases in rates were not an individual consultation point in themselves, comments were made in many submissions that related to rates increases. 15 of these comments raised general concern about the rates increases and work proposals. The general sentiment was that council should not be increasing rates, that the work is unnecessary, or that some projects should be deferred, or scaled back put on hold. Comments questioned what the increases are for, requested prioritisation of projects and cost-benefit analysis. Comments referred to ratepayers being a ‘captive market’, and reference was made to the economic impacts of Covid-19.

Eight submissions noted general support for the work or for increases. These submissions supported progression of the region, benefits for future generations, environmental protection, and noted support for positive relationships with council.

Attachments/Ngā tapirihanga

Attachment 1: Report on 'Have Your Say' events 2021 ⇩

Attachment 2: Summary of Submissions 2021 ⇩

Attachment 3: Report on social media feedback 2021 ⇩

Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Deliberations | Appendix 1

Name / Organisation

Submitter comment

Staff response

Mr Alan Agnew

LTP21_40

Submitter requested that his submission to the 2020/21 annual plan process be re-submitted to this event and provided two new pieces of information to add. Points raised in this submission included: - The need for a recreation centre for the elderly and disabled, citing the ex-Countdown building as a possible site. Note - submitter provided new paperwork relating to a trespass notice he had been served at the Kensington site on 6 December. - Concern about fire bans in summer. Note - submitter provided new paperwork on an incident logged by the Fire Authority, relating to a fire he lit on his property in protest of the fire ban.

- Kauri die back being caused by borer beetles {Staff summary; please see original submission}

The decision to redevelop the Kensington site into a combined medical precinct and convenience restaurant hub was made in 2019. Its construction and tenanting is now well advanced.

Borer beetles have not been identified as a known vector of kauri dieback disease. The disease starts in the roots of the tree and the greatest risks lie with the transfer of infected soil.

Mr Stephen Rush
Environment Officer
Te Runanga o Whangaroa

LTP21_67

The NRC subsidiary - Harbour master authority is operating autonomously and needs to be reviewed in light of meaningful consultation with iwi and hapū on harbour matters. Where NRC has policies the roll-out of these to the harbour master role is, at times, inconsistent. e.g. Regional Coastal Plan designated mooring areas where the harbour master is exercising discretionary authority without consultation or notification to do so. This is a serious concern for the long term plan, particularly where planning for long term coastal and marine matters are at issue.

The harbourmaster cannot exercise discretionary powers in designated mooring areas. These are defined in the coastal plan after extensive consultation at the planning level. This is the point where Iwi and Hapu have the opportunity to submit on the plan. Once a mooring area is designated, the harbourmaster is obliged to permit moorings as they are permitted, unless there is a navigational safety reason not to. The harbourmaster operates in accordance with the existing coastal plan, and the maritime transport act.

Where a consent is required for a mooring, the consenting requirements are followed, and the harbourmaster can only submit on navigational safety matters.

C Cotton

LTP21_81

I haven't seen any mention of protecting our Esplanade Reserves from eroding into the sea. At present the Esplanade Reserve above the One Tree Point Cliffs is disappearing into Whangārei Harbour creating more silting. This erosion is undermining the cliffs creating overhangs which topple from time to time on to the beach below. As Bream Bay's population increases more and more people are using the Esplanade Reserve and are in danger of falling the 5 - 8 metres off the cliff, or their weight near one of the many overhangs may trigger a landslide on to someone below. Likewise the children and young adults who climb and swing from the beautiful pohutukawas on the cliff edge risk these undermined trees toppling into the ocean or beach on to anyone that may be below. The erosion has also created sandstone caves which children play in - a potentially dangerous situation which would not be tolerated at a work site. I suggest the sea retaining rock wall built on some parts of the cliff be continued up harbour from the One Tree Point boat ramp.

The Northland Regional Council is responsible for identifying and keeping records of natural hazards in Northland and for processing the resource consents that may be required for coastal protection works. However, esplanade reserves are owned, maintained and managed by territorial authorities. The Whangarei District Council is responsible for the Esplanade Reserve above the cliffs at One Tree Point.

Quinn Miller

LTP21_130

The adventure tourism potential of the Bay of Islands and the coastline north of there could be improved by creating a series of campgrounds aimed at kayakers. Currently there is the DOC campgrounds on Urupukapuka island, but that only allows day trips, rather than moving along the area. In Auckland there is the Te Moana trail and Northland would be well suited to doing something similar.

Northland Inc. is the responsible for council’s activities in the area of tourism product development, marketing and management. Council will forward the suggestion on to them.

Northland Inc. is currently in the process of developing a Destination Management and Marketing Plan for Te Taitokerau.

Guy Ralls

LTP21_150

Submitter puts submission forward as a formal notice to NRC. Requests that NRC acknowledge the limits to its authority set out under He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tirene, the Declaration of Independence of the United Tribes of New Zealand 1835.

Raises concern that the LTP will include a framework to implement United Nations Agenda 2030 objectives to "re-wild" rural areas of Northland in a way that would limit human domestic and agricultural use of privately held or Māori land, and that this would not be in the interests of the people of Northland / Te Tai Tokerau.

Raises concern about the designation of land as Outstanding Natural Features and Landscapes ("ONFLs"), Significant Natural Areas ("SNAs"), Significant Ecological Areas or similar.

Submission discusses this in detail, with media article referenced.

{staff summary; please see original submission}

The submitter makes it clear that it is not a submission – it is a formal notice to the Northland Regional Council.

Consequently staff have made no recommendations in respect to the LTP.

Mr James Murray

LTP21_166

Submitter makes reference to matters of Regional Planning including Aquaculture Management Areas and the Regional Coastal Plan. {staff summary; please see original submission}

The submitter is seeking that Council include proposed Aquaculture Management Areas in the Regional Coastal Plan (Regional Plan).

It is not possible to include provisions in the Regional Plan via an LTP decision. Staff have made contact with the submitter and organised meeting to discuss issues raised. Staff recommend no amendments to the LTP.

Mr Shane Hyde
Eco-land Ltd

LTP21_167

Please ensure the following are not enabled with the plan: '

** Physical or biotech technologies of which are not retractable from the natural or physical environment regardless if this limitation be in physical sense or financial sense '

** Please ensure pollution is mitigated, charged to and regulated at point of source '

** Please ensure those that have profited through enabling permanent ecological burden are held responsible for the clean-up or remedial work. '

** Please insure those that promote and undertake sustainable land management with no need of funding assistance are supported through the enforcement of present legal policy

'** Please do not dissolve property owner vegetation rights to those who have historically enhanced / enabled vegetated remain in marginal production zones. It would be considered unfair to make such land owners burdened by climate change carbon sequent ion at the economic advantage of those land owners that already have sponsored tree denuded productive grass landscapes. '

** Please do not regulate or make farm timber collection a permitted fees chargeable activity regardless of tree species involved.

'** Please do not diminish grandfather rights of historic water take for domestic and livestock use

The matters raised are largely not matters controlled by a LTP, and are Proposed Regional Plan or consenting matters.

Staff note that the council monitors the resource consents it grants and recovers the actual and reasonable costs of monitoring those consents from the holders of those consents through resource users charges.

Staff also note that four additional FTE staff sought in Years 1 and 2 of the LTP to increase compliance monitoring and enforcement capacity.

Dr Lily George
Policy Analyst
Nga Tai Ora

LTP21_172

Submitter makes comment on various topics and makes the following recommendations that are not relevant to any specific consultation point:

Wastewater recommendations: That NRC establishes a process to ensure the safe management of on-site effluent disposal, and consider the cumulative effects of these systems, not just the individual effects of each system · That NRC considers systematic realisation of wastewater treatment plants for all Northlanders, and seeks to develop a plan/strategy for this.

Stormwater recommendations: That NRC take into consideration the predicted impacts of climate change on stormwater systems when developing water catchment management plans, and upgrading stormwater systems. 'Flood relief for isolated rural communities' recommendation: That the NRC works with the regional councils and government organisations to develop viable flood and climate change relief for isolated rural communities such as Waikare.

'Covid-19 pandemic, epidemic and pandemic preparedness and response' recommendations:

· That NRC has a comprehensive pandemic plan in place to deal with the current and future pandemics, and that the plan is reviewed regularly

· That NRC takes a '˜green recovery' approach, (outlined in the section on climate change)

· That NRC recognises and prepares for the risk novel of infectious disease outbreaks as a result of climate change e.g. vector borne diseases like dengue fever

· Pandemic preparedness: that adequate planning is in place to manage the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, and future pandemics, and that NRC takes a 'green recovery' approach.

Wellbeing recommendations: That NRC structure their strategic objectives, business activities and targets to explicitly align with the wellbeing framework (social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing) articulated in the LGA.

Engagement with Ngā Tai Ora/Public Health Northland (Northland DHB) recommendations: The establishment of a working group between Ngā Tai Ora/Public Health Northland (Northland DHB) and NRC to identify projects and a way forward.

'Sustainable development goals' recommendation: We encourage NRC to engage with this process as appropriate, and would welcome collaboration on relevant projects.

Conclusion recommendation: Perhaps the strongest recommendation we can make, however, is that NRC apply a health/wellbeing and equity lens over all their activities, and work more closely with Ngā Tai Ora/Public Health Northland (Northland DHB) to facilitate this. This would help achieve the 'four wellbeings' outcomes that are sought, and steer the region through the challenges it faces into a healthy sustainable future.

{staff summary; please see original submission}

Territorial authorities are responsible for providing wastewater services to their communities, rather than regional councils.

Staff note that council may be involved in the consenting of new stormwater systems and must have particular regard to the effects of climate change.

Nationally, regionally and locally detailed COVID 19 Response and Recovery Plans exist that are regularly reviewed and updated. The regional and local plans have been developed by the Northland CDEM Group in consultation with key partners and stakeholders, including the DHB.

Council’s strategic direction and planning is built around the four wellbeing’s framework as set out in the Local Government Act

Mr David Lourie

LTP21_173

I support Regional Council purchasing properties suitable for regional parks that are or could be connected to public transport services. Properties chosen for location, landscape features, biodiversity, cultural and historic protection with said areas protected with other areas run as public open space, model farming best practices, camp ground, lodge accommodation, cater for school trips, workshops, model wetland restoration, model stream management and environmental resource centre. Regional parks have the potential to be at least partly self funding. I support exploring further funding options such as bequests of cash and land, asking people if they would donate to different projects, many people donate time, why not cash rich time poor people have a chance to donate money for projects they support. Regional parks could be part funded by selling time shares in lodge accommodation, but still managed entirely in house.

Council has not proposed the purchasing of properties for regional parks. While this may be something council may wish to consider in the future, this would be a significant undertaking by council and requires detailed consideration. Staff recommend no amendments to the LTP.

Item No.	Item Issue	Reasons/Grounds
6.1	Council Deliberations on the Long Term Plan 2021- 2031: Oruku Landing Conference and Event Centre	The public conduct of the proceedings would be likely to result in disclosure of information, the withholding of which is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information, or information from the same source, and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied s7(2)(c)(i) 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).

TITLE:	Council deliberations on the User Fees and Charges 2021/22
ID:	A1443691
From:	Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager
Authorised by Group Manager:	Chris Taylor, Governance Support Manager, on 13 May 2021