Agenda of Kaipara Moana Remediation Joint Committee

Kaipara Moana Remediation Joint Committee

29 July 2024

Kaipara Moana Remediation Joint Committee Agenda

Rā \| Date:	Monday, 29 July 2024
Wā \| Time:	10.30am
Tauwāhi \| Location:	Warkworth Town Hall, 2 Alnwick St, Warkworth, 0910
Ngā Mana whakahaere \| Members	Tame Te Rangi (Chair), Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua      Amy Macdonald (Deputy Chair), Northland Regional Council      Cherie Povey, Ngā Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara      Georgina Curtis-Connelly, Te Uri o Hau      Greg Sayers, Auckland Council      Jack Craw, Northland Regional Council       Jane Sherard, Ngā Maunga Whakahii o Kaipara       John Blackwell, Northland Regional Council      Kerrin Leoni, Auckland Council      Michelle Carmichael, Auckland Council      Taiāwhio Wati, Te Uri o Hau      Virginia Warriner, Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Whātua

The Quorum for the Joint Committee is:

a) 7 members of the 12 Committee members, and;

b) At least 1 member each from Auckland Council and Northland Regional Council, and;

c) At least 2 members from Kaipara Uri (unspecified from which entities).

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

For any queries regarding this meeting, please contact Kaipara Moana Remediation via the website https://kmr.org.nz/contact/

RĪMITI (ITEM) Page

1.0 KARAKIA | WHAKATAU

2.0 NGĀ WHAKAPAHĀ | apologies

3.0 NGĀ WHAKAPUAKANGA | declarations of interest

4.0 Ngā Whakaae Miniti | Confirmation of Minutes

4.1 Confirmation of Minutes - May 2024 4

5.0 Whiwhinga Mahi | Work Programme

5.1 Joint Committee Action Tracker 11

5.2 Joint Committee Forward Workplan 13

6.0 Ngā Rīmiti / Items

6.1 Committee and Executive Interests 15

6.2 Indicative Year End Results 19

6.3 Pou Tātaki Report 24

7.0 Reta | Correspondence

7.1 Correspondence 29

Kaipara Moana Remediation Joint Committee ITEM: 6.2

29 July 2024

TITLE:	Indicative Year End Results for 2023-2024
Kaituhi Pūrongo \| Report Writers	Stephanie Versteeg, Amo-Rautaki Pākihi \| Strategic Business Manager, Galilee Miles, Kaitohutohu \| Advisor – Monitoring and Evaluation

Te Kaupapa | Purpose

This report summarises unaudited year-end key performance indicators for Kaipara Moana Remediation in 2023-2024.

Whakarāpopototanga | Executive summary

Audited year-end results for Year 4 of the Kaipara Moana Remediation (KMR) Programme are due to be submitted to the Ministry for the Environment by 31 October 2024. In advance of the KMR audit, this report provides a summary of the unaudited Year 4 year-end results for the Joint Committee’s information.

Preliminary results indicate that KMR met all of its Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in Year 4 barring one (area of land covered by KMR plans), primarily due to incorrect assumptions about the overall relative mix of farm types and project types (these correlate to average size of property). These assumptions were made using known programme data when the KPIs were set back in March 2023, and were the best available estimates at the time.

KMR is extremely pleased with these year-end results. They reflect the ongoing uplift in KMR’s engagement and sediment remediation on the ground, despite worsening economic headwinds and renewed uncertainty about freshwater, carbon and biodiversity policy and regulation.

Whakataunga |Recommendations

That the Joint Committee:

1. Receive the report ‘Indicative Year-End Results for 2023-2024’ by Stephanie Versteeg, Strategic Business Manager and Galilee Miles, Advisor – Monitoring and Evaluation, dated 29 July 2024.

2. Note that audited year-end results for Year 4 of Kaipara Moana Remediation (KMR) are due to be submitted to the Ministry for the Environment by 31 October 2024.

3. Note the preliminary, unaudited Year 4 year-end results presented in this report, which will be communicated to Ministry for the Environment and others, as relevant.

4. Note that the preliminary, unaudited Year 4 year-end results indicate that KMR has met all of its Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), barring one metric (land area covered by new plan) which, while a valid measure, does not reflect activity by returning landowners/groups, nor the value – environmentally or culturally – of the projects supported by KMR grants.

Horopaki | Background

Under the KMR Deed of Funding, audited year-end results for Year 4 of Kaipara Moana Remediation (KMR) are due to be submitted to the Ministry for the Environment by 31 October 2024. There is an earlier opportunity (and need) for KMR to communicate Year 4 delivery against key performance targets and progress in scaling-up sediment reduction projects.

Tātari me ngā tūtohu | Analysis and Advice

The table over page provides a summary of the unaudited Year 4 year-end results compared to the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in the Year 4 Annual Work Plan:

Table 1: Preliminary year-end results for 2023-2024.

Focus Area	Metric	Year 3 Actuals	Year 4 Actuals[1] (Unaudited)[2]	Total Year 4 target
Sediment reduction activities	Number of new Farm Environment Plans (total) Sediment Reduction Plans (SRP) Tiaki FEPs or grant agreements Number of projects by returning landowners	242 106 136 49	210 151 new SRP approved 59 new Fonterra FEP or grant agreements 132 landowners/groups returning to undertake additional projects	180 90 90 70
Sediment reduction activities	Area (ha) of works covered by new Sediment Reduction Plans or Farm Environment Plans	48,212	31,594ha	45,000
Freshwater restoration	Number of plants planted in riparian, lake, or wetlands areas	634,336	799,319 stems 434,361 signed off as completed from winter 2023 and the start of winter 2024 364,958 committed for winter 2024	600,000
	Area (ha) of riparian, lake or wetlands planting	140ha	160ha 87ha signed off as completed from winter 2023 and the start of winter 2024 73ha committed for winter 2024	120
	Length (km) of new fencing constructed	347km	458km 209km signed off as completed 249km committed	350

Focus Area	Metric	Year 3 Actuals	Year 4 Actuals (Unaudited)[3]	Total Year 4 target
Other soil conservation measures	Area (ha) of afforestation, space planting or biodiversity planting not in riparian, lake, or wetlands margins NB: In effect, this is a measure of work in highly erodible hill country.	67ha	383ha 27ha signed off as completed 356ha committed	200
Other soil conservation measures	Number of plants planted in highly erodible hill country	n/a[4]	354,051 52,332 signed off as complete 301,719 committed	n/a⁴
Nature based employment	Number of people-hours worked in each reporting period	74,663 (48 FTE)	95,118 (61 FTE) 95,118 hours of work completed, with an additional 70,198 hours committed to in contracts with landowners	80,000 (51 FTE)
Nature based employment	Number of people undertaking training in each reporting period	18	115 Training included KMR Field Advisor Training, te reo and tikanga courses, NZARM training, NRC Wetlands Course, and external training provided via delivery partners and as part of Kaitiaki Employment Coordinator role.	30

These (unaudited) results reflect the hard work of many landowners, groups, programme partners, suppliers and community supporters, as well as Kaipara Maurikura staff.

Preliminary results indicate that KMR met all of its Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) in Year 4, with only one metric not reaching target (it achieved 70% of target). While KMR has exceeded the associated target number of new landowners (and Sediment Reduction Plans or Farm Environment Plans) to be completed in 2023-2024, the property area covered by new Sediment Reduction Plans and Farm Environment Plans has not grown as fast as anticipated. The KPI was set using best available knowledge of land size and relative sectoral mix of landowners/groups taking action in the programme at the time this KPI was set (March 2023).

The lower than anticipated result reflects the following:

· the growing proportion of return (i.e. second- or third-year) projects by landowners/groups already working with KMR (the area of these properties is not captured by this metric);

· the lower than anticipated delivery by Fonterra of new Plans (~200 hectare average farm size);

· the growing number of smaller farm blocks (including lifestyle blocks) working with KMR; and

· the growing number of group-led or community-led projects on small areas of land (e.g. on riverbank strips, school lands or public reserves) supported by KMR’s Whenua Whānui Fund.

While the area of land covered by new Plans is a valid measure (it is particularly relevant in a regulatory environment, for example if Freshwater Farm Plans become mandatory), it does not reflect the value – environmentally and culturally – of the projects supported by KMR grants. We also note that returning landowners/groups are critical to KMR achieving our investment outcomes, and will remain so through the life of the programme.

Nonetheless, Year 4 results are KMR’s best overall year-end results to date, with the metrics that achieved target falling between 117%-363% of the target set. All metrics included, the median was 141% of target. KMR is therefore extremely pleased with the unaudited Year 4 year-end results. The results demonstrate the ongoing scale up in KMR’s engagement and sediment remediation activities on the ground, despite worsening economic headwinds and high uncertainty relating to freshwater, carbon and biodiversity policy and regulation that can and does affect landowner willingness to work with KMR.

Ngā whāinga mō āmuri | Next steps

KMR is shortly to undergo the usual financial audit process. Final audited financial reporting and key performance indicators will be presented in the KMR Annual Report, which will come to the Joint Committee on 21 October ahead of submission to the Ministry for the Environment by 31 October.

In the interim, KMR will use these unaudited figures (with appropriate caveats) to support relevant communications and engagement.

Considerations

1. Aromātai whāinga haumi mō te oranga | Wellbeing Investment objectives and assessment

These indicative outputs for 2023-2024 support KMR to achieve its investment objectives across all domains, including Tiaki Taiao (Natural Capital), Ōhanga (Physical and Financial Capital), Manaaki Tangata (Human Capital) and Tātai Hononga (Social Capital).

2. Ngā ritenga take pūtea | Financial implications

These are indicators of the results achieved through the 2023-2024 budget. Grant funding associated with remediation works that were contracted in 2023-2024 but not completed will be carried over into the 2024-2025 budget. This budget will be finalised once 2023-2024 audit is complete.

3. Ngā hiranga me ngā hononga | Significance and Engagement

In relation to section 79 of the Local Government Act 2002, the decisions arising from this report are considered to be of low significance when assessed against Northland Regional Council’s significance and engagement policy. This does not mean that this matter is not of significance to tangata whenua and/or individual communities, but that the Joint Committee is able to make these decisions without undertaking further consultation or engagement.^{^[5]}

4. Ngā tūraru me ngā mauru | Risks and mitigation

These indicators may change as a result of audit. Any communications in the meantime will contain appropriate caveats.

5. Ngā urutau huringa-ā-rangi | Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation

While KMR’s primary objective is to reduce the delivery of sediment to the Kaipara Moana, these results will also achieve wider benefits including the sequestration of carbon and enhancing the climate resilience of the Kaipara Moana landscape and communities.

Pirihongi | Attachments

Nil

Kaipara Moana Remediation Joint Committee item: 6.3

29 July 2024

TITLE:	Pou Tātaki Report
Kaituhi Pūrongo \| Report Writer	Justine Daw, Pou Tātaki

Te Kaupapa | Purpose

This report provides a brief update to the Kaipara Moana Remediation (KMR) Joint Committee on progress in key elements of KMR delivery since we last reported.

Whakarāpopototanga | Executive summary

Since we last reported in May, KMR continues to focus on winter planting and landowner and community engagement. Some of this activity is being led by Navigator projects and strategic partners across the catchment.

The latest Key Performance Indicators continue to demonstrate growing uptake across the catchment and ongoing scale-up of sediment remediation projects, with KMR’s new investments in erodible hill country accelerating the uplift. For the first time since KMR began, the value of projects in the sheep and beef sector has overtaken those in the dairy sector.

A second independent survey of landowners/groups working with KMR confirm that we are effectively engaging with and supporting those taking action on the ground, and that we are working in the right areas to improve programme responsiveness and delivery. However, the survey paints a sobering picture of the financial headwinds facing our landowners/groups, which KMR cannot readily resolve.

Working with Jobs for Nature, we are participating in a Benefits Case Study which is expected to demonstrate the scale of both early and subsequent benefits to accrue from KMR investments.

Whakataunga |Recommendations

That the Joint Committee:

1. Receive the report ‘Pou Tātaki Report’, by Justine Daw dated 29 July 2024.

Tātari me ngā tūtohu | Analysis and Advice

Programme Performance

KMR reached some important milestones since we last reported:

· For the first time since the programme began, in May the value of KMR projects in the sheep and beef sector has overtaken the value of those in the dairying sector[6].

· In June, the 1,000th landowner/group submitted an Expression of Interest to KMR[7].

· In the next month or so, KMR is expected to exceed our 2 millionth tree (planted, or contracted to go in the ground).

· KMR is now the largest recipient nationally of Trees That Count trees, with over 90,000 free trees provided to landowners and groups to date.

The programme-life-to-date Key Performance Indicators as at 30 June 2024 – which reflect programme delivery 2.5 years months into full operational delivery – demonstrate continued progress in scaling up, driven in part by KMR’s new investments in erodible hill country driving growth:

Jobs & Skills

· 57 people trained as KMR Field Advisors – many from local iwi/hapū

· New work created in rural communities – a year’s work for >180 people (30 June 2024 data)

· >$17.6m support for sediment reduction projects, sustaining local, nature-based employment

Engagement & Participation

· KMR has engaged with more than half of the pastoral landowners in the catchment

· 1011 landowners have submitted an Expression of Interest to KMR

· 693 co-funded project plans have been developed with landowners

· >150 schools, hapū, marae and community groups have been engaged

· 76 projects led by collectives or groups are completed, underway or in development

Nature

· >1.88 million plants in the ground or contracted to plant this winter

· >479 hectares of planting has been completed or contracted

· >800km of fencing has been completed or contracted (the same distance as from Cape Rēinga to Napier)

· Nearly 130,000 hectares are managed under KMR plans.

Independent survey of KMR landowners

In April-May 2024, the Ministry for the Environment ran a second independent survey of 207 landowners/groups who have already engaged, or who are continuing to engage, with KMR. The aim was to understand the drivers for and barriers to working with KMR. This survey complements an earlier, smaller 2023 survey which focused on operational areas for improvement.

Overall, the 2024 survey results were extremely pleasing, benchmarking KMR very highly compared to norms for similar (voluntary) programmes:

· The vast majority ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ their interactions with KMR were positive (88%)

· The vast majority ‘agreed’ or ‘strongly agreed’ their questions were answered adequately (86%)

· The vast majority found it ‘easy’ or ‘very easy’ to obtain the information (81%) they needed.

· The vast majority found it ‘easy’ or ‘very easy’ to obtain the advice (83%) they needed.

The 2024 survey confirmed previous survey results as well as other feedback received. Where the survey identified possible improvements, in the majority of cases, KMR has already made changes or is working towards better practice. The survey also confirmed previous anecdotal evidence that some landowners/groups were struggling to reach the required matched co-funding.

While the majority (72%) indicated that people respondents know ‘strongly approve’ or ‘somewhat approve’ of their work with KMR, the 2024 survey also identified a potential new barrier to working with KMR - viz. that some other landowners/groups would view those working with KMR negatively (viz. as ‘greenies’). The comments appear reflective of wider concerns in the rural community beyond KMR (e.g. ‘loss of grazed areas’ to plantation forestry; ‘frustration with regulatory challenges, red tape’).

The main survey results are set out below. As not everyone who completed the survey (n=65) completed every question, the percentages given refer only to those who answered that question.

· The 2024 survey confirmed that most landowners/groups find out about KMR via someone they know (45%), a KMR newsletter or newspaper article (22%), or at a public event (20%).

· Of those surveyed, the majority were beef farmers (68%) or sheep farmers (20%). Of those surveyed who provided their postcode (optional), most came from the mid-section of the Kaipara Moana catchment (viz. around Maungatūroto (0520 postcode), Warkworth (0910) or Tāpora/Wellsford (0977)).

· When asked what prompted them to work with KMR, respondents mentioned ‘financial assistance’ and ‘environmental/community alignment’ as primary reasons. Secondary reasons were ‘planning and technical advice’, as well as ‘positive recommendations and experiences’.

· When asked what their KMR project means to them, respondents mentioned ‘financial assistance’ and ‘environmental legacy’ as the key aspects, followed by ‘personal and community benefits’ and ‘regulatory compliance’.

· When asked what they liked the most about working with KMR, respondents mentioned ‘supportive and knowledgeable people’ and ‘funding and financial assistance’ as the primary aspects, ‘technical expertise and practical advice’ as secondary aspects.

· When asked about the benefits of working with KMR, respondents highlighted ‘financial and practical support’, ‘expertise’, and ‘community and collaborative benefits’, and indicated the ‘ease of grant application and project execution’, ‘hands-on support’ from KMR, ‘advice on fencing, planting and ecological management’, ‘learning opportunities and knowledge-sharing’, ‘environmental benefits and healthier farm management’, as well as ‘strengthened community engagement and collaboration’.

· When asked what makes it easy to work with KMR, respondents highlighted ‘effective communication’, ‘quality of ‘field advisors’ and ‘ease of process and contract management’.

· When asked about the disadvantages of working with KMR, respondents either mentioned ‘none’ or highlighted ‘regulatory and administrative challenges’, ‘funding constraints’, and ‘operational and project management issues’. Those who indicated challenges specified matters such as ‘slow approval processes delaying project start’, ‘regulatory constraints’, ‘insufficient funding’, ‘constraints relating to organic farming’ (e.g. use of weedkiller; species suitability for organic land), and ‘communications challenges’.

· When asked what makes it difficult to work with KMR, nearly a third of respondents indicated ‘nothing’, ‘can’t think of anything’, or similar. However, others noted operational or administrative challenges including organic land constraints, an inexperienced Field Advisor, communications (e.g. KMR emails going to spam), plant procurement and supplier issues, regulatory constraints, and funding challenges (including KMR market rates being too low).

· When asked what was the top priority for KMR to improve, most respondents indicated more funding’ [noting that the matched co-funding requirement is a condition of Crown funding], operational improvements (e.g. streamlining administrative processes, plant quality control), and better communication on process, timing and what support KMR can offer. Many recommendations were outside of KMR’s mandate (e.g. the need for: rates reductions for retired land; ongoing environmental subsidies; reduced regulation; community engagement via schools; and broader environmental awareness campaigns).

When invited to share any other comment, three main themes were recorded:

· The significant financial constraints in the rural sector, particularly in relation to the high costs associated with fencing.

· The crucial support provided by KMR, and KMR’s role as a nationwide model.

· Appreciation for the technical and practical assistance from KMR in navigating administrative processes and providing advice.

Strategic engagement

The KMR Pou Tātaki, supported by governance and the KMR executive team, has continued to undertake senior-level engagement and influence to ensure key decision-makers understand KMR and its value in supporting environmental restoration of the Kaipara Moana across two regions.

A major focus of this work has been in Wellington and includes KMR participation in a Benefits Case Study led by the Jobs for Nature Secretariat. This is not due for publication by the Crown until November, but early work clearly demonstrates the [significant] scale of both initial and ongoing benefits to accrue from KMR activities and investments.

Since we last reported formally to the Joint Committee, KMR has also undertaken a wide range of engagement and community-facing events. While too numerous to itemise, key engagements include hosting Minister Andrew Hoggard to a KMR project in Auckland, co-hosting three community planting events with Conservation Volunteers NZ and DOC, hosting a King’s Coronation planting ceremony with Whangārei District Council, supporting two KMR Navigator project-hosted community engagements (Mangakāhia, Tangowāhine), presenting to interested locals at one of KMR’s accredited nurseries (Hellensville), and supporting a Te Uri o Hau-led Open Day in Ōruawharo (Kōareare River Restoration).

We continue to regularly produce a wide range of compelling stories that are picked up by various media outlets showcasing the efforts of landowners and groups across the catchment. Recent results from the MfE survey, reported above, highlight the importance of ‘social norming’ of our work. Diverse landowners and groups seeing themselves in our stories makes it more likely that they will take action with KMR support.

Our media stories are supported by ongoing regular KMR Pānui, which is delivering better than average ‘open’ rates, and continued audience growth. Regular webinars, our most recent with Fonterra, continue to communicate the support KMR can provide, working in partnership with a growing number of partners, and allow a focus on specific sector or industry needs and interests.

Financial performance

The unaudited year-to-date financials shown in Table 1 over page continue to show that KMR is continuing to scale up at pace, as indicated by the value of total Programme Expenditure (Activity).

KMR has contracted an additional $5.4m worth of projects as at 30 June 2024, some of which will be completed but not yet paid out. This reflects the lag between landowners contracting to undertake sediment reduction projects, completing projects, KMR arranging project review and sign-off, landowners submitting invoices, and KMR paying invoices. As a result, Table 1 shows financial payments made to 30 June 2024, rather than project activity completed.

Table 1: KMR Financials

KMR Financials (30 June 2024 – Preliminary)
Funding contributions[8][9]
MfE	11,226,000
MfE other	50,700
Northland Regional Council (NRC)	12,730
Auckland Council (AC)	1,114,717
Interest earnt	283,142
Subtotal (Funds available)	12,687,288
Less KMR expenditure (Activity incl. Grants)	7,512,364
Funds Remaining	5,174,924

Co-funding (Matching Contributions)
NRC in kind labour	72,687
NRC in kind Opex costs	1,292,427	(incl. salaries)
AC in kind labour	54,733
AC in kind Opex costs	-
Landowners / Other contributors	3,996,019
Subtotal (Co-funding expenditure)	5,415,866
Total Programme Expenditure (Activity)	12,928,230

Joint Committee Grant Interests

In line with advice from the Office of the Auditor-General, we provide a transparent overview below of the KMR grant-related interests that are relevant to LAMIA Act (local government legislation that pertains to the financial interests of elected members, and others sitting on local government committees, such as KMR’s Joint Committee). We note that the OAG has made a ruling in respect of KMR which recognises that Members of the KMR Joint Committee have been appointed to the Committee on a representative basis i.e. due to their roles in their iwi/hapū.

Table 2: Joint Committee Grant Interests

Who

Grant type

KMR Grant (excl. GST)

Status

Nature of Interest

Georgina Curtis-Connelly & Taiawhio Wati

(Trustees for Taipuha Farms)

Landowner Grant 

Project 2 
(2024) 
$12,692

Approved by KMR.

The project is going to Trustees for approval in July.

Taipuha Farms is a subsidiary of the Te Uri o Hau Settlement Trust. Any potential financial benefit from this environmental restoration grant (e.g. in terms of future land use value) would accrue to all beneficiaries of the Te Uri o Hau Trust.
The OAG has provided a ruling to KMR that iwi/hapū membership does not constitute a LAMIA conflict.

[1] KMR counts works as completed when the final grant payment is made (this can be 6-10 months after planting). Some works recorded as committed will have been completed but not yet signed off by a KMR Field Advisor; others will be undertaken in the current financial year.

[2] Bolded items are Jobs for Nature Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

[3] Bolded items are Jobs for Nature Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

[4] Hill country soil conservation measures only commenced in winter 2024 and so targets only apply from Year 5.

[5] This Joint Committee operates under the Local Government Act which requires a significance and engagement policy (which identifies when matters require special consultation with tangata whenua and the community) and to have regard to that policy when making decisions. As the administrative support for the Joint Committee is provided by the Northland Regional Council, it is that Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy that will apply to Joint Committee decision making.

[6] This is important because there are approximately three times as many drystock landowners in the catchment as there are dairy farmers, but dairy farmers have typically taken action with KMR support earlier through our partnership with Fonterra.

[7] Not everyone who submits an Expression of Interest is eligible to work with KMR (for example, they may be out of the catchment). Likewise, not all projects from eligible landowners/groups are eligible for KMR funding.

[9] Totals in this section include some carry-overs of unused funding from previosu years (programme to Date figures). Otherwise, all figures are Year to Date.

TITLE:	Confirmation of Minutes - May 2024
Kaituhi Pūrongo \| Report Writer	Sophie Bone, PA to Pou Tātaki and Governance Support

TITLE:	Joint Committee Action Tracker
Kaituhi Pūrongo \| Report Writer	Sophie Bone, PA to Pou Tātaki and Governance Support

TITLE:	Joint Committee Forward Workplan
Kaituhi Pūrongo \| Report Writer	Sophie Bone, PA to Pou Tātaki and Governance Support

TITLE:	Committee and Executive Interests
Kaituhi Pūrongo \| Report Writer	Sophie Bone, PA to Pou Tātaki and Governance Support