a g e n d a - hauraki district · 2019-05-24 · d peddie a de laborde p thom s fabish public...

A G E N D A

COUNCIL MEETING

Wednesday, 29 May 2019, 9.00am

Council Chambers Council Office William Street Paeroa

Mayor J P Tregidga Councillors Cr D A Adams (Deputy Mayor) Cr P D Buckthought Cr C Daley Cr R Harris Cr G R Leonard Cr M McLean Cr P A Milner Cr A Rattray Cr D Smeaton Cr A M Spicer Cr D H Swales Cr J H Thorp Executive Leadership L D Cavers D Peddie A de Laborde P Thom S Fabish Public Distribution Paeroa Office Plains Area Office Waihi Area Office Chief Executive L D Cavers

Hauraki District Council, P O Box 17, William Street Paeroa, New Zealand P: 07 862 8609 or 0800 734 834 (within the District) E: [email protected] www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz

Membership

1 Council Agenda- 29-05-19 Doc. Ref: 2586348

COUNCIL AGENDA Wednesday, 29 May 2019 – 9.00am Council Chambers, Council Office, William Street, Paeroa Order of Business Pages

1. Karakia

2. Apologies

3. Declarations of Late Items

4. Declarations of Interests

5. Confirmation: Council Minutes - 24-04-19 (2566081) 5

6. Receipt and Adoption: Audit Risk Committee Minutes - 16-04-19 (2566078) 14

7. Receipt and Adoption: Hearings and Judicial Committee Minutes - 25-02-19

(2543300)

21

8. Receipt and Adoption: Hearings and Judicial Committee Minutes - 29-04-19

(2566229)

31

9. CEO Monthly Report for May 2019 (2586083) 37

10. Council Financial Report - for the ten months ending April 2019 (2585551) 122

11. Elderly Person Housing Rent Fees (2586143) 132

12. 2019-20 Annual Plan, Fees and Charges and Resolutions (2585669) 136

13. Ngatea Library and Service Centre update (2585565) 250

14. Planning and Environmental Report - April 2019 (2585651) 260

15. Building System Legislative Reform 2019 (2585653) 272

16. Report on Martha Trust - Activation (2585703) 277

17. Transport Report - April 2019 (2585989) 313

18. Transport Report - NZTA Memorandum of Understanding (2585529) 322

19. Water services activity report - May (covering April) (2585546) 366

20. District Drainage Activity Report - April 2019 (2585557) 385

21. Establishment of the Taramaire Drainage District Committee (2585763) 391

22. Solid Waste Monthly Report - April 2019 (2585553) 399

Public Excluded

23. Item 1: Landfill Contract Options (2585613) 407

2 Council Agenda- 29-05-19 Doc. Ref: 2586348

Matters to be taken with the Public Excluded

The public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

Item No.

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Ground(s) Under Section 48(1) for the Passing of this Resolution

1

Landfill Contract Options

Section 7(2)(i) Prejudice to Commercial Position/Negotiations To enable the local authority holding the information to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations.

Section 48(1)(a) That the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist.

1 Council Minutes 24-04-19 Doc Ref: 2566081

HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL MEETING

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, WILLIAM STREET, PAEROA ON WEDNESDAY, 24 APRIL 2019 COMMENCING AT 9.00 AM

KARAKIA The meeting was opened with a karakia by Cr Smeaton. APOLOGIES RESOLVED THAT the apology of His Worship the Mayor - J P Tregidga and Cr R Harris be received and sustained. C19/126 Rattray/Buckthought CARRIED LATE ITEMS There were no late items. DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS There were no declarations. CONFIRMATION: COUNCIL MINUTES – (27-03-19) (2558281) The Deputy Mayor presented the minutes. RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Hauraki District Council held on Wednesday, 27 March 2019 are confirmed and are a true and correct record. C19/127 Spicer/Leonard CARRIED Goldfields School, Paeroa – Collection of Litter on Ohinemuri Stopbank behind McDonalds Outlet The Deputy Mayor advised that he had been approached by pupils of Goldfields School raising their concern on the large amount of litter around the Ohinemuri River stopbank behind the McDonalds outlet.

PRESENT Cr D A Adams (Deputy Mayor – in the Chair), Cr P D Buckthought, Cr C Daley, Cr G R Leonard, Cr M McLean, Cr P A Milner, Cr A Rattray (9.00am-1.26pm), Cr D Smeaton, Cr A M Spicer (9.00am-1.52pm), Cr D H Swales and Cr J H Thorp

IN ATTENDANCE Messrs L D Cavers (Chief Executive), A de Laborde (Group Manager

- Engineering Services), D Peddie (Group Manager - Corporate Services), D Lees (Property Manager), M Buttimore (Strategic Planning Projects Manager), Mrs J Nelson (Senior Strategic Planner), L de Haast (Transportation Manager and Ms C Black (Council Secretary)

Council Agenda - 29-05-19


The schools have taken it upon themselves to remove the litter and request that Council give serious consideration to ensuring that the litter in this area is monitored and investigate ways to reduce this issue. CHIEF EXECUTIVE MONTHLY REPORT - APRIL 2019 (2563963) The Chief Executive presented his monthly report for the month of April 2019. The report updated on recent staff changes within the organisation and highlighted the proposed changes to LGNZ rules. The changes will be voted on at the LGNZ’s AGM on 7 July 2019. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/128 Adams/Milner CARRIED PROPOSED CHANGES TO WLASS GOVERNANCE ARRANGEMENTS - APRIL 2019 (2563635) The Chief Executive presented a report which sought approval on the proposed required resolutions and delegated authority on proposed changes to the governance arrangements of WLASS. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/129 Milner/McLean CARRIED RESOLVED THAT Council endorses the amendment of the constitution of Waikato Local Authority Shared Services (WLASS) in the manner set out in the attached special resolution, and THAT Council approves the proposed resolution that the independent Chair be paid a fee for service up to $45,000 per annum (plus reasonable costs and GST, if any), and THAT Council notes that the constitution for LASS as amended allows for the independent Chair to be appointed by unanimous agreement of the Council Representative Directors, and THAT Council approves the delegation of authority to the Council Representative Directors to agree a fee for service for the independent Chairs up to the amount noted above, and THAT Council approves the appointment of Mr Rob Williams CEO of Thames-Coromandel District Council as Councils Representative Director for Waikato Local Authority Shared Services (WLASS), and THAT Council delegates authority to the Chief Executive Officer to sign the attached special and ordinary resolutions in Appendix A on behalf of Council. C19/130 Leonard/Thorp CARRIED PROPOSED PROCUREMENT POLICY REVIEW - APRIL 2019 (2563713) APPENDIX A - REGIONAL PROCUREMENT PRINCIPLES POLICY FRAMEWORK (2563499) The Group Manager – Corporate Services presented a report which sought approval to adopt Council’s revised procurement policy.



RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/131 Adams/McLean CARRIED RESOLVED THAT Council adopts the revised Procurement Policy with the effective date of 1 July 2019. C19/132 Buckthought/Smeaton CARRIED COUNCIL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE PERIOD TO 31 MARCH 2019 (2563883) The Group Manager – Corporate Services presented the financial report covering the period to 31 March 2019. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/133 Adams/Daley CARRIED PROPOSED SENSITIVE EXPENDITURE POLICY APRIL 2019 (2563771) ATTACHMENT A - PROPOSED SENSITIVE EXPENDITURE POLICY APRIL 2019 (2563773) The Group Manager – Corporate Services presented a report which outlined the revised Sensitive Expenditure Policy affecting staff and elected members expenditure which was considered by the Audit and Risk Committee on 16th of April. Approval was sought to adopt the policy to be effective from 1st of May 2019. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/134 Adams/Thorp CARRIED RESOLVED THAT the Council adopts the revised Sensitive Expenditure Policy with the effective date of 1 May 2019. C19/135 Buckthought/Smeaton CARRIED FEES AND CHARGES FOR LEASES AND LICENSES (2563828) The Property Manager presented a report which sought Council approval of the proposed fees and charges for leases and licenses on Council owned or controlled land and/or buildings. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/136 Daley/McLean CARRIED



RESOLVED THAT Council adopt the lease and licence fee and charges structure as outlined in the report, and THAT the new lease and licence fee and charges apply to new agreements being developed, and THAT lessees are informed of proposed changes and to implement changes on 1 July 2019 for all new leases. C19/137 Adams/McLean CARRIED RENEWAL OF LICENCE TO OCCUPY L-67660 KIWIRAIL (2563827) APPENDIX A - AERIAL VIEW OF LEVEL ROAD CROSSINGS (2562537) APPENDIX B - LICENCE L-67660 (2562538) The Property Manager presented a report which sought approval for a new Licence to Occupy between Hauraki District Council and Kiwirail for the use of land RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/138 Daley/Rattray CARRIED RESOLVED THAT Council approves entering into a new Licence to Occupy between Kiwirail and the Hauraki District Council for a term of 9 years, and THAT the licence be subject to the conditions set out in the report. C19/139 Thorp/Spicer CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 10.25am. The meeting reconvened at 10.42am. FINAL COUNCILMARK ASSESSMENT REPORT 2019 (2563496) The Chief Executive presented a report which sought that the CouncilMARK working party be delegated to work with staff to evaluate areas for improvement identified by the CouncilMARK assessment of Council undertaken in October 2018. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/140 Adams/Milner CARRIED RESOLVED THAT the CouncilMARK working party work with staff to draft an action plan prioritising and budgeting for the areas of improvement identified in the CouncilMARK report, and THAT the action plan be presented to the incoming Council (after the 2019 local government elections) for consideration. C19/141 Spicer/McLean CARRIED



ROAD CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT COST RECOVERY (2563762) The Transportation Manager presented a report which sought approval to introduce fees to recover the cost of administering and managing construction activities and events in the road corridor. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/142 Adams/Buckthought CARRIED RESOLVED THAT Council approves user fees for managing utility operator access to transport corridors, and THAT Council approves, for consultation, the user fee amounts as specified in Appendix A to the report, and THAT targeted consultation on the proposed fees be undertaken in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 consultation principles, and THAT Council notes that the decision to fund expenditure associated with utility operator access to transport corridors via user fees is inconsistent with the Council’s 2018 Revenue and Financing Policy as it does not provide for income from user fees and charges for this purpose, and THAT in regards to this inconsistency it is not considered to be significant in accordance with the Significance and Engagement Policy, and THAT Council will amend the Revenue and Financing Policy to accommodate the decision to fund expenditure via user fees when it is next reviewed as a matter of course. C19/143 Buckthought/Daley CARRIED TRANSPORT ACTIVITY REPORT - MARCH 2019 (2563777) The Transportation Manager presented a report which updated on transportation activity for the month of March 2019. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/144 Adams/Thorp CARRIED PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REPORT – MARCH 2019 (2563830) The Strategic Planning Projects Manager presented the planning and regulatory monthly activity report covering the month of March 2019. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/145 Milner/McLean CARRIED



DRAFT SMOKEFREE - VAPEFREE POLICY (2563849) The Senior Strategic Planner presented a report from the Policy Analyst which sought consideration and endorsement of Council’s draft smoke-free and vape-free policy and support that the policy be released for public consultation. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/146 Milner/Spicer CARRIED RESOLVED THAT the Draft Smokefree & Vape-free Policy be approved for release for public consultation. C19/147 Buckthought/Daley CARRIED NON FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE TARGETS - THIRD QUARTER -2018-19 (2563653) The Senior Strategic Planner presented a report which provided a summary of Councils non financial performance targets for the third quarter to April 2018-19. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/148 Smeaton/Rattray CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 12.15pm The meeting reconvened at 12.55pm. FUTURE LIVING SKILLS PROGRAMME (2563760) The Group Manager – Engineering Services provided a report to notify the Council of the ‘Future Living Skills’ work programme run by the Sustainable Living Education Trust and request support for Hauraki District Council to sign up to the programme which provides resources and training opportunities for education around sustainability and waste minimisation. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/149 Spicer/McLean CARRIED RESOLVED THAT Council join the Future Living Skills programme who will in turn provide resources, training and support around sustainability and waste minimisation, and THAT Councils’ Waste Minimisation Working Party provides an update on the progress of the programme to the 28 August 2019 Council meeting. C19/150 Spicer/McLean CARRIED



HAUARAHI STREAM WORKS - KAIAUA (2563654) The Group Manager – Engineering Services presented a report which sought support of the associated costs for proposed works to undertake stream works required in the Hauarahi Stream in Kaiaua to reduce the effects of severe rainfall events. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/151 Swales/McLean CARRIED RESOLVED THAT Council support the proposed works estimated at $95,000, and THAT Council consult with the Kaiaua Community within the area of benefit of the proposed works on:

a) The extent of the proposed works and associated cost estimates b) The proposed rating model

C19/152 Swales/McLean CARRIED Cr Rattray left the meeting at 1.26pm. FENCING PROJECTS FOR WATER AND WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS (2563956) The Group Manager – Engineering Services presented a report which sought Council to approve the increases in the budget for the fencing of Council’s water and wastewater plants. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/153 Thorp/Buckthought CARRIED RESOLVED THAT the Council approve the increased capital budget by approximately $39,000 (excluding contingencies) in the Wastewater Activity (Kerepehi) for fencing of the Kerepehi Wastewater Treatment Plant, and THAT Council approve a contingency amount of $10,000 for the fencing of the Kerepehi Wastewater Treatment Plant, and THAT the Council note the capital cost saving in the Water Activity for fencing of approximately $53,000 (excluding contingencies), and THAT the Council approve a contingency $13,000 for the fencing of the water treatment plants, and THAT Tender HDC150: Fencing for Water and Wastewater Treatment Plants be awarded to N&T Higgins Fencing for the tendered value of $252,029.63 including GST. C19/154 Thorp/Buckthought CARRIED



MANA ENHANCING AGREEMENT (MEA) FOR TIAKI REPO KI PŪKOROKORO RESERVE COMMUNITY TRUST (2563641) The Group Manager – Engineering Services presented a report which sought support of the Mana Enhancing agreement for Tiako Repo Pūkorokoro Reserve Community Trust to show support for environmental improvements of the wetland area located alongside East Coast Road. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/155 Adams/Milner CARRIED RESOLVED THAT Council support the Mana Enhancing Agreement for Tiaki Repo Ki Pūkorokoro Reserve Community Trust, and THAT the Mayor sign the Mana Enhancing Agreement on behalf of the Hauraki District Council. C19/156 Smeaton/McLean CARRIED Cr Spicer left the meeting at 1.52pm. WATER SERVICES ACTIVITY REPORT - APRIL (COVERING MARCH) (2563774) The Group Manager – Engineering Services presented the monthly water services activity report covering the month of March 2019. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/157 Swales/Daley CARRIED SOLID WASTE ACTIVITY REPORT - MARCH 2019 (2563782)

The Group Manager – Engineering Services presented the monthly solid waste activity report for March 2019. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/158 Smeaton/McLean CARRIED DISTRICT DRAINAGE ACTIVITY REPORT - MARCH 2019(2563706)

The Group Manager – Engineering Services presented the monthly District Drainage activity report for March 2019. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C19/159 Buckthought/Swales CARRIED



The Group Manager – Engineering Services presented the Western and Eastern Drainage District Committee minutes for meetings held on 04 April 2019. RECEIPT AND ADOPTION WESTERN PLAINS DRAINAGE DISTRICT COMMITTEE (04-04-19) (2563858) RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the Western Plains Drainage District Committee meeting held on Thursday, 4 April 2019 be received and the recommendations therein adopted. C19/160 Buckthought/Swales CARRIED RECEIPT AND ADOPTION EASTERN PLAINS DRAINAGE DISTRICT COMMITTEE (04-04-19) (2563855) RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the Eastern Plains Drainage District Committee meeting held on Thursday, 4 April 2019 be received and the recommendations therein adopted. C19/161 Buckthought/Swales CARRIED The Deputy Mayor closed the meeting with a karakia at 2.17pm CONFIRMED D A Adams Deputy Mayor 29 May 2019


1 Audit and Risk Committee Minutes – 16-04-19 Doc Ref: 2566078

HAURAKI DISTRICT

AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE HELD IN THE HAURAKI ROOM, WILLIAM STREET, PAEROA ON TUESDAY, 16 APRIL 2019 COMMENCING AT 9.00 AM

PRESENT P Bennett (In the Chair), His Worship the Mayor Mr J P Tregidga, R Harris (9.00-11.22am), P A Milner and D Smeaton IN ATTENDANCE Mr D Walker (Audit Director - Audit NZ), L D Cavers (Chief Executive),

D Peddie (Group Manager – Corporate Services), S Baker (Finance Manager), Mrs J Nicholls (Health and Safety Advisor) and Ms C Black (Council Secretary)

APOLOGIES RESOLVED THAT the apology of Cr Adams be received and sustained. ARC19/20 Smeaton/Tregidga CARRIED LATE ITEMS There were no late items. DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS There were no declarations. CONFIRMATION: AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE MINUTES – 19-02-19 (2542940) RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the Audit and Risk Committee meeting held on Tuesday, 19 February 2019 be received and are a true and correct record. ARC19/21 Tregidga/Smeaton CARRIED AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE WORK PROGRAMME - APRIL 2019 (2560823) The Finance Manager presented the Audit and Risk Committee’s forward work programme to April 2019. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. ARC19/22 Bennett/Smeaton CARRIED



ROGRESS AGAINST AUDIT NZ RECOMMENDATIONS APRIL 2019 (2560707) APPENDIX A: AUDIT NZ MANAGEMENT LETTER ACTION SCHEDULE (APRIL-2019) RESOLVED THAT the report be received. ARC19/23 Harris/Milner CARRIED AUDIT DIRECTOR - FRAUD PRESENTATION APRIL 2019 (#2560736) Mr David Walker provided a PowerPoint presentation on Fraud. TREASURY REPORT AS AT 31 MARCH 2019 (2560711) The Group Manager – Corporate Services presented a report which updated on the current position of the loan/debt status, against the parameters outlined in the Council’s Financial Strategy and Liability Management Policy. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. ARC19/24 Tregidga/Harris CARRIED AUTO APPROVED INVOICES AND MITIGATION (2560876) The Finance Manager presented a report on a summary of invoices that were auto approved during the period 1 December 2018 – 31 March 2019 and provided an update that would prevent one person from completing the purchase and invoice approval process. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. ARC19/25 Bennett/Smeaton CARRIED RESOLVED THAT the Audit and Risk Committee note the interim measures implemented by staff to mitigate associated risks. ARC19/26 Bennett/Smeaton CARRIED David Walker advised Audit NZ would like to have the auto approved invoicing system in place before 1 July 2019. OVERHEADS REPORT 28 FEBRUARY 2019 (2560813) The Group Manager – Corporate Services presented a report which provided Council’s Overhead expenditure for the eight months to 28 February 2019.



RESOLVED THAT the report be received. ARC19/27 Milner/Smeaton CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 10.04am The meeting reconvened at 10.20am.

HEALTH SAFETY REPORT - APRIL 2019 (2558932

The Health and Safety Advisor presented the health and safety report to April 2019 which provided statistics on how Council is tracking in the areas of health, safety and wellbeing. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. ARC19/28 Bennett/Tregidga CARRIED The Chairperson commended staff on a well formulated report. RISK REPORT - APRIL 2019 (2560785) APPENDIX A – HDC RISK REGISTER - APRIL 2019 (2560787) The Finance Manager presented the updated Corporate Risk Register for the Committee’s review. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. ARC19/29 Tregidga/Milner CARRIED The register also included the three waters review currently being undertaken by the Department of Internal Affairs. PROPOSED SENSITIVE EXPENDITURE POLICY -APRIL 2019 (2560704) APPENDIX A - PROPOSED SENSITIVE EXPENDITURE POLICY APRIL 2019 (2560714) The Finance Manager presented the updated proposed Sensitive Expenditure Policy for the Committee’s endorsement prior to the adoption of Council. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. ARC19/30 Bennett/Tregidga CARRIED It was requested that staff provide a list of gifts (koha) to the Audit and Committee annually.



RESOLVED THAT the Committee endorses the adoption of the revised Sensitive Expenditure Policy, and THAT staff be instructed to place the proposed Sensitive Expenditure Policy on the Council agenda for 24th April 2019 for Councils consideration. ARC19/31 Milner/Smeaton CARRIED PROPOSED PROCUREMENT POLICY –A PRIL 2019 (2560705) APPENDIX A - REGIONAL PROCUREMENT PRINCIPLES POLICY FRAMEWORK (2560719) The Group Manager – Corporate Services presented a report which sought the endorsement of the revised procurement policy. Feedback received from Audit NZ recommended that Council updates its procurement and procedures to ensure good control and consistency of procurement across Council. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. ARC19/32 Milner/Harris CARRIED RESOLVED THAT the Committee endorses the adoption of the revised Procurement Policy, and THAT staff prepare a report on the proposed Procurement Policy to be placed on the Council agenda for the 24th April Council meeting. ARC19/33 Bennett/Harris CARRIED



Matters to be taken with the Public Excluded The public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

Item No.




1

KPMG - Progress report 16 April 2019

Maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through: (i) The free and frank expression of opinions by, or between, or to members, or officers or employees of any local authority, or any persons to whom section 2(5) of this Act applies, in the course of their duty.


2

Rates in Arrears

Section 7(2)(a) – Protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons.


ARC19/34 Bennett/Tregidga CARRIED Cr Harris left the meeting at 11.22am



RESOLVED THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting and that the business in committee discussed be confirmed. ARC19/39 Milner/Tregidga CARRIED The meeting closed at 11.40am. CONFIRMED P Bennett Chairperson 18 June 2019

Council Agenda - 29-05-19 Page 20

1 Hearings and Judicial Committee Minutes - 25-02-19 – Doc Ref: 2543300

HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL

HEARINGS AND JUDICIAL COMMITTEE MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE HEARINGS AND JUDICIAL COMMITTEE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, WILLIAM STREET, PAEROA ON MONDAY, 25 FEBRUARY 2019 COMMENCING AT 9.00AM PRESENT Cr P A Milner (Chairperson), Cr G R Leonard (Deputy Chairperson)

and Cr A Spicer

IN ATTENDANCE Messrs P Thom (Planning & Environmental Services), Mrs W Harris (Senior Planner), Mr M Sexton (Dog Control Officer) and Ms C Black (Council Secretary)

APOLOGIES There were no apologies. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST There were no conflicts of interest. CONFIRMATION: HEARINGS AND JUDICIAL COMMITTEE MINUTES (17-09-18) (2444494) RESOLVED THAT the meeting of the Hearings and Judicial Committee meeting held on Monday, 17 September 2018 be confirmed and are a true and correct record. HJC19/01 Leonard/Milner CARRIED



MATTERS TO BE TAKEN WITH THE PUBLIC EXCLUDED RESOLVED THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of the meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

Item No.




1

Appeal of Section 31 of Dog Control Act (1996) Notice of Classification of Dangerous Dog (2536690, 2541383)



2

Decision to disqualify dog owner under Section 25 Dog Control Act (1996) (2522301)



3

Appeal of Section 71 Retention of dog threatening public safety and decision to prosecute under Section 57 Dog Control Act (1996) (2536676)



HJC19/02 Milner/Leonard CARRIED



RESOLVED

THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting and that the business in committee discussed be confirmed.

HJC19/07 Milner/Leonard CARRIED

The meeting closed at 11.10am. CONFIRMED P A Milner Chairperson 29 April 2019


1 Hearings & Judicial Committee Minutes - 29-04-19 Doc Ref: 2566229


HEARINGS AND JUDICIAL COMMITTEE

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE HEARINGS AND JUDICIAL COMMITTEE HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, WILLIAM STREET, PAEROA ON MONDAY, 29 APRIL 2019 COMMENCING AT 9.00AM PRESENT Cr G R Leonard (Chairperson) and Mrs D M Carmine

(Commissioner) IN ATTENDANCE Messrs P Thom (Planning & Environmental Services), Mrs W Harris

(Manager, Regulatory Services), Mr M Sexton (Dog Control Officer) and Ms C Black (Council Secretary)

APOLOGIES RESOLVED THAT the apology of Cr P A Milner and Cr A Spicer be received and sustained. HJC19/07 Leonard/Carmine CARRIED LATE ITEMS There were no late items. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST There were no conflicts of interest. CONFIRMATION: HEARINGS AND JUDICIAL COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES (25-02-19) (2543300) RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the Hearings and Judicial Committee meeting held on Monday, 25 February 2019 be confirmed and are a true and correct record. HJC19/08 Leonard/Carmine CARRIED



MATTERS TO BE TAKEN WITH THE PUBLIC EXCLUDED

The public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

HJC19/09 Leonard/Carmine CARRIED

Item No.




1

Application for Dog Number Dispensation: (2564220)

Section 7(2) (a) – Protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons.


2

Decision to disqualify dog owner under Section 25 Dog Control Act (1996) (2559347)

Section 7(2) (a) – Protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons.




RESOLVED THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting and that the business in committee discussed be confirmed. HJC19/14 Leonard/Carmine CARRIED The meeting closed at 9.25am. CONFIRMED G R Leonard Chairperson 13 May 2019


2559655 Page 1 of 2

Information Report

To: Mayor and Councillors

From: Chief Executive – Langley Cavers

Date: Monday, 20 May 2019

File reference: Document: 2559655 Appendix A: 2586012

Meeting date: Wednesday, 29 May 2019

Subject: Chief Executives Monthly Report – May 2019

Recommendation: THAT the report be received.

1 Staff

Vandana Kapoor started as Library Assistant in a part-time role on 29th April. Antoinette Mustart is our newly appointed Executive Assistant – Corporate and Engineering. Antoinette has a background in Change Management and HR and has worked in a variety of countries including South Africa, UK and Kuwait. Siobahn Soole will be joining us on 27th May in the role of Customer Services Advisor which was vacant as a result of Leanne Charteris’s promotion. Petrina Torstonson joined us on 20th May in the role of part-time Rates Officer. Petrina has substantial experience in Local Government accounting and rates. Vicki Burrell is joining us on 8th July in the role of part-time Rates Officer. Vicki will be coming to us from Richardsons Real Estate where she has worked for the past 13 years. We are currently in the process of recruiting for the roles of Works Inspector – Roading, Building Control Officer and Operations Engineer.


2559655 Page 2 of 2

2 Local Government New Zealand Remits

Attached for the members’ information and feedback is the remits that will be considered at the LGNZ AGM on the 7 July 2019. The remits have been circulated well ahead of the AGM to allow for members to consider these prior to the AGM. Hauraki District Council delegates that will be attending and voting on these remits at the AGM are the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Councillor Rattray. Langley Cavers Chief Executive


2019 Annual General Meeting Remits


2

1 Climate change – local government representation

Remit: That LGNZ calls on the Government to include local government representation (as determined by local government) at all levels of policy development, technical risk and resilience assessment, and data acquisition on climate change response policies – with an emphasis on climate adaptation: policy; legal; planning; and financial compensation regimes.

Proposed by: Auckland Council

Supported by: Zone One

Background information and research

1. Nature of the issue

a. Climate change action, impacts and related policy, risk, legal, planning and financial implications are borne most directly by local communities.

b. As the structure and framework for a more cohesive New Zealand-wide approach emerges with the current government, it is critical that the country-wide context is informed directly by the local voice at a local council level so it is integrated appropriately into the wider context.

c. Local government is likely to be responsible for implementing a range of central government climate change policies – it is therefore crucial that local government is represented in policy/technical design process to ensure it is fit for purpose at a local scale and able to be implemented cost-effectively in the local government system.

2. Background to its being raised

a. Climate adaptation and mitigation approaches are being adopted across New Zealand, in some cases well in advance of a coherent national approach. As local councils make progress on strategy, policy, planning and direct initiatives, an opportunity exists to integrate learning, challenges or concerns into the wider national context.

b. Some councils have pioneered new approaches with mana whenua, community engagement, evidence-building and research and cross-sector governance. Without a seat at the larger table, the lessons from these early adopters risk being lost in the national conversation/approach.


3

3. New or confirming existing policy

This is a new policy.

4. How the issue relates to objectives in the current Work Programme

• The issue relates to LGNZ’s climate change work programme, particularly relating to the input/influence on the Zero Carbon Act and Independent Climate Commission, implementation of CCATWG recommendations, decision-making and risk, impacts assessment, and other elements.

• A local seat at the larger New Zealand table would ensure a strong local voice for a range of workstreams.

5. What work or action on the issue has been done on it, and the outcome

Aside from specific LGNZ workstreams relating to climate change (see above), central government has progressed consultation on the Zero Carbon Bill and Interim Climate Change Committee, has appointed a panel to produce a framework for national climate change risk assessment, and has announced a set of improvements to New Zealand’s emissions trading scheme. Likewise, a number of councils have progressed action plans and strategies to reduce emissions and prepare for climate impacts. Notably, New Zealand-wide emissions continue to rise and the serious risks associated with climate impacts continue to be better understood – an integrated local and national approach is very much needed in order to make any substantive progress on climate change in New Zealand.

6. Any existing relevant legislation, policy or practice

As described above, the Zero Carbon Act is the main relevant New Zealand legislation with accompanying frameworks, policies and schemes. A range of more local policies from the Auckland Unitary Plan to coastal policies need meticulous alignment and integration with the national approach in order for both to be most effective.

7. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone or Sector meeting

Zone 1 agreed on 1 March 2019 to support this remit.

8. Suggested course of action envisaged

• It is recommended that LGNZ work with central government to advocate for these changes.

• It is recommended that LGNZ engage directly with relevant ministers and ministries to ensure local government has an appropriate role in the National Climate Change Risk Assessment Framework, and all related and relevant work programmes.


4

2 Ban on the sale of fireworks to the general public

Remit: That LGNZ works with central government to introduce legislation to ban the sale of fireworks to the general public and end their private use.


Supported by: Metro Sector



The following issues have been identified:

a. Community concern about the negative impacts of the ad-hoc private use of fireworks particularly around the deliberate and unintentional distress to people and animals and damage to property.

b. High demand for council and emergency services who receive a large number of complaints in relation to the use of fireworks.

c. The absence of regulatory powers to territorial authorities to ban the sale of fireworks by retailers to the general public.


a. The issue was raised during the review of the Auckland Council’s Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 which prohibits setting off fireworks on public places.

b. During the review of this Bylaw, Auckland Council separately resolved to request the New Zealand Government to introduce legislation to ban the sale of fireworks to the general public and end their private use.

c. Reasons for the decision are stated in the ‘Nature of the issue’ and further details are in ‘What work or action on the issue has been done, and the outcome’.


This is a new policy.


5


This issue relates to LGNZ’s social issues portfolio which reflects working alongside central government to address social issues affecting community safety:

• Community safety is an issue of vital interest for councils as areas which are perceived to be “unsafe” are likely to experience lower levels of social cohesion and economic investment. When asked to rank issues that are most important to themselves and their communities’ safety is always one of the top.

• Framed in this way, prohibiting the private use and sale of fireworks through government legislation enhances community safety as a top priority for LGNZ. Furthermore, it also promotes social cohesion by enabling the use of public displays without the worries and danger of ad-hoc private use of fireworks.


The review of Auckland Council’s Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013 identified that a territorial authority has no regulatory powers to ban the retail sale of fireworks to the general public.

A territorial authority’s regulatory powers in relation to fireworks are limited to:

• Prohibiting fireworks from being set off on or from a public place.

• Addressing nuisance and safety issues that may arise from their use on other places (eg private property) and affect people in a public place.

• Addressing noise issues relating to fireworks being set off on other places.

Enforcement is also challenging and resource-intensive. Auckland Council (and potentially other territorial authorities) do not have capacity to respond to all complaints during peak times, and it is difficult to catch people in the act. There can also be health and safety risks for compliance staff.

A ban on the sale of fireworks through legislative reform would therefore be the most efficient and effective way of addressing issues identified in the ‘Nature of the issue’.

Any such ban would not prohibit public fireworks displays which enable a managed approach towards cultural celebrations that use fireworks throughout the year.

There is also a known level of public support for such a ban. Public feedback between October and December 2018 on the decision of Auckland Council to request a ban on the sale of fireworks was overwhelmingly supportive. Feedback to Auckland Council resolution was received from 7,997 people online. Feedback showed 89 per cent (7,041) in support and 10 per cent (837) opposed.


6

Key themes in support included:

• Concerns for the safety of people and animals (68 per cent).

• Concerns about the amount of noise (35 per cent).

• Concerns about stockpiling and use of fireworks after Guy Fawkes night (27 per cent).

• A preference for public fireworks displays only (23 per cent).

Key themes opposed, including from fireworks retailers, were:

• A ban would be excessively restrictive.

• In favour of more regulation on use instead of a ban.

• A ban would end a key part of kiwi culture and tradition.

Similar requests and petitions to ban the sale of fireworks to the general public have been delivered to the Government, including:

• An unsuccessful petition in 2015 with 32,000 signatures, including the SPCA, SAFE and the New Zealand Veterinarians Association.

• A recent petition in 2018 with nearly 18,000 signatures which was accepted on its behalf by Green Party animal welfare spokesperson Gareth Hughes.

A ban on the sale of fireworks would align New Zealand legislation to that of other comparative jurisdictions. For example, retail sale of fireworks to the general public is prohibited in every Australian jurisdiction (except the Northern Territories and Tasmania where strict restrictions on the sale and use are in place).


Hazardous Substances (Fireworks) Regulations 2001

• Fireworks may be displayed for retail sale or sold by a retailer during the period beginning on 2 November and ending at the close of 5 November in each year.

• A person must be at least 18 years in order to purchase fireworks.

WorkSafe

• Regulates health and safety in a workplace and administers the regulations for storing fireworks in a workplace.

• Approve compliance certifiers who certify public/commercial displays.

New Zealand Police

• Enforce regulations around the sale of retail fireworks, including requirements around the sale period and age restrictions under the Hazardous Substances (Fireworks) Regulations 2001.

• Address complaints about dangerous use of fireworks.


7

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

• Responsible for providing information about the sale of retail fireworks.

• Responsible for approving certifiers to test and certify that retail fireworks are safe prior to being sold in New Zealand.

• Provides approval for hazardous substances, including fireworks and provide import certificates to allow fireworks to be brought into New Zealand and the requirements for labelling and packaging of fireworks.

Auckland Council

• Deals with complaints about noise from fireworks.

• Prohibits setting off fireworks from public places under its Public Safety and Nuisance Bylaw 2013.

New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA)

• Responsible for enforcing Land Transport Rule 1 which covers fireworks being transported on the road.


We ask that LGNZ request the Government to include red light running with other traffic offences that incur demerit points.


8

3 Traffic offences – red light running

Remit: That LGNZ request the Government to bring into line camera and officer-detected red light running offences with other traffic offences that incur demerit points.



1. Background information and research


LGNZ strategic goals include a safe system for transport – increasingly free of death and serious injury. This proposal is directly working towards a safe road system, with an integrated approach across infrastructure, operation of the road network and enforcement.

The red-light-running-related crash-risk has increased in recent years (CAS) and additional prevention measures are required to reduce and eventually eliminate the social, financial and road trauma burden of these crashes.

Making use of safety cameras and demerit points would allow the intent of the law to be upheld without the need for significantly increased police presence, and is a cost effective way to ensure safety at high risk camera locations.

Demerit points are more effective than fines in deterring unsafe road user behaviour as the deterrent effect impacts equally across a wide range of road users.

We ask that LGNZ request the Government that red light running be included with other traffic offences that incur demerit points (currently absent from the list of similar offences that acquire points, although this was proposed in 2007).

All councils in New Zealand stand to benefit from reduced red-light running and cost-effective enforcement of safety using red light cameras which can operate more cheaply over wide areas. This will support councils to get strong safety results from their road safety camera programmes.

Demerit point systems (DPS) work through prevention, selection and correction mechanisms. A DPS can help increase compliance with stop signals, reducing the likelihood of exposure to non-survivable forces, and it can help reduce repeat offending among ‘loss of licence’ drivers who repeatedly make poor safety choices which may lead to a crash.


9

Applying demerit points to red-light-running offences would help make the whole penalty system more meaningful and fair, and better reflect the risk. It is expected that the costs would be minimal, mostly in the justice sector, however these too can be minimised with an educational approach.


Road safety crisis

Auckland, as the rest of New Zealand, has an increasing road toll. From 2014 to 2017 Auckland had an increase in deaths of 78 per cent. The rest of New Zealand had an increase of almost 30 per cent in that same period. Serious injuries have increased at similar rates in that time. This follows a long period of gradual reductions in road trauma. The previous methods for managing road safety are no longer working.

A Vision Zero approach requires clear expectations and shared responsibility about safe behaviour at intersections, from road users and legislators and managers of the road system.

Auckland Transport (AT) Independent Road Safety Business Improvement Review (BIR) recommends increasing penalties for camera offences for all drivers, alongside other recommendations for road safety sector partnerships.

National Road Safety Strategy update is underway. It would help to have LGNZ support for changes like this being considered under the strategy.


Red light running or failing to stop at a red signal at intersections:

• Note that in this 2007 release for changes to the demerit system in 2010, proposed a fine of $50 and 25 demerit points for red light running. https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/tougher-penalties-focus-road-safety-package

10 years of driver offence data:

• https://www.police.govt.nz/about-us/publication/road-policing-driver-offence-data-january-2009-december-2018 (accessed at 2 April 2019)

Number of red light running offences for 2014-2018 five year period, all of New Zealand:

• Officer issued: 61,208 or $8.9 million in fines, no demerit points.

• Camera issued: 14,904 or $2.2 million in fines, no demerit points.


https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/tougher-penalties-focus-road-safety-package

https://www.police.govt.nz/about-us/publication/road-policing-driver-offence-data-january-2009-december-2018

https://www.police.govt.nz/about-us/publication/road-policing-driver-offence-data-january-2009-december-2018

10


The overall strategic focus of LGNZ includes leadership and delivery of change on the big issues confronting New Zealand communities, such as road safety, with a focus on best performance and value for communities. Safety cameras with reliable enforcement tick off a number of these requirements.

This proposal could support three of the five strategic policy priorities in the LGNZ Policy statement 2017-2019, although it does not fit under one alone:

• Infrastructure: LGNZ’s policy statement mentions a safe system for transport – increasingly free of death and serious injury (p6). This proposal is directly working towards a safe road system, including infrastructure, operation of the road network and enforcement.

• Risk and resilience: Also known as safe and sustainable transport, Vision Zero and this detailed change to road safety supports a risk-based approach to increasing safety in New Zealand communities. Collaboration between local and central government is necessary to achieve the safe system goal and treating no death or serious injury as acceptable for those communities.

• Social issue – community safety: LGNZ supports projects that strengthen confidence in the police and improve perceptions of safety. This proposal reflects the goal of responsive policing, and innovative solutions for dealing with social issues.

Note on equity

While demerit points provide a more equitable deterrent effect compared to fines and help dispel the myth of ‘revenue gathering’, an increase in the use of demerit points may still impact some low deprivation communities and create ‘transport poverty’ issues, particularly in areas with high sharing of vehicles. One way to manage this potential equity issue is to use the Swedish model for managing safety cameras where they are only switched on a proportion of the time and are well supported by local road safety education activities.


From Auckland Transport research report: Auckland Red Light Camera Project: Final Evaluation Report, 2011: “When red light cameras were trialled in Auckland between 2008 and 2010, there was a 43 per cent reduction in red-light running and an average 63 per cent decrease in crashes attributable to red light running.”

Conversations with AT and Policing Operations on demerits for safety camera infringements indicate that police are very supportive of demerit points for safety cameras.

Reasons include that demerits from safety cameras can be easily transferred to the driver involved in the infringement, which addresses concerns that vehicle owners who are not driving would be unfairly penalised.


11

Further conversations between AT and New Zealand Police indicate that red light running offences are an anomaly as they do not lead to demerit points. For comparison, failing to give way at a pedestrian crossing is 35 points, and ignoring the flashing red signal at rail crossings, 20 points.

The effect of demerit points on young drivers: incentives and disincentives can have an important impact on young, novice drivers’ behaviour, including demerit points as a concrete disincentive.

From OECD research report: Young Drivers: The Road to Safety 2006 by the European Conference of Ministers of Transport (EMCT), OECD publishing, France.

Comment on technology used for enforcement:

Existing cameras are more than capable of detecting offences, it is just the legal rules that are preventing this. However, it may be worth considering that new intelligent technology will potentially improve this process even further in future.


To change the:

• Land Transport Act 1998.

• Land Transport (offenses and penalties) Regulations 1999.

• Land Transport (road user) Rule 2004.

The demerits points system comes from section 88 of the Land Transport Act and expressly excludes offences detected by camera enforcement (“vehicle surveillance equipment” as it is called in legislation).

These sections of the Act are supported by reg 6 and schedule 2 of the Land Transport (Offences and Penalties) Regulations 1999.


We ask that LGNZ request the Government to include red light running with other traffic offences that incur demerit points.


12

4 Prohibit parking on grass berms

Remit: To seek an amendment to clause 6.2 of the Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 to prohibit parking on urban berms.





Auckland Transport cannot enforce ‘parking on the grass berms’ without the request signage being in place.


In 2015 Auckland Transport Parking Services received advice that the enforcement of motor vehicles parking on the berms of the roadway could not be lawfully carried out, without the requisite signage being in place to inform the driver that the activity is not permitted. After that advice, enforcement was restricted to roadways where signage is in place. A programme to install signage was undertaken on a risk priority basis from that time to present.


Change in the existing legislative situation.


The overall strategic focus of LGNZ includes leadership and delivery of change on the big issues confronting New Zealand communities, such as road safety, with a focus on best performance and value for communities.


13

This proposal supports the Infrastructure strategic policy priorities in the LGNZ policy statement 2017-2019:

• Infrastructure: LGNZ policy statement mentions the right infrastructure and services to the right level at the best cost (p6). This proposal is directly working towards a safe road system, including infrastructure that meets the increasing demands within a reasonable roading investment.


• September 2015: AT legal team notified Parking Services and Ministry of Transport (MoT) of the issue.

• October 2015: Ministry responded stating it would be included in the next omnibus rule amendment.

• June 2016: AT was advised that the matter would not be progressed as a policy project would be needed. AT also informed that the matter was not in the 2016/17 programme but would be considered in the forward work programme.

• AT advised there would be workshops with local government to determine potential regulatory proposals in the 2017/18 programme. This did not happen.

• November 2016: AT’s Legal team wrote to the MoT again requesting for an update on when the workshops would take place.

• November 2016: MoT advised AT that they were currently co-ordinating proposals.

AT have not received an update on the issue since.


AT’s Traffic Bylaw 2012 prohibits parking on the grass within the Auckland urban traffic area. However, the combination of provisions in the Land Transport Act 1998, and the various rules made under it, mean that for AT to enforce this prohibition, we must first install prescribed signs every 100 metres on all grass road margins within the urban traffic area.

It should be noted that this is not just confined to Auckland, but is a nationwide issue, hence our multiple requests for the Ministry to consider the issue.

To note: The same requirements apply to beaches, meaning before AT can enforce a Council prohibition on parking on the beach, signage must first be installed every 100 metres along the beach.

Clearly, installing the required signage on all road margins and beaches is both aesthetically undesirable as well as prohibitively expensive.

Operational practice by AT parking services is to respond to calls for service and complaints from the public. This change is not to introduce a change in enforcement practices.


14

5 Short-term guest accommodation

Remit: That LGNZ advocates for enabling legislation that would allow councils to require all guest accommodation providers to register with the council and that provides an efficient approach to imposing punitive action on operators who don’t comply.

Proposed by: Christchurch City Council




The advent of online listing and payment platforms like Airbnb and HomeAway have helped grow a largely informal accommodation provider sector around the world on a huge scale. This is presenting challenges for local authorities around the world to adapt regulatory frameworks to effectively capture these new businesses.

The Airbnb market share in Christchurch has grown exponentially from June 2016 to December 2018.

• Rooms in owner-occupied homes listed grew from 58 in June 2016 to 1,496 in December 2018.

• Entire homes listed increased from 54 to 1,281 over the same period (+2,272 per cent).

• Airbnb’s share of all guest nights in Christchurch rose from 0.7 per cent in June 2016 to 24 per cent in December 2018.

• In the month of December 2018 there were an estimated 120,000 guest nights in Christchurch at Airbnb providers.

Councils generally have regulatory and rating requirements that guest accommodation providers are required to work within. District Plan rules protect residential amenity and coherence and many councils require business properties to pay a differential premium on general rates.

However, many informal short-term guest accommodation providers operate outside the applicable regulatory and rates frameworks. The nature of the activity makes finding properties being used for this activity problematic. Location information on the listing is vague and GPS coordinates scrambled. Hosts do not provide exact address information until a property is booked, and the platform providers won’t provide detailed location, booking frequency or contact details to councils, citing privacy obligations. In their view, the onus is on hosts to


15

confirm they meet relevant regulatory requirements. In short, we don’t know where they are and finding them is an expensive and resource-intensive exercise akin to playing whack-a-mole with a blind fold on.

This means the informal accommodation sector is able to capture competitive advantages vis-à-vis the formal sector by reducing compliance costs and risks. In popular residential neighbourhoods, high demand for this activity can reduce housing affordability, supply and choice and compromise the neighbourhood amenity.

Councils need to be able to require guest accommodation providers to register with them and to keep records of the frequency of use of residential homes for this purpose. This would enable councils to communicate better with providers, ensure regulatory and rating requirements are being met and enable a more productive relationship with platform providers.

Queenstown Lakes District Council proposed a registration approach through its District Plan review but withdrew that part of their proposal after seeking further legal advice. Christchurch City Council has also had legal advice to the effect that registration with the Council cannot be used as a condition for permitted activity status under the District Plan, particularly if that registration is contingent on compliance with other Acts (eg the Building Act, various fire safety regulations, etc). The closest thing to a form of registration that can be achieved under the RMA is to require a controlled resource consent which is still a relatively costly and onerous process for casual hosts.

2. Background to it being raised

Christchurch City Council has received numerous complaints and requests for action from representatives of the traditional accommodation sector – hotels, motels and campgrounds. They have asked for short-term rental accommodation to be brought into the same regulatory framework they are required to operate in.

There are other wider issues to consider such as impact on rental housing availability, impact on house prices and impact on type of development being delivered in response to this market.

Representatives from the Christchurch accommodation sector have raised the disparity in operating costs and regulation that are imposed on them and not the informal sector. They believe the effect of this is:

• Undermining the financial viability of the formal accommodation sector.

• Resulting in anti-social behaviour and negative amenity impacts in residential neighbourhoods.

• Creating a health and safety risk where small, casual operators are not required to meet the same standards that they are.


16


LGNZ Flagship Policy Project - Localism

‘’Local government is calling for a shift in the way public decisions are made in New Zealand by seeking a commitment to localism. Instead of relying on central government to decide what is good for our communities it is time to empower councils and communities themselves to make such decisions. Strengthening self-government at the local level means putting people back in charge of politics and reinvigorating our democracy.”

Providing councils with the means to require accommodation providers to register will greatly assist them to work with their communities to develop approaches to regulating the short-term guest accommodation sector that best serves that particular community. For many councils it would enable a nuanced approach for each community to evolve under a district-wide policy.


Christchurch City Council is taking a four-pronged approach to creating a more workable regulatory and rating frameworks.

• Preliminary work is underway to consider changes to the District Plan. These will explore options including:

o To differentiate between scales of the activity with a primarily residential or rural versus primarily commercial character (likely to be determined based on the number of days a year that a residential unit is used for this activity and whether or not it is also used for a residential purpose);

o To enable short-term guest accommodation with a primarily residential or rural character in areas where it will have no or minimal effects on housing availability or affordability, residential amenity or character, and the recovery of the Central City; and

o Restrict short-term guest accommodation in residential areas where it has a primarily commercial character.

• Consideration will be given to business rates approaches that align with any changes to District Plan rules. This may see a graduated approach to imposing business rates based on the level of activity and in line with District Plan compliance thresholds. This is an approach Auckland Council and Queenstown Lakes District Council are using.

• Consideration of a more proactive regulatory compliance approach once any changes to District Plan rules are introduced. The Council is currently responding to complaints related to guest accommodation activity but is not undertaking proactive enforcement due to the difficulty in identifying properties being used as guest accommodation and then enforcing zone rules.

• Advocating for enabling legislation that would allow councils to require all guest accommodation providers to register with the council and that provides an efficient approach to imposing punitive action on operators who don’t comply.


17


Convene a working group of local government subject matter experts to prepare a prototype legislative solution to put to the Government to guide advice to MPs.

The solution should enable councils to require all accommodation providers to register and keep records of the frequency of their bookings and should enable councils to develop a regulatory and rating approach that best suits its situation and needs.

Examples of legislation that provide similar powers include:

• Class 4 and TAB Gambling Policies under the Gambling Act.

• Prostitution Bylaws under the Prostitution Reform Act.

• Freedom Camping Bylaws under the Freedom Camping Act.


18

6 Nitrate in drinking water

Remit: That LGNZ recommend to the Government the funding of additional research into the effects of nitrates in drinking water on human health, and/or partner with international public health organisations to promote such research, in order to determine whether the current drinking water standard for nitrate is still appropriate for the protection of human health.

Proposed by: Christchurch City Council




Nitrates are one of the chemical contaminants in drinking water for which the Ministry of Health has set a maximum acceptable value (MAV) of 50 mg/L nitrate (equivalent to 11.3 mg/L nitrate-Nitrogen) for ‘short-term’ exposure. This level was determined to protect babies from methaemoglobinaemia (‘blue baby’ syndrome).

Some studies, in particular a recent Danish study, indicate a relationship between nitrates in drinking water and increased risk of adverse health effects, in particular colorectal cancer.

The well-publicised 2018 Danish study found that much lower levels of nitrate than that set in the New Zealand drinking water standards may increase the risk of colorectal cancer. The level of increased risk was small, but ‘significant’ even at levels as low as 0.87 mg/L nitrate-Nitrogen, which is more than an order of magnitude lower than the New Zealand drinking water standard.

Other studies looking at the relationship of nitrate in drinking water and possible adverse human health effects have in some instances been inconclusive or have found a relationship between nitrate in drinking water and colorectal cancer for specific sub-groups with additional risk factors (such as high red meat consumption), but not necessarily at the same level as the 2018 Danish study. The 2018 Danish study is notable because of its duration (between 1 January 1978 to 31 December 2011) and the size of the population studied (2.7 million Danish adults).

There does not appear to be a robust national system for monitoring and reporting nitrate in drinking water, nor a programme or system in place for considering whether the current drinking water standard for nitrate is still appropriate for protecting human health.


19


Dietary intake of nitrates include consumption of vegetables such as spinach, lettuce, beets and carrots, which contain significant amounts of nitrate, and processed meat, and to a lesser extent drinking water (when/where nitrate is present).

In the 2015 Environmental indicators Te taiao Aotearoa compiled by Ministry for the Environment and Statistics New Zealand, an overall trend of increasing levels of nitrate in groundwater was observed for the ten-year period 2005-2014 at monitored sites (see Figure 1).

Figure 1. Nitrate levels in groundwater, 2005-2014

Ministry for the Environment’s Our Fresh Water 2017 reports that 47 of 361 sites (13 per cent) did not meet the drinking water quality standard for nitrate at least once in the period between 2012 and 2014. The report doesn’t indicate whether any or all of these sites are sources of public water supplies.


• One of LGNZ’s five strategic priorities concerns councils’ infrastructure including that for ‘Three Waters’: “Water is critical to the future health of New Zealanders and their economy and in a world facing water scarcity New Zealand’s water resources represent a significant economic advantage. Consequently, protecting the quality of water and ensuring it is used wisely is a matter of critical importance to local government and our communities. Water is also subject to a range of legislative and regulatory reforms, with the overall allocation framework under review and councils subject to national standards, such as drinking water standards.”

• Another of LGNZ’s strategic priorities is addressing environmental issues including the quality and quantity of New Zealand’s freshwater resources: “Water quality is, and will continue to be, one of the defining political issues for governments and councils over the foreseeable future …”


20

• LGNZ’s Water 2050 project is also relevant. This project is described as: “A fit-for-purpose policy framework for the future (Water 2050) which considers freshwater quality and quantity: including standards, freshwater management, impacts on rural and urban areas, such as infrastructure requirements and associated funding, quantity issues including rights and allocation, and institutional frameworks for water governance.”


The City Council undertakes chemical sampling from approximately 20-25 bores each year as an additional risk management barrier for the provision of its public drinking water supply. This data is shared with Environment Canterbury. The monitoring programme analyses for a number of chemicals, with nitrate being only one of many contaminants analysed. The City Council maintains a database with the results of the chemical monitoring programme.

The extent of the issue with respect to understanding the extent of nitrates in drinking water and its associated human health implication is beyond the scope of the City Council’s resources to undertake.

5. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone/Sector meeting

To date no City Council drinking water well has exceeded the drinking water standard for nitrate.

Data from the last ten years of the City Council’s monitoring programme have shown that in about a third of the samples taken, results have met or exceeded the 0.87 mg/L level for which the 2018 Danish study found an increased risk of colorectal cancer (see Table 1).

Table 1. Nitrate-Nitrogen sampling results of CCC drinking water wells, 2008-2018

Results below 0.87 mg/L

Results at/above 0.87

mg/L

Total number of samples taken 280 93

Number of wells with 1 or more results 126 57

Concentration range <0.001 – 0.85 0.89 – 7.1


21


Recommend that central government fund additional research into effects of nitrates in drinking water on human health and/or partner with international public health organisations to promote such research.

Recommend that central government work with regional and local governments to improve monitoring of nitrates in reticulated supplies as well as in the sources of drinking water, noting that in its 2017 report Our Fresh Water 2017 the Ministry for the Environment has stated that they “have insufficient data to determine groundwater trends at most monitored sites” and that the Ministry of Health’s latest report on drinking water Annual Report on Drinking water Quality 2016–2017 states that “chemical determinants are not regularly monitored in all supplies”.


22

7 Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (1987)

Remit: That LGNZ initiates a review of Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (1987) (LGOIMA) request management nationally with a view to establishing clear and descriptive reporting for and by local authorities that will create a sector-wide picture of:

• Trends in the volume and nature of LGOIMA requests over time.

• Trends in users.

• The impacts of technology in terms of accessing information sought and the amount of information now held by local authorities (and able to be requested).

• The financial and resource impacts on local authorities in managing the LGOIMA function.

That LGNZ use the data obtained to:

• Identify opportunities to streamline or simplify LGOIMA processes.

• Share best practice between local authorities.

• Assess the value of a common national local government framework of practice for LGOIMA requests.

• Identify opportunities to advocate for legislation changes on behalf of the sector (where these are indicated).

Proposed by: Hamilton City Council




A comprehensive understanding of the current state of play in the sector is needed, as are metrics to measure LGOIMA activity nationally to identify opportunities for improvements and efficiencies for the benefit of local authorities and the public.

An appropriate response is needed to address the tension between transparency and accountability to the public and effective, cost-efficient use of council resources to respond to requests under LGOIMA.


23

Despite guidance provided by the Office of the Ombudsman, it is becoming harder for local authorities to traverse the range of requests made under LGOIMA with confidence that they are complying fully with the Act. Issues such as grounds for withholding information, charging for information or seeking extensions are becoming increasingly problematic as the scope and scale of complex requests grows.


Anecdotally, local authorities all around the country seem to be noticing:

• An increase in the volume of LGOIMA requests year on year;

• An increase in requests from media;

• An increase in serial requestors;

• An increase in referrals for legal advice to negotiate complex requests and the application of the Act;

• An increase in requests that could be described as vexatious; and

• Consequently, an increase in the costs of staff time in managing LGOIMA.

In seeking to comply with the legislation, local authorities share the Ombudsman’s view of the importance of public access to public information in a timely fashion in order to “enable more effective public participation in decision-making; and promote the accountability of members and officials; and so, enhance respect for the law and promote good local government” (s4 LGOIMA).

In many ways technology is making it easier to source, collate and share a far greater range of public information faster. At the same time the ubiquitous use of technology within local government has significantly increased the volume and forms of information an organisation generates and captures, with associated implications for researching, collating and then reviewing this information in response to LGOIMA requests.

Current status:

a. Understandably, the Ombudsman’s advice encourages local authorities to apply a very high threshold for withholding information and to take a generous view of what is in the public interest.

b. The scope of requests is becoming broader, more complex and covers longer time periods (to the point where some could be described as fishing expeditions). While local authorities can request refinements to scope, requestors do not always agree to do so or make only minimal changes.

c. There are costs associated with automated searches of systems, databases and email accounts, some of which should not or are not easily able to be passed on to requestors. Not undertaking automated searches increases the risk of pertinent information being omitted.


24

d. The Ombudsman’s guidance is very helpful in the main. However, Ombudsman’s guidelines take the view that a council will scope the request then make the decision whether to release the information then prepare the information for release. This often does not reflect the reality of dealing with a LGOIMA request especially large and complex requests. These components are interrelated and cannot be processed as entirely separate stages.

e. A small number of repeat requestors appear to be responsible for an increasingly disproportionate number of the total requests. Some are individuals, but a greater number are media and watchdog groups like the Taxpayers Union.

f. With an increasing amount of information requested, the review of documents, webpages, etc and redaction of text for reasons of privacy or outside-of-scope is significant and onerous.

g. Local authorities are failing to take a common approach to people and organisations that are making the same request across the sector.

h. An increasing number of LGOIMA requests are seeking property/property owner/license-holder information or other information more often than not to be used for marketing or other commercial ends. Yet local authorities are limited in their ability to recoup associated costs in providing this information, or in the case of standard operating procedures, protect their own intellectual property.


LGNZ has a work programme focused on improving the local government legal framework. This remit is consistent with that programme and seeks to focus attention on a particularly problematic part of the framework that is currently not being specifically addressed.


At a local level, Hamilton City Council has been working continuously over the last 18 months to refine our processes for dealing with LGOIMA requests. This work has ensured that relevant staff as well as the staff in the LGOIMA office and in the Communications Unit are aware of the procedures and requirements for dealing with LGOIMA requests under the Act, and options potentially available where the scope or the complexity of requests tests Council resources. Templates for responses and communications with staff regarding responses have been developed and are used or customised as necessary. We have also introduced a reporting framework so that we have visibility of requests over time and various component factors including time taken to prepare and respond to LGOIMAs. Opportunities for further enhancements relate to understanding and being able to reflect best practice sector-wide.


25


Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987; Privacy Act 1993; Office of the Ombudsman Official Information legislation guides; Privacy Commissioner privacy principles.

Hamilton City Council is very conscious of its responsibilities under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, the Privacy Act 1993, and related guidance, and our processes comply with the relevant legislation.

This topic is also closely aligned with Hamilton City Council’s strategic imperative: ‘A Council that is Best in Business’.


LGNZ prioritises a national review of LGOIMA request management as part of its programme to continuously improve the local government legal environment.


26

8 Weed control

Remit: That LGNZ encourages member councils to consider using environmentally friendly weed control methods.

Proposed by: Hamilton City Council




There is mixed evidence of the risks associated with using chemical weed control as a method, particularly glyphosate-based, and lobby groups are actively pressuring councils to reduce use. Glyphosate is currently approved for use as a herbicide by New Zealand’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and most New Zealand councils use it, given it is a cost-effective, proven option for weed control. Most councils take an integrated approach to weed control, which includes the use of glyphosate-based products along with alternative methods.


In New Zealand, the use of chemicals including glyphosate is regulated by the EPA. A 2016 EPA review concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to be genotoxic or carcinogenic to humans and does not require classification under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act 1996 as a carcinogen or mutagen.

Internationally, there is controversy surrounding the use of glyphosate. In 2004 a World Health Organisation (WHO) Group (the Joint Meeting on Pesticides Residues) determined that glyphosate does not pose a cancer risk to humans. In 2015, another WHO sub-group (the International Agency for Research on Cancer) classified glyphosate as ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’.

In August 2018 a California jury found Monsanto liable in a case linking the use of the company’s glyphosate-based weedkillers to cancer. In March 2019, a federal jury in America ruled that use of Monsanto’s glyphosate-based weedkiller was a ‘substantial factor’ in another user developing cancer. These cases have reinvigorated calls to ban the use of glyphosate in New Zealand and worldwide.


27


LGNZ has an environmental work programme and the proposed remit is consistent with this focus on environmental issues that affect local government and local communities. The LGNZ programme does not specifically address the issue of non-chemical methods of weed control despite strong public interest.


At a local level, Hamilton City Council staff are currently actively looking at reducing chemical use in general and, more specifically, at alternative weed control methods. Our approach acknowledges the importance of keeping our community and staff safe and healthy. Staff are appropriately trained and required to wear the correct personal protective equipment (PPE) for the task.

Our investigation of non-chemical options has incorporated the following:

• In September 2018, we began trialling use of a steam machine for weed control. The equipment has a large carbon footprint (9 litres of fossil fuel per hour of operation) and requires more frequent application to achieve the same level of weed control.

• The use of a new mulch application machine has enabled sites to be mulched faster than traditional methods, which supresses weeds for longer.

• We have trialled longer grass-cutting heights to reduce Onehunga weed in amenity areas. This has led to a reduction in selective herbicide application.

• We are working with Kiwicare to trial alternative weed control methods in Hamilton parks. Kiwicare has a wide range of alternatives, including an organic fatty acid-based product.

Our current operating approach includes continuous review of application equipment efficiency including use of air-induced spray nozzles droplet control, which results in less spray being required.

As a result of Hamilton City Council’s strategy to consider alternatives, one large herbicide sprayer was decommissioned from the council parks fleet in early 2019. This will lead to a reduction in glyphosate used.

Glyphosate is no longer used for weed control in our playground sites. It has been replaced with an organic spray alternative (this option is 30 per cent more expensive than using glyphosate).

Glyphosate use by Hamilton City Council is recorded on a dedicated webpage and a no-spray register is maintained. Residents can opt out of the council spraying programme and take responsibility themselves for weed control along property boundaries and street frontages.


28


Hamilton City Council currently operates in compliance with national standards (New Zealand Standard 8409:2004 Code of Practice for the management of agrichemicals), the Waikato Regional Plan and Pest Management Plan and our own Herbicides Use Management Policy.

6. Outcome of any prior discussion at a Zone/Sector meeting

Most councils take an integrated approach to weed control, which includes the use of glyphosate-based products along with alternative methods. Reports this year from Christchurch, where the City Council is phasing out use of glyphosate, indicates levels of service and maintenance appearance have been an issue, along with significant cost increases when glyphosate has been significantly reduced.


LGNZ leads a commitment by local government to investigate and trial environmentally friendly alternatives to chemical weed control with results shared amongst member organisations.


29

9 Building defects claims

Remit: LGNZ calls on central government to take action as recommended by the Law Commission in its 2014 report on “Liability of Multiple Defendants” to introduce a cap on the liability of councils in New Zealand in relation to building defects claims whilst joint and several liability applies.

Proposed by: Napier City Council

Supported by: Zone Three



• In its report on joint and several liability issued in June 2014 (the Law Commission report) the Law Commission recommended that councils’ liability for defective building claims should be capped. Building consent authorities in New Zealand (councils) are disproportionally affected by defective building claims.

• The Government in its response to the Law Commission report directed the Ministry of Justice and the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) to further analyse the value and potential impact of the Law Commission’s recommendations, including capping liability of councils, and report back to their respective ministers.

• The MBIE website suggests that a Building (Liability) Amendment Bill would be consulted on in 2017 and final policy approval obtained from Cabinet. That Bill, according to the MBIE website, would be aimed to amend the Building Act 2004 to cap the liability of councils and protect consumers by introducing provisions driving greater uptake of home warranty protection. However no progress appears to have been made towards drafting or introducing this Bill into Parliament. At a recent rural and provincial local government meeting in Wellington, MBIE advised that no further action is being taken to progress any capping of council liability.

• This proposed remit is aimed to put pressure on MBIE and the Government to follow the Law Commission’s recommendation to limit (ideally by capping) councils’ liability in respect of defective building claims.


30


• Defective building claims are prevalent throughout New Zealand, both in large centres and small. They are not limited to “leaky building” claims. Claims which include allegations involving structural and fire defects are increasingly common, both for residential and commercial properties.

• The courts have held that councils will generally have a proportionate share of liability in defective building cases in the vicinity of 20 per cent. However, because councils are generally exposed to the full quantum of the claim, when other parties are absent (for example whereabouts unknown, deceased, company struck off) or insolvent (bankrupt or company liquidated), which is the rule, rather than the exception, the Council is left to cover the shortfall. The Law Commission report recognised that councils in New Zealand effectively act as insurers for homeowners, at the expense of ratepayers.

• Other liable parties such as developers, builders and architects can potentially reduce their exposure through insurance and wind up companies in the event of a large claim. Developers often set up a dedicated company for a particular development and then wind that company up following completion.

• Councils on the other hand can no longer access insurance for weathertightness defects (a “known risk”). They have no choice about whether to be involved in the design and construction of buildings, as they have a legislative role as building consent authorities in their districts. They make no profit from developments and cannot increase their fees to account for the level of risk. Yet they are often the main or sole solvent defendant in defective building claims (last person standing).

• The cost to ratepayers of the current joint and several liability system is significant, disproportionately so. This was recognised in the Law Commission report in 2014, but no substantive steps have been taken by central government to address the issue or implement the Law Commission’s recommendation that council liability should be capped.


The current LGNZ Work Programme for housing includes an objective of the regulatory and competitive framework of continuing advocacy to government for alternatives to current liability arrangements. Clearly this remit fits squarely within and would assist to progress that objective.


31


• The Law Commission report was a result of concerns raised primarily by LGNZ and councils around New Zealand about the effect of joint and several liability in relation to the leaky homes crisis. Prior to release of the report, LGNZ and a number of councils around New Zealand, including Auckland Council, Christchurch City Council, Hamilton City Council, Hastings District Council, Queenstown Lakes District Council, Tararua District Council, Waipa District Council staff, Wellington City Council, as well as SOLGM and BOINZ all filed submissions advocating for a change to the status quo.

• The Law Commission report, as discussed in more detail above, recommended that councils’ liability be capped. It was understood from the Government’s response to the Law Commission report and from MBIE (both discussed above) that this recommendation was being progressed in a meaningful way. This was further supported by MBIE’s submission to the Law Commission prior to the release of the Law Commission report, in which it stated that:

a. Provisions in the Building Amendment Act 2012 not yet in force, in particular the three new types of building consent limiting councils’ liability “are likely to be brought into force within a reasonable time after the Commission completes its review of joint and several liability”. MBIE stated that the Law Commission should take the impact of these changes into account in preparing its report. However, these provisions are still not in force.

b. “The Government has instructed the Ministry to explore options for the consolidation of building consent authorities as part of the Housing Affordability agenda and ongoing reforms in the construction sector. Issues regarding the liability of a central regulator, as well as that of territorial authorities, will be fundamental concerns as consolidation options and other measures to increase productivity in the sector are explored”. This does not appear to have been progressed.

• It was only in the last month or so that MBIE has now advised that the recommendation that councils’ liability be capped would no longer be progressed.


We consider that LGNZ could form a joint working party with MBIE and the Ministry of Justice, and possibly the relevant Minister’s (Jenny Salesa’s) staff to explore limiting councils’ liability for building defects claims, including:

• Disclosing and considering the following information (whether by way of OIA requests and/or as part of a working group):

o MBIE documents relating to its consideration of the Law Commission report and the reasons why it is no longer progressing the capping of council liability.

o Ministry of Justice and Minister of Building and Housing’s documents relating to the Law Commission report and to proposed capping of council liability.


32

o MBIE and Minister of Building and Housing’s documents relating to implementation of s 17 of the Building Amendment Act 2012.

• Drafting proposed amendments to the Building Act and/or a Building (Liability) Amendment Bill (this work may have been started by MBIE, so this task should await the outcome of the information gathering exercise above).

• Drafting content for a cabinet paper regarding the Law Commission’s recommendation that council liability for building defect claims be capped.


33

10 Social housing

Remit: That LGNZ, in conjunction with central government, urgently focus on the development and implementation of a broader range of funding and financing tools in respect of community/social housing provision, than those which currently exist in the housing needs space. These should include funding to support the operation, upgrade and growth of council housing portfolios and, where a council chooses, access to Income Related Rents for eligible tenants.

Proposed by: Napier City Council, Tauranga City Council and Wellington City Council


Metro Sector



Napier City Council

Social housing, especially for older citizens, is a strategic issue.

New Zealand communities are facing an extremely serious housing affordability crisis that has resulted in the country having the highest rate of homelessness in the developed world. Current policy settings are failing to adequately address the issue.

Local government is the second largest provider of social housing in New Zealand, however, since 1991, successive governments have failed to adequately recognise the contribution we have and are making. Unfortunately, existing policy actively discriminates against councils meeting local housing needs resulting in a gradual reduction in the council owned social housing stock. With Housing New Zealand focussing its attention on fast growing urban areas, social housing needs in smaller communities are not being met.

The issue is becoming more serious as baby boomers retire – the current social housing is not designed to address the needs of this cohort – a role historically provided by councils with support from central government in the form of capital grants.

The issue has already become urgent for Aotearoa New Zealand and its communities.


34

Tauranga City Council

The western Bay of Plenty SmartGrowth partnership (Tauranga City Council, Western Bay of Plenty District Council, Bay of Plenty Regional Council and tangata whenua), has undertaken some preliminary research into the potential for government assisted bond raising for community/social housing providers using the Federal Government experience from Australia.

It has also identified the Australian rental housing provision tax incentive opportunities that the current Labour opposition has put forward. The partnership is aware of work being undertaken by Treasury in terms of raising the debt ceilings via amendments to the Local Government (Financial Reporting and Prudence) Regulations 2014. The SmartGrowth partnership would welcome the opportunity to work further with LGNZ and others to take a more “four well-beings” focus to the housing funding and financing toolkit than currently exists. This matter is becoming critical for all of the Upper North Island growth councils and other councils such as Queenstown.

Wellington City Council

Housing is an important contributor to the wellbeing of New Zealanders, and councils support the work of the Government to continue to grow and improve social housing provision in New Zealand.

Addressing housing demand and affordability related challenges are significant issues for local government. 62 (93 per cent) of New Zealand’s 67 local authorities reference some type of housing-related activity in their current Long Term Plans. As at November 2018, 60 local authorities (90 per cent) collectively own 12,881 housing units and 13 of those provide 50 per cent or more of the total social housing within their jurisdictions.

The social housing currently owned by local authorities equates to 16 per cent of the nationwide social housing stock, with the remaining 82 per cent largely owned by the Housing New Zealand Corporation (HNZC) and Community Housing Providers (CHPs). While there is variation in housing eligibility policy settings at the local level, a significant proportion of tenants housed by local authorities have a similar profile to those housed by HNZC and CHPs.

To help address housing affordability for households on the lowest incomes, central government provides the Income Related Rent Subsidy (IRRS) for those with housing need and that meet policy eligibility criteria. Eligible households generally pay 25 per cent of their income on rent, and a government subsidy is paid to the housing provider for remaining portion of rent.

Despite housing a similar group of tenants, current IRRS policy settings mean HNZC and CHPs can access the subsidy for tenants but local authorities cannot.

This has created considerable inequity in the housing system and is placing pressure on a vulnerable population group in New Zealand. Tenants who would be eligible for IRRS, but who are housed by a local authority, generally have to pay a significantly higher amount of rent. With demand for HNZC public housing and social housing provided by Community Housing Providers outstripping supply in most areas, these households have very few housing options and are unable to access the Government support they would otherwise be eligible for.


35

The inability to access IRRS has also contributed to housing portfolio sustainability challenges for local authorities, who cannot access the additional funding through IRRS to help maintain their housing portfolios. This challenge has led to vulnerable tenants having to be charged unaffordable levels of rent, and the decline in the overall social housing stock levels owned by local authorities. This has occurred even as social housing demand has increased and housing affordability has become a more acute challenge for more households.


Napier City Council

Councils provide in excess of 10,000 housing units, making it a significant provider of community housing in New Zealand. Councils began providing community housing across the country, particularly for pensioners, in the 1960’s when central government encouraged them to do so through capital loan funding. In the 1980’s, this occurred once again and was applied to general community housing developments. Council’s rent setting formulas varied but all provided subsidised rents. While the housing stock was relatively new, the rental income maintained the homes, however, now decades on, and with housing at the end of life, significant investment is required. Income from rents has not been enough to fund renewals let alone growth to meet demand.

The Government introduced Income Related Rent subsidy (IRR) in 2000 for public housing tenants and it was later applied to registered Community Housing Providers. This mechanism allows tenants to pay an affordable rent in relation to their income, while the housing provider receives a ‘top up’ to the agreed market rent for each property under the scheme. In effect, housing providers receive market rent through this mechanism. Being able to generate market rental income is the most successful sustainable model for the provision of community housing. Providers receive an adequate income to cover the cost of providing housing, to fund future renewals and to raise capital for immediate asset management. Councils are excluded from receiving this subsidy, and so are their tenants.


Key objectives for councils that provide social housing generally include ensuring that their social housing tenants are well housed in quality homes, and that they pay an affordable level of rent. Balancing this objective with business sustainability continues to be a real challenge for many councils, and has contributed to some divesting their social housing portfolios. At the same time, demand for social housing has generally continued to increase and housing affordability is a more prominent issue, particularly for households on the lowest incomes.

Despite ongoing and repeated lobbying over a number of years from councils and LGNZ, and a commitment from the current government to reconsider IRRS policy settings, local authorities are still unable to access IRRS. This remit recognises the inequitable situation this has created for a significant number of vulnerable households, and the negative impact it has had on the overall supply of social housing owned by local authorities.


36


Napier City Council

This remit supports LGNZ’s Housing 2030 policy and programme, in particular the Social Housing and Affordable Housing workstreams. Housing 2030 is one of LGNZ’s four strategic projects. This remit reinforces and supports that initiative.

LGNZ recently hosted a Social Housing workshop with both local and central government agencies to discuss the issues and opportunities and the future role councils could play in the provision of social housing. There was agreement that a partnership approach that recognises local situations with a range of options for support from government (both funding and expertise) would be most suitable.


By working with central government, local authorities, and a range of other stakeholders, the current LGNZ housing work programme seeks to establish a central local government housing partnership and improve housing outcomes. The work programme includes three key focus areas: housing supply; social and community housing; and healthy homes.

As part of the ‘social and community housing’ focus area, LGNZ have already signalled an intention to work with government agencies to enable local authorities to access IRRS. This remit would however provide specific mandate from member councils on this point.


Napier City Council

As the proposer of this remit, Napier City Council, has undertaken an S17A Review of its own provision of community housing, with further investigation underway. In addition, both at a governance and management level, we have taken part in numerous conferences, symposiums and workshops on the matter in the last two years. We lead a local Cross Sector Group – Homelessness forum and take part in the Hawke’s Bay Housing Coalition. We have provided housing for our community for over five decades, supplying just under 400 retirement and low cost rental units in Napier.


Wellington City Council, along with a number of other councils and LGNZ have already made a number of formal submissions to central government regarding this issue. To date, central government has advised that no changes will be made to IRRS policy settings at this stage.


37


Napier City Council

This remit supports, as a matter of urgency, the further investigation by central government and LGNZ of the opportunities identified at the workshop and any other mechanisms that would support councils provision of community housing in New Zealand.

It is designed to strengthen LGNZ’s advocacy and would provide a reason to approach the Government in the knowledge that local government as a whole is in support.


LGNZ, on behalf of member councils, would increase efforts to formally advocate for local authorities to be able to access Income Related Rent Subsidies for all eligible tenants that they house, with implementation within a two year timeframe.


38

11 Procurement

Remit: That LGNZ investigate the ability of the sector to collaborate in procuring open-source designs and plans for bulk infrastructure that are largely similar, with an initial approach to look at water and wastewater treatment facilities.

Proposed by: New Plymouth District Council

Supported by: Central Hawkes Bay District Council

Otorohanga District Council

South Taranaki District Council

Stratford District Council

Thames-Coromandel District Council

Waitomo District Council


Whanganui District Council



At present, every local authority in New Zealand undertakes bespoke procurement for its own infrastructure despite there being little difference in the infrastructure provided. Each local authority then receives a slightly different product that largely achieves the same outcome.


Local authorities often face similar challenges, albeit at different times. Local authorities often procure similar infrastructure that deal with the same inputs and outputs, but are bespoke products designed at significant cost.

A good case example, and a useful starting point, is water and wastewater treatment plants. The Government’s Three Waters Reform programme received a report from Beca that identified the number of water treatment plants that are non-compliant with water standards. While not all of these plants will require replacement, some of them may do so.


39

The report identifies that 17 large plants (10,001+ people), 13 medium plants (5,001-10,000 people), 140 minor plants (501-5,000 people), 169 small plants (101-500 people) and 153 neighbourhood plants (25-100 people) are not compliant with standards. A similar story emerges with wastewater treatment plants.

At the same time, the sector is aware of the upcoming increase in renewals across water and wastewater treatment plants (including plants currently compliant with standards). There are a considerable number of plants coming near to the end of their useable lifespan in coming years. Often these plants have to be replaced with an entirely new plant so as to keep the existing plant operating during the replacement’s construction.

While there may be some local variation, new water and wastewater treatments plants being built in the future will either be large, medium or small. The increasingly prescriptive regulatory framework will invariably reduce scope for choices and options in plant design. All plants will need to meet the same output quality standards, and will require the same treatment processes (with some minor variations to reflect any local preferences or unique circumstances).

Local authority procurement is a ‘hot topic’ for the Office of the Auditor-General (OAG). The OAG have signalled a forthcoming report Procurement workforce capacity and capability in local government that will aim to encourage greater collaboration between local authorities. Similarly, there is a strong focus on procurement within central government, including all-of-government procurement in which local authorities can choose to be involved.

Local authorities should collaborate now to procure a number of standardised open-source options for water and wastewater treatment plants for the future. These would then be available to all local authorities to use when required, rather than having to go to the market for a new design. These would be tested and implementable designs – the risk of failure would be lower than a bespoke design. The processes used would need to be customisable (such as whether drinking water is fluoridated, or to address particular issues in incoming water). Scalability would, of course, be critical. Council procurement would be limited to build-only contracts.

A collaborative procurement process for standardised designs could lead to significant cost savings. Even a small saving of one or two per cent would result in millions of dollars of savings across the sector. Over time, there would be further consequent savings, such as not having to retrain staff when transferring between authorities or even the capacity for further collaboration through shared services.

If successful, the sector would be well-placed to look at other areas where collaborative procurement processes for standardised designs would be useful. These could include solid waste resource recovery and separation facilities, roading assets, or other significant assets.


40


LGNZ has placed significant time and energy into the Three Water Reform programme. LGNZ’s position paper on these reforms notes strong support for improving the regulatory framework for drinking water. LGNZ oppose the mandatory aggregation of water assets.

This remit will also contribute to the LGNZ strategic policy priorities: Infrastructure; Risk and Resilience; Environmental; and Economic Development.


The Three Waters Reforms are likely to result in significant legislative reform that impacts on water and wastewater treatment plants.


41

12 Single use polystyrene

Remit: That LGNZ advocates to the Government to phase out single use polystyrene.

Proposed by: Palmerston North City Council




Expanded polystyrene is bulky and does not break down. While some technologies exist to reduce the bulk of polystyrene prior to landfill, or to recycle it (for example, to make insulation material), these interventions offer only a partial solution to the prevalence of polystyrene. Single-use polystyrene (such as used in food containers) has further contamination issues, meaning that landfill remains the only means of disposal.

Palmerston North City Council's own Waste Management and Minimisation Bylaw 2016 prohibits the use of polystyrene or styrofoam containers or cups at events held on council land or with council funding. This has encouraged the use of more sustainable substitutes. However, while the council can control, to some small extent, the use of polystyrene and its disposal (for example, by refusing to collect it), in practice its influence is limited. This is because most of the supply of polystyrene originates outside of the city, and the Council has limited ability to ensure it doesn't end up in the waste stream (for example, it can be inside rubbish bags).

2. Background to it being raised

Under section 23(1)(b) of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, the Government is empowered to ban or regulate certain problematic or wasteful products. This provision is currently being used to phase out single-use plastic shopping bags.

This remit proposal meets both LGNZ remit policy criteria. As with single-use plastic bags, the national regulation of single-use polystyrene products would be more effective in beginning to address their use in the first place, rather than being addressed (as at present) as a city-level waste issue.

Single-use polystyrene contributes significantly to landfill in New Zealand, and it is the view of the Palmerston North City Council that a nationwide ban would reduce the environmental impact of these products.


42

13 Local Government Act 2002

Remit: That LGNZ pursue an amendment to the Local Government Act 2002 to:

a. Re-number sub-sections 181 (5) and (6) to sub-sections (6) and (7); and

b. Introduce a new sub-section (5) to read: For all purposes the term “any work” in subsection 4 means any works constructed before xx Month 20xx; and includes any works that were wholly or partly in existence, or work on the construction of which commenced, before xx Month 20xx.

Proposed by: Rangitikei District Council




Historic assumptions that there is statutory authority for the siting of Three Waters infrastructure on private land do not reflect the complete picture.

Questions arise:

• May an infrastructure asset owner notify further works on private land where the original works are not protected by written consent (or notification)?

• Does an infrastructure asset owner have authority to restrict a landowner’s ability to build over a non-protected asset?

• What is the potential cost to infrastructure asset owners to remedy the absence of enforceable authority?


An example in the Rangitikei – Hunterville urban and rural water schemes

a. The rural scheme was constructed in the 1970’s (government grant involved).

b. Construction was a collective project (county and scheme users).

c. The urban supply draws bulk (raw) water from the rural scheme.

d. Infrastructure is sited on numerous private landholdings.


43

e. Conscious decision that landowner consents not required (relied on “the Act”).

f. Urban supply treatment, storage, reticulation sited on one member’s land.

g. Land has changed hands (twice) since urban supply infrastructure developed.

h. Current owners seek renegotiation of access rights as well as compensation.

i. Council and owners negotiating (little progress after seven years).

j. Substantial costs to survey and register easement.

The issue is not unique to Rangitikei

a. Several local authorities from Waikato and Bay of Plenty to Otago have emailed to comment. All record similar experiences to Rangitikei’s, both historic and ongoing’. One noted that such incidents arise, on average, monthly.

b. All comments received have noted frustration at the potential costs to formalise previously ‘casual’ but cordial and workable arrangements with prior landowners.

The power to construct is constrained

• Local Government Act (2002) sections 181 (1) and (2) empower a local authority to construct Three Waters works on private land.

• Section 181 (3) specifies the local authority must not exercise the power to construct unless it has the prior written consent of the landowner (or it has followed the prescribed notification process).

• Similar provisions that existed in previous legislation were repealed by the 2002 Act.

Effect of the law

• The Act provides power to construct; it is the owner consent (or notification process) that provides the authority to enter private land to exercise its power to construct.

• A local authority cannot claim absolute right of access without evidence of owner consent or compliance with the notification requirements.

• The High Court considered the need for fresh consent from, or notice to, subsequent owners (Re Watercare Services Ltd [2018] NZHC 294 [1 March 2018]).

Other infrastructure owners

• The Electricity Act 1992, the Gas Act 1992, and the Telecommunications Act 2001 all provide retrospective authority for siting of infrastructure on private land.

• No record has been found of the rationale behind those retrospective authorities.

• The thread of these authorities could be brought into the Local Government Act.


44


• Local Government Act (2002) section 181 (4) authorises entry to any work constructed under the Act or the corresponding provisions of a prior Act.

• The effect of the Court’s (Watercare) Declaration is to confirm that a local authority must have evidence of prior written consent (or notification) for the original works on that land.


45

14 Campground regulations

Remit: That LGNZ request the Government to amend the Camping - Ground Regulations to allow councils to approve remote camp facilities on private property, subject to any such conditions as deemed required by a council, including the condition that any approved campground is x distance away from an existing campground, unless the existing campground operator agrees to waive this condition in writing.

Proposed by: Thames-Coromandel District Council

Supported by: Dunedin City Council

Waikato District Council

New Plymouth District Council

Mackenzie District Council

Hamilton City Council



Currently the ‘remote camp site’ definition means a camping ground: ‘in a national park, state forest, state forest park or public reserve or on Crown Land.’ As the provision is only for public land there is no opportunity to provide such an experience on private property.


Ratepayers, through their council, are having to provide areas for camping for increasing numbers of what are being called ”freedom campers”, with associated increasing costs to ratepayers and community both regarding environmental and financial considerations.

Unfortunately for councils there is nothing for free, and to provide any public facilities there is a range of costs to provide and maintain the facilities including power, water, waste collection, maintenance, cleaning, and compliance monitoring and enforcement etc. Those costs are increasing.


46

Enforcement for compliance is increasingly problematic and costly and in addition, social media is sending the wrong messages for our communities who must contend with freedom campers in their area. The result is that prime beach front sites are being degraded through overuse, and abuse of sites available.

While reserve areas can be either managed or leased for a remote camp facility, councils are constrained by the lack of public land where a remote site can be established, particularly in more remote locations. Remote camps have far fewer regulatory requirements than usual campgrounds.


There is work underway regarding freedom camping in New Zealand which is looking at a range of issues in relation to freedom camping.

The Responsible Camping Working Group comprises central and local government representatives, as well as other interested parties, and is currently looking at a number of matters, including the Camping Ground Regulations. A review of the Regulations was one of the recommendations of the Working Group and work is underway specifically on this.


The remit seeks an amendment of the Camping - Ground Regulations to broaden the definition of remote camp site to allow councils to authorise remote camp sites on private land, taking into account distance from existing campground facilities. A new definition would enable sites to be established where, for a modest fee, an operator would be able to provide basic facilities and recover some of the cost of provision and maintenance.

In addition the 2016 annual general meeting agreed to ask the Government to change to s14(3) of the Camping Ground Regulations 1985 (made under s120B of the Health Act 1956) to allow broader exemptions to the need for provision of camping facilities for those that wish to freedom camp in all areas and not just at “remote” camps; this is yet to be actioned but is being considered by the joint officials body.


Amend the Campground Regulations definition for remote sites to allow councils to authorise remote camps on private land taking into account distance from existing campground facilities.

By providing sites where a modest fee is required, the operator provides the basic facilities at no cost to ratepayers or the environment.


47

15 Living Wage

Remit: Wellington City Council asks that LGNZ members consider engaging with the Living Wage Aotearoa New Zealand Movement when developing policies on payment of the Living Wage.

Proposed by: Wellington City Council




According to the Living Wage Movement Aotearoa New Zealand, “Over the last 30 years New Zealand has gone from one of the most equal countries in the developed world to one of the most unequal. Wages have stagnated while New Zealanders are working harder and longer than ever before. Growing poverty and inequality hurts us all; workers and their families, employers, business, the Government and society as a whole.”

The Living Wage Movement Aotearoa New Zealand was formed in 2012 to generate a conversation about working poverty in Aotearoa. It brings together community, union and faith based groups to campaign for a Living Wage.

The Living Wage is defined as: “The income necessary to provide workers and their families with the basic necessities of life. A living wage will enable workers to live with dignity and to participate as active citizens in society”. The Living Wage is an independently researched hourly rate based on the actual cost of living and is reviewed annually. The official 2019 New Zealand Living Wage is $21.15 and will come into effect on 1 September 2019.

Research from around the world shows that paying a Living Wage brings benefits to employers, to the community and most importantly to workers who need it the most.


The Living Wage Movement Aotearoa New Zealand has an accreditation system available to employers who meet the criteria to become a Living Wage Employer. In order to use this trade mark, employers must sign a license committing the organisation to paying no less than the Living Wage to directly employees and contracted workers, delivering services on a regular and ongoing basis.


48

This remit recognises that a number of local authorities across New Zealand are currently taking steps towards becoming Living Wage councils.


LGNZ is committed to working alongside central government and iwi to address social issues in New Zealand’s communities, including disparity between social groups.


In September 2018, Wellington City Council became the first council in New Zealand to be accredited as a Living Wage Employer. This was the culmination of implementing a Living Wage and working with the Living Wage Movement Aotearoa New Zealand since 2013, in summary:

• Following a decision in 2013, from January 2014 the Council implemented a minimum wage rate of $18.40 for all fully trained directly employed staff.

• On 1 July 2014, WCC implemented its decision to introduce the Living Wage (at $18.40 per hour) for council and Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) staff.

• On 15 May 2015, the Council’s Governance, Finance and Planning Committee passed a resolution to increase the $18.40 rate to reflect annual inflation movement.

• On 28 October 2015, WCC extended the living wage (at $18.55 per hour) to security and core cleaning contractors.

• In July 2017, the Council implemented the New Zealand Living Wage ($20.20 at the time) for staff, CCOs and core contractors as they come up for renewal.

• In September 2018, WCC was accredited as a Living Wage employer.


Member councils who are developing policies on payment of the Living Wage will consider engaging with the Living Wage Movement Aotearoa New Zealand to understand the criteria for becoming a Living Wage accredited employer.


49

16 Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act

Remit: LGNZ, on behalf of its member councils ask for a review of the effectiveness of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 in reducing alcohol harm (eg price, advertising, purchase age and availability) and fully involve local government in that review.

Proposed by: Wellington City Council and Hastings District Council





The Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act was introduced in 2012 and has not as yet been reviewed.

There is now considerable experience in how it is working in practice and it is timely that a review is undertaken to ensure it is meeting the outcomes that were sought when it was introduced and that any anomalies that have emerged from regulation under the Act are addressed.

Addressing anomalies: an example of such an anomaly that has become apparent is the definition of ‘grocery store’ in the Act, where a business is only a grocery store if its largest single sales group (by turnover) is a specified type of food/groceries. In hearings the focus is often more on the accounting statements of an applicant, rather than about alcohol effects.

An established operator for whom the highest turnover item was topping up Snapper cards ahead of groceries applied for a renewal of their licence. The Act requires the District Licensing Committee (DLC) to use turnover as the measure to define the type of business and there is no discretion allowed to the DLC. In effect the DLC had the choice of declining the liquor licence or saying they could only retain their liquor licence by stopping Snapper top ups. They were not a grocery store by definition as Snapper card top ups was the highest turnover item. The obvious decision was to stop the Snapper top ups, to meet the “grocery store” definition, and retain the liquor licence. The overall outcome of considering the safe and responsible sale, supply and consumption of alcohol; and the minimisation of harm was not achieved.


50

This is one of a range of issues. The District Licensing Committees all report each year to the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority. This addresses the issues of the operation of the Act. After five years this now provides a considerable base of information that can be used in a wider review to improve the effectiveness of the Act.

Better regulation: The current regulations are tightly prescribed (eg setting maximum penalties or fees), leave little flexibility for local circumstances and have not been reviewed. The process of establishing local alcohol policies has also not been effective.

The Council developed a Provisional Local Alcohol Policy which was notified on January 21, 2014. Appeals were lodged by eight parties which were heard by the Authority over eight days between 20 October and 5 November 2014. The Authority released its decision on 20 January 2015 which asked the Council to reconsider elements of its PLAP. In 2016, the Council resolved that it should not at that time resubmit the PLAP to the Authority, and should instead continue to monitor alcohol-related data in Wellington, work with key stakeholders, and consider future Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority (ARLA) decisions on other PLAP appeals prior to determining if the Council requires a local alcohol policy.

This experience is not uncommon and it has been difficult to establish a comprehensive Local Alcohol Policy which was a key building block of the regulatory framework. As at November 2018 while 34 of the 67 territorial authorities have an adopted LAP, this only covers 28 per cent of the New Zealand population. The majority of New Zealand communities have not been able to achieve the level of community input that was envisaged under the Act. This process needs to be reviewed in light of the experience of how the Act is operating in practice.



This remit recognises that almost all local authorities across New Zealand are currently managing this issue through the licensing powers under the Act. They can bring practical experience of the operation of the Act and help enable communities to benefit from a review of the provisions of the Act.

Hastings District Council

Hawke’s Bay faces significant social challenges as demonstrated in the following statistics:

• 25 per cent of Hawke’s Bay 0-4 year olds live in a household receiving a main benefit (compared with 18 per cent nationally).

• 40 per cent of Hawke’s Bay tamariki Maori aged 0-4 years live in a household receiving a main benefit.

• 250 Hawke’s Bay children are in the care of Oranga Tamariki.

• Hawke’s Bay rates of violent crime continues to be higher that the New Zealand average and is twice the rate of New Zealand as a whole.

• There were 9,932 family violence investigations by the Eastern Police District in 2017.


51

• Suicide;

o Is a major cause of premature, avoidable death in Hawke’s Bay.

o From 2010 to 2015, suicide was the second highest reason for premature death for those aged 0 to 74 years.

o Since 1 July 2018, 29 people have committed suicide in Hawke’s Bay.

• Drugs;

o Synthetic substances are a serious concern for many whanau.

o Fewer youth are smoking but more Hawke’s Bay adults smoke than nationally.

A contributing factor of these negative statistics is the significant problem that the Hawke’s Bay community has with alcohol consumption. For our region the issues manifested by alcohol consumption are a problem across the whole community including for young newly-born babies, infants and children, young people, adults and seniors across the generations. Local alcohol statistics are alarming and include:

• 29 per cent of Hawke’s Bay adults drink at harmful levels compared to 21 per cent nationally, and this rate is increasing over time.

• 41 per cent of young people aged 15-24 are drinking hazardously.

• Over half of young men are drinking hazardously.

• The number of 15 years and older hospitalisations wholly attributable to alcohol; see the below graph. Note, there is an increasing rate of people being admitted to hospital due to alcohol.

• Alcohol intoxication or a history of alcohol abuse are often associated with youth suicide.

The statistics relating to our alcohol harm impact negatively on other key community safety concerns including health issues; death and injury; violence; suicide; assault and anti-social behaviours. This is why addressing the harm of alcohol is such an important issue for our community to address.


52

The harm that alcohol causes across New Zealand is also a significant issue for the country and as with Hawke’s Bay the harm that alcohol causes within the community is pervasive. National statistics include:

• About four in five (79 per cent) of adults aged 15 years or more drank alcohol in the past year (in 2017/18).

• 21 per cent of New Zealand adults drink at harmful levels.

• In 2017/18, 25 per cent of adults aged 15 years or more who drank alcohol in the past year has a potentially hazardous drinking pattern, with men (32 per cent) more likely to drink hazardously than women (17 per cent).

At a local level there are some tools available to territorial authorities and their respective communities to combat alcohol harm. For example, Local Alcohol Policies (LAPs) are permitted in accordance with the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012. Unfortunately for many LAPs there are significant delays in these becoming operational due to long appeal processes.

There are typically commercial implications for businesses particularly supermarkets and these often result in appeals being lodged. Appeal processes have not allowed for more local input and influence by community members and groups, but have instead allowed larger companies, with more money and resources, to force councils to amend their LAP’s reducing the potential impact on harm minimisation.

Of course, local tools available to territorial authorities are also limited by what is permitted within our national laws. We consider that current statutes and their content are not strong enough and need to be strengthened so that alcohol harm within our communities can be more effectively addressed.

The most significant drivers of alcohol-related harm include:

• The low price of alcohol.

• Levels of physical availability.

• Alcohol advertising; promotion and sponsorship.

• The minimum legal purchase age (18).

Therefore this remit seeks a focus on effective national level strategies and interventions that prevent or minimise alcohol-related harm in regards to:

• Pricing and taxing (minimum unit pricing for alcohol).

• Regulating the physical availability.

• Raising the purchase age.

• Restrictions on marketing, advertising and sponsorship.

• Drink driving countermeasures.

• Treatment and early intervention services.


53

We consider that significant changes in national policy and law that address key issues pertaining to alcohol harm are needed to create significant impact on reducing the harm that alcohol causes both in Hawke’s Bay and New Zealand.



LGNZ has a priority to work, in partnership with central government, for local areas to develop innovative and place-based approaches for dealing with social issues. While the operation of the Act is not directly listed as one of the social issues covered by the current work programme, the intent of the Act was to allow place-based approaches to the management of alcohol related harm.


This remit links to the social policy priority; community safety. Integrate policy positions from Mobilising the Regions including: integrated transport planning and decision-making models into the above.



We are actively involved. The Council was proactive in initiating the development of a Local Alcohol Policy. We administer licencing functions under the Act and the DLC reports each year to the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority on its functions.

We have not directly progressed work on a review at this point as it requires central government leadership with the input of local authorities across New Zealand.


The Napier City and Hastings District Councils have a Joint Alcohol Strategy 2017-2022 (JAS) and have started to implement the JAS Action Plan with support from the JAS Reference Group (local stakeholder organisations that also contribute to this strategy). Some actions completed thus far include:

• Removal of alcohol advertising on bus shelters in Hastings and Napier;

• Funding obtained to identify and develop youth-driven alcohol harm prevention projects;

• Creation and distribution of an alcohol network newsletter (bi-monthly) to make the licensing process more accessible to the community;

• A move to notifying liquor licence applications online; and

• Funding obtained to create brand and resources for alcohol free events and alcohol free zones.


54

Hastings District and Napier City Councils have completed a Provisional Local Alcohol Policy that was notified in July 2016. The Provisional Local Alcohol Policy has been before ARLA as a result of appeals. A position has been negotiated with the appellants. That position has been considered by ARLA and will be notified to the original submitters once ARLA is satisfied with the final wording. If no one seeks to appeal the revised version it will become the adopted Local Alcohol Policy.



That LGNZ would, on behalf of its member councils, form a working group to work with central agencies to review the effectiveness of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.


• Actively monitor opportunities to submit to central government with respect to review of statutes and regulations that relate to alcohol.

• Prepare submissions to central government review processes that relate to the key drivers of alcohol harm as outlined in this remit.

• Write to and meet with the Minister of Justice and officials to promote changes to laws and regulations that will address the key drivers of alcohol harm.

• Create a national action plan to reduce harm caused by alcohol.

• Engage and support councils nationwide to implement strategies, policies and actions that are aimed at reducing alcohol-related harm. This could include delivering workshops; providing statistics and information on the harm alcohol causes and developing templates for policies and strategies that can be easily implemented.


55

17 Greenhouse gases

Remit: Wellington City Council asks that LGNZ members collectively adopt the position that government should revise the Resource Management Act 1991 to adequately consider the impact of greenhouse gases when making decisions under that law and to ensure that the Resource Management Act 1991 is consistent with the Zero Carbon Bill.

Proposed by: Wellington City Council




The purpose of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) is to promote the sustainable management of natural and physical resources.

The Act seeks to enable people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural well-being and for their health and safety while:

• Sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations;

• Safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil, and ecosystems; and

• Avoiding, remedying, or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment.

Under the RMA, most decisions are decentralised to local and regional levels to enables public participation in decision-making.

The emissions trading scheme is a national framework. Because of this, there is a disconnection between decisions taken under the RMA and the emission of greenhouse gases. Emissions are not consistently contemplated when decisions are taken; there appears to be a gap, however the Council currently doesn’t have a formal position on this.


Wellington is proposing a substantial change in urban form and transportation in order to accommodate anticipated growth and to meet community expectations around carbon emissions. Planning for this growth has highlighted the regulatory gap described above.


56


In planning for growth the Council is setting out to develop a future Wellington that is low carbon and resilient. Decisions will be taken under the RMA, yet the need to reduce carbon emissions is not currently a requirement under our key planning legislation.


The Council has developed a draft plan, Te Atakura – First to Zero, that would establish the Council’s advocacy position in favour of significantly boosted consideration of emissions in the RMA. This draft was released for consultation on 15 April 2019 and is to be considered for adoption on 22 June 2019.


The Minister for the Environment is aware of the gap, and has publicly stated:

“The Government intends to undertake a comprehensive review of the resource management system (Stage 2), which is expected to begin this year.”

“Cabinet has already noted my intention to consider RMA changes relating to climate change (both mitigation and adaptation) within the scope of this review.”

Local government will have an opportunity to advocate for the inclusion of climate change effects through this process.

This remit asks councils to work together in engaging with government to amend the RMA to require decision makers to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.


57

18 Climate Change – funding policy framework

Remit: That LGNZ recommends to government that they establish an independent expert group to develop a new funding policy framework for adapting to climate change impacts as recommended by the Climate Change Adaptation Technical Working Group (CCATWG). This new expert group would be supported by a secretariat and stakeholder advisory group.

Proposed by: Greater Wellington Regional Council

Supported by: Regional Sector



New Zealand will need a new funding policy framework to enable effective, efficient and equitable long-term adaptation to the many challenges posed by climate change. Any such framework must be comprehensive, fit for purpose, and facilitate flexible and dynamic responses.

While there is broad agreement that the current policy framework for climate change adaptation, and especially sea level rise, is inadequate, there has been little attention given to securing a consensus among the stakeholders on the core features of a new framework.

Some small initiatives have been taken by a few local councils and academics towards the formulation of a new framework.

There are a large number of separate, yet interconnected issues that require investigation in parallel or in sequence. It is very likely to take several years to formulate a new, well-designed policy framework, followed by the drafting and enactment of legislative reforms, before the process of implementation can begin. Given the amount of work that is involved and that climate change impacts are already making themselves felt, it is important that this process is started without further delay.


58


Sea level rise constitutes a particularly serious challenge due to irreversibility of the near-term impacts. Already many low-lying coastal communities around New Zealand are facing a growing threat to their homes and livelihoods, public infrastructure and private businesses. This and other impacts on human and natural systems related to more intense rainfall, heat, wind, and pathogens and disease vectors, will increase and become disruptive. They will increase the financial burden on the state at all levels and create inequities across society.

For further discussion of the issues and options for developing a new policy framework, from which the proposed remit was derived, see the discussion paper by Jonathan Boston (VUW) and Judy Lawrence (VUW), dated 4 February 2019.


A recent report by LGNZ found an estimated $14 billion of local government assets are at risk from climate change impacts. It has called on central government to create a ‘National Climate Change Adaptation Fund’. It has also recently published a legal opinion by Jack Hodder QC regarding the potential for local government to be litigated in relation to its actions or inaction in relation to climate change. A key risk raised by Mr Hodder’s report was the absence of national climate change adaptation guidance (or framework) in New Zealand, which in effect is leaving it to the courts to decide how to remedy climate change related harms. This will be an uncertain and inefficient means of doing so.

The Government has received the recommendations of the CCATWG, but is yet to act upon them. The CCATWG recommendation to the Government (quoted below) was to set up a specialist group to define funding arrangements for funding adaptation.

“We recommend that a specialist group of practitioners and experts undertake this action (formulate a new policy framework for adaptation funding). These should be drawn from central and local government, iwi/hapū, sectors such as banking, insurance, and infrastructure; and have expertise in climate change, planning and law, public finance, capital markets, infrastructure financing, and risk management. The group should be serviced by a secretariat with officials across relevant public sector and local government agencies and include significant public engagement.”


That LGNZ issue a news release explaining the content of the remit, and that they engage with central government directly (in face to face meetings) to discuss the setting up of an independent expert group to progress the development of a new funding policy framework for adapting to climate change impacts.


59

19 Road safety

Remit:

1. That LGNZ acknowledges that the New Zealand Transport Agency's (NZTA's), Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management (CoPTTM) is a comprehensive and robust document, and that NZTA ensures the CoPTTM system is regularly reviewed, refined and updated. However, in light of the recent road worker fatalities LGNZ requests NZTA, in partnership with Road Controlling Authorities (RCAs);

a. Review afresh its Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management (CoPTTM} to satisfy themselves that;

i. The document provides sufficient guidelines and procedures to ensure approaching traffic are given every possible opportunity to become aware of the worksite ahead and to respond appropriately and in a timely manner.

b. Review its CoPTTM Training System to ensure;

i. Trainers are sufficiently qualified and adequately covering the training syllabus.

ii. Site Traffic Management Supervisors (STMS's) and Traffic Controllers (TC's) are only certified when they can demonstrate competence in the application of CoPTTM.

ii. A robust refresher programme is in place to ensure those in charge of Traffic Management on worksites remain current in the required competencies.

c. Review its Site Auditing requirements to ensure the traffic management at worksites is independently audited at a sufficient frequency to ensure compliance, and that a significantly robust system is put in place to enable enforcement of compliance.

2. That LGNZ takes steps to remind its members of their duties with respect to their role as Road Controlling Authorities including;

a. Appointing and sufficiently training and resourcing a Traffic Management Co-ordinator to ensure their obligations under the Health and Safety Work Act 2015, with respect to traffic management, are being met.

b. Adequately resourcing and undertaking audits of road work sites to ensure compliance with CoPTTM.


60

Proposed by: Whakatāne District Council

Supported by: Dunedin City Council

Wairoa District Council

Hamilton City Council

Kawerau District Council

Tauranga City Council



Four road workers have been killed on New Zealand roads this calendar year, and we need to ask ourselves, are we doing all that we can to ensure those working on our roads are safe from harm.

There is an increasing level of public discontent with the level of discipline around traffic management being maintained on roadwork sites by contractors, particularly on unattended sites, where all too often the temporary traffic management on site does not seem appropriate, or to adequately inform motorists of the need for the restrictions, or is left in place for too long.


Frameworks for the safe management of roadworks have been in place for over two decades now, and during this time they have evolved and improved to keep up with the changing risks in the workplace environment.

The current framework is the New Zealand Transport Agency's Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management, fourth edition 2018 (CoPTTM).

This is a comprehensive document that applies a risk based approach to temporary traffic management, based on a road's classification and intensity of use, and the nature of works required to be undertaken on the road.

It is closely aligned to the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015, recognising the statutory duty of all those involved with activities on or adjacent to the road, to systematically identify any hazards, and if a hazard is identified, to take all reasonably practical steps to ensure no person is harmed.

It includes steps to eliminate risks to health and safety and if it is not reasonably practicable, to minimise risks to health and safety by implementing risk control measures in accordance with Health and Safety at Work (General risk and Workplace Management) Regulations 2015.


61

CoPTTM also includes a risk matrix to help determine what the appropriate temporary speed limit is that should be applied to a worksite, whether attended or unattended. It further contains procedures for undertaking safety audits and reviews of worksites, including the ability to close down worksites that are identified as unsafe following an audit. There are no financial penalties for non-compliance, although there are a range of other penalties that can be imposed, including the issue of a notice of non-conformance to individuals or companies, and a 'three strikes' system whereby the issue of three non-conformances within a 12 month period results in sanctions being imposed. These can include:

• Removal of any prequalification status.

• Reduction of quality scores assigned in tender evaluations.

• Forwarding of non-conformance to the appropriate standards organisation which may affect the company's 1S09000 registration.

• Denial of access to the road network for a period of time.

• Requirement for the company to have someone else provide their TTM.

• Staff retraining for CoPTTM warrants.

In principle there would seem to be sufficient processes in place to ensure that traffic management on road worksites was appropriate and adequately provided for the safety of workers on site, the general public, and passing traffic.

However, this year has seen four road workers killed whilst working on our roads.

There is also a growing level of discontent from motorists regarding the appropriateness of signs that are left out on unattended sites.

Often these signs are perceived to be (any combination of) unnecessary, poorly located, incorrectly advising the condition of the road ahead, having an inappropriate speed limit, or being left out too long.


Local Government New Zealand has five policies in place to help achieve their sector vision: Local democracy powering community and national success.

Policy priority one is Infrastructure, which focuses on water, transport and built infrastructure. The transport statement states that a national policy framework is needed to achieve five outcomes. One outcome is 'a safe system, increasingly free of death and serious injury'.

This remit is aligned to this priority outcome as it is focused on reducing safety risks, death and serious injury in locations where road works are being undertaken.


62


The Whakatāne District Council has been working proactively with NZTA and its local contractors to review its own traffic management requirements, the level of compliance with those requirements, and the adequacy of its auditing processes and frequencies.

There has been positive engagement with NZTA and the local contracting sector on this matter.

The process has identified improvements that could be effected by both the Council and its contractors. A plan is being developed to socialise the outcomes with NZTA and other RCA's, and this remit forms part of that plan.

NZTA is also responding to the recent deaths by initiating immediate temporary changes to pertinent traffic management plans, and considering permanent changes through its standard CoPTTM review process.

There is currently no national initiative to require local government RCA's to review their practices in response to these deaths.


• Support NZTA's initiative to review CoPTTM in light of the recent fatalities.

• Encourage NZTA to work closely with RCA's to ensure the CoPTTM review also covers local road Temporary Traffic Management.

• Strongly encourage RCA's to work with NZTA, perhaps through the RCA Forum, on a review of local road Temporary Traffic Management.

• Strongly encourage RCA's to adopt with urgency, any local road CoPTTM

• Improvements that arise from the review.


63

20 Mobility scooter safety

Remit: That LGNZ requests that government investigate the introduction of strengthened rules to govern the safe use of mobility scooters, particularly in relation to speed limits and registration.

Proposed by: Whanganui District Council





a. There is no opportunity to enforce a speed limit for mobility scooters, despite the fact that the top speeds of these devices can reach 40kmh.

b. Mobility scooters are used too frequently on the road, even when a suitable footpath is available.

c. There is no requirement for a mobility scooter user to have a license or any previous driving experience.

d. There are no health related restrictions on who can operate a mobility scooter.

e. There is no ability to track mobility scooters as no registration or Warrant of Fitness (WoF) is required.

A supplementary issue is also acknowledged:

• There is no restriction in terms of who can use a mobility scooter. For example, in some states of Australia mobility scooters can only be used by a person with an injury, disability or medical condition which means they are unable to walk or have difficulty walking. People who do not have difficulty walking are not permitted to use them.


Establishing the number of injuries and fatalities involving mobility scooter users can be difficult to isolate and this has been identified as an issue nationwide. However, coronial data shows that at least 20 people have died while using mobility scooters in New Zealand.


64

Given the considerable lag between a death occurring and a coronial case on that death being closed, the actual number may be significantly higher. Notably NZTA reports that: “mobility scooters… have been involved with a number of fatalities (at least 20 in 2014-2015).”

For the period 2008-2012 the Ministry of Transport recorded eight fatalities and 141 injuries of mobility scooter users. NZTA records 12 fatalities, 19 serious injuries and 81 less serious injuries for the period 2009-2014. These figures do not include fatalities or injuries to persons other than the mobility scooter user.

It has been acknowledged by those working in this field that there have been a ‘surprising’ number of injury crashes involving mobility scooters over the last five years, including fatalities. More work on clarifying the extent of this problem is required and there has been general agreement nationwide from the region’s road safety co-ordinators, and other agencies such as NZTA and Age Concern, that mobility scooter safety is an emerging concern. This is the case throughout the country and is reiterated by both large and small centres, in urban areas and rural regions.

Some of the issues raised include:

• Mobility scooters being driven on the road, at speed, with low visibility (eg without a flag) and like a motor vehicle (as opposed to like a pedestrian as is required).

• No accountability around vulnerable elderly users, particularly those who have lost their licence. There is no established avenue to ascertain whether there are issues around dementia or other chronic conditions which could have an impact on their ability to use these safely.

• No accountability around the purchase of mobility scooters, both in terms of being fit for use and training for safe handling. This is particularly the case when they are bought off the internet, eg there is no opportunity to ensure that the right scooter has been purchased for the user’s level of ability and that they are shown how to drive it according to the regulations.

• No ongoing monitoring of use, particularly in the case of declining health.

• No restrictions on the speed that mobility scooters can reach or the size of mobility scooters. With an increase in larger model mobility scooters being imported, there is less room for scooters to pass one another, or to pass other pedestrians. This leads to a greater likelihood of one or more of the footpath users needing to use the road rather than the footpath. Larger mobility scooters also require larger areas to turn. Given the size of many footpaths in New Zealand, this increases the risk that the user will enter the roadway at an angle and roll the mobility scooter, resulting in serious injury or death.

Some centres have also identified an issue with the increasing prevalence and size of mobility scooters adding load to the footpaths. Furthermore, the contrast between New Zealand Post’s work on safety assurances with the use of Paxster vehicles on the footpath, and the lack of oversight over larger sized mobility scooters being used in a similar (but unmonitored) way has been drawn.


65

However, it is also important to note the significant role that mobility scooters play in granting senior people their independence. Any measures taken to address this remit’s concerns must balance this benefit with the need to ensure safety for users and other pedestrians.


The remit would strengthen existing central government policy. However, new legislation would be required to put in place an appropriate registration programme, both for mobility scooter users and for the mobility scooters.


Transport safety issues are not referred to specifically in the current LGNZ work programme. However, ensuring we have safe systems, increasingly free of death and serious injury and addressing the needs of an ageing population are each included under one of the five policy priorities (Infrastructure and Social, respectively).


This is an emerging issue and is acknowledged as such by those with an interest and involvement in road safety at both the local and regional level. Although discussions are underway about working with the Safe and Sustainable Association of Aotearoa/New Zealand (SASTA) and Trafinz on these concerns so that this can be addressed with the NZTA, it is understood that this work has not yet commenced.

The Marlborough Road Safety Mobility Scooter User Group has undertaken some useful research in this area. They have canvassed users in relation to training needs, safety, registration, injuries, facilities and the footpath network.

Although not all suggestions were supported, this survey did identify some relevant ideas and safety concerns, eg 71 per cent of respondents had seen a mobility scooter being used in an unsafe manner on the footpath or road, 19 per cent had been injured by a mobility scooter as a pedestrian and 78 per cent said that they or someone they knew has had a ‘near miss’.

Some ideas raised include focusing on licensing/registering drivers rather than the mobility scooters themselves, ensuring that any registration costs were low to ensure affordability, making mobility scooters easier to hear and introducing a speed limit.


NZTA has the responsibility, via government, for mobility scooters in New Zealand and has a booklet available, titled Ready to Ride - Keeping safe on your mobility scooter. This is based on section 11 of the Land Transport (Road Use) Rule 2004.


66

The following provisions exist – it is recommended that these be expanded upon and strengthened:

• Speed limits: Current New Zealand law says “A driver of a mobility device or wheeled recreational device on a footpath;

a. Must operate the device in a careful and considerate manner; and

b. Must not operate the device at a speed that constitutes a hazard to other footpath users.”

• Road usage: Current New Zealand law says;

a. A driver must not drive a mobility device on any portion of a roadway if it is practicable to drive on a footpath.

b. A pedestrian or driver of a mobility device or a wheeled recreational device using the roadway must remain as near as practicable to the edge of the roadway.

• Monitoring and registration: Current New Zealand law does not require users to have a driver licence or any form of medical approval to operate a mobility scooter and no warrant of fitness or registration is needed.

Further, current law does not require the use of any personal protective equipment such as helmets, despite these devices being capable of reaching similar speeds to mopeds and higher speeds than many bicycle users travel at.

This is particularly problematic given Canadian research that showed, of their sample group of mobility scooter users, 38 per cent had hearing impairments, 34 per cent had vision impairments, 19 per cent had memory impairments and 17 per cent had balance impairments. The study also found that 80 per cent of the mobility scooter users took four or more medications daily.

The Ready to Ride guidelines clearly spell out that mobility scooter users could be fined if they are found to be riding their scooter: “… carelessly, inconsiderately or at a dangerous speed. The fine may be higher if you do any of these things more than once. ” Furthermore, if a mobility scooter user causes a crash where someone is killed or hurt then they could be charged with “careless or inconsiderate use of a motor vehicle”. This brings penalties ranging from a severe fine to a prison sentence. However, these do not provide clear definitions or rules to inform a user’s decisions.


Speed limits

It is recommended that the approach taken in some Australian States, including Victoria be adopted. This states that mobility scooters: “must have a maximum capable speed of 10km per hour on level ground and a maximum unladen mass of 110kg”.


67

Road usage

It is recommended that New Zealand Police be resourced to enforce the law. Local and regional councils throughout the country, as well as NZTA, road safety action groups and other key agencies, have highlighted serious concerns about mobility scooters riding on the road when a footpath is available, as well as riding on the road as if they are a motor vehicle.

Monitoring and registration

It is recommended that legislation is changed to require all mobility scooters to be registered and display a licence plate, with minimal or no cost imposed, to ensure compliance. It is further recommended that the legislation set a maximum power assisted speed and size for mobility scooters.


68

21 Museums and galleries

Remit: That central government funding be made available on an annual basis for museums and galleries operated by territorial authorities with nationally significant collections.






• There is currently no central government funding for daily operating costs for museums and galleries operated by territorial authorities.

• Public museums and galleries often house nationally significant collections and taonga but are supported largely by their local ratepayers, often from a limited funding pool.

• These facilities attract national and international visitors and service far more than the local area from which their funding is drawn.

• Local authorities are severely challenged to adequately support the annual running costs required for these key cultural facilities due to the financial impost on ratepayers.

• Support for the retention of these facilities in smaller regional centres, outside the larger cities, is important in terms of cultural accessibility and in keeping our provincial communities viable.


Regional museums and galleries are important to the cultural makeup of this country. They are recognised as critical hubs for communities and visitors and play a role that extends far beyond the display of images and artefacts:

• They occupy a dynamic position in our national cultural life, encouraging us to think about our place in the world.

• They stimulate discussion and debate. This enhances participation, creativity, community capacity and a sense of place.


69

• They generate economic activity; they are a driver of tourism and create jobs and vibrancy.

• They contribute to key aspects of our community and national cultural identity; the nature of our bicultural society and other multicultural influences means that museums and galleries will act as an increasingly important link in reflecting and understanding the diversity of our communities.

• They build social cohesion, creativity and leisure opportunities. They contribute to civic development and provide a focal point for gathering and interaction; acting as a key social destination.

• They foster enrichment. Arts and culture are ‘good for you’. Having access to events and exhibitions is important, and this might be even more so in provincial centres.

Despite this, there is limited funding available, particularly for operating costs. This raises concerns about the ongoing ability of territorial authorities to:

• Provide adequate, appropriate and safe storage methods. Climate control and professional and timely care or repair of our treasures requires adequate funding to ensure the longevity of many of our special collection items (for example, paintings or heritage artefacts such as Māori cloaks).

• Deliver the right display conditions. Without the right climate control, security and display methods, the public’s access to view these collections is severely limited. Instead of enhancing the visibility of, and connection to, our key collection pieces locally, nationally and internationally, this access is restricted by inadequate funds for exhibition. This is exacerbated by the limitations of funding at the local ratepayer level.

• Preserving our stories. The collections available at public museums and galleries are not only often nationally significant but also reveal important aspects of our local identity. They are an education resource (both formally through school programmes and informally) and are a drawcard for tourism. Maintaining these collections retains our storytelling abilities, supports our unique identities and contributes to economic and social development.

This is supported by the following background information:

• Some collections are over 100 years old and need specialised climate control and storage facilities. Paint, canvas, fabric and fibres have unique requirements to ensure their preservation and longevity. The cost of doing so is huge and is a burden that many local communities cannot sustain. However, despite this, they are solely responsible for this care.

• Some grants are available, on application, to deliver education programmes for school children. However, this funding is very limited and requires additional subsidisation by schools. As a result, not all children are gaining equitable access to our museums and galleries.

• Limited grants are also available, on application, for storage and building upgrades, as well as for one-off restoration projects. However, there are no regular, reliable funds available to meet the significant and necessary costs of just running these institutions.


70

• Currently only the Auckland War Memorial Museum and Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa receive an ongoing proportion of operating costs.

As an example, the Sarjeant Gallery in Whanganui has an annual operating budget of $2.285 million and the Whanganui Regional Museum a budget of $1.085 million. The value of their collections is $30 million across each institution, with their collections considered to be some of the best in New Zealand. Yet they are funded almost solely from the local Whanganui district ratepayer base. This is not sustainable if we are to make the most of New Zealand’s nationally significant collections and ensure their preservation for the future.

An example of public museums and art galleries currently operated by territorial authorities:

Institution Permanent collection?

Sarjeant Gallery - Whanganui

Whanganui Regional Museum

Auckland Art Gallery

Whangarei Art Museum

Te Tuhi Center for the Arts, Manukau City x

Waikato Museum

Rotorua Museum of Art & History

Tauranga Art Gallery

Whakatane Museum & Art Gallery

Govett Brewster Gallery/Len Lye Centre – New Plymouth

Percy Thompson Gallery – Stratford x

Tairawhiti Museum – Gisborne

Hawke’s Bay Museum and Art Gallery – Napier

Aratoi Wairarapa Museum of Art & History – Masterton

City Gallery – Wellington x

The New Dowse – Lower Hutt

Millennium Art Gallery – Blenheim

Suter Art Gallery – Nelson

Christchurch Art Gallery

Coca – Centre for Contemporary Art – Christchurch

Aigantighe Art Gallery – Timaru

Forrester Gallery – Oamaru

Dunedin Public Art Gallery

Southland Museum and Art Gallery – Invercargill

Anderson Park Art Gallery – Invercargill

Eastern Southland Gallery – Gore


71


The remit would require a policy shift by central government to provide funding for operating costs based on a set of clear assessment criteria.


The LGNZ work programme includes tourism as a focus area and addresses concerns about funding in relation to key facilities and amenities:

“Without more equitable forms of funding there is a risk that visitors will lack the appropriate range of local amenities they need to have a positive experience.”

This is framed by the following statement:

“The visitor industry is now New Zealand’s largest export industry however the speed of its growth is putting many of New Zealand’s smaller communities under pressure. It is a problem created by the way in which councils are funded as new facilities will be paid for out of property taxes while visitor expenditure, in the form of increased GST and income tax, benefits central rather than local government.”

7. What work or action on the issues has been done on it, and the outcome

Although there was work completed on a central government funding model for the ‘national collection’ in the 1990’s (that being, the collection held by all public museums and galleries in New Zealand) this did not progress. The United Kingdom has a centrally funded system for museums and galleries.


• Auckland War Memorial Museum Act 1996.

• Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa Act 1992.

9. Suggest course of action envisaged

That central government funding be made available on an annual basis for museums and galleries operated by territorial authorities with nationally significant collections.

This would be in the form of an annual allocation for operating costs based on specific criteria to ensure the maintenance, preservation and development of collections with relevance beyond the local setting. This would provide the surety of a reliable income stream and could be set to a specified limit, eg 10 per cent of annual operating costs.


72

Of particular interest would be those collections of national importance where the benefit of protection and enhancement would make a substantial contribution to New Zealand’s creative sector as well as our national cultural identity.

Priority funding would be given to museums and galleries which hold permanent New Zealand collections, rather than being solely exhibition galleries. Funding could also be based on the size and type of collection. This recognises the added burden of storage, care and maintenance for collections of a significant size and importance.


73

22 Resource Management Act

Remit: That the selection of all independent commissioners for Resource Management Act hearings be centralised to improve independence and enhance the quality of decisions.





The following issues with the current system have been identified:

• There is potential for corruption and undue influence.

• There is limited ability for newer commissioners to obtain experience.

• There is opportunity for enhanced effectiveness and more robust decision-making.


The Resource Management Act (RMA) contains provisions for the appointment of independent commissioners to sit on panels to hear RMA matters, for example, resource consent applications, notices of requirement and District and Regional Plan Reviews, including plan changes (s39B).

Commissioners must be accredited to sit on RMA hearing panels and the Minister for the Environment must approve the qualification for accreditation. The certification process is called “Making Good Decisions” and is delivered on behalf of the Ministry.

The Ministry for the Environment (MfE) website sets out the areas covered by the accreditation and recertification processes and has a register of qualified commissioners.


74

Although this system provides opportunity, in theory, for panel composition based on a balanced range of factors to ensure impartiality and relevant breadth of experience – in practice this is not the case. Instead, selection can be influenced by:

• Paid relationships. For example, commissioners being held on retainer.

• Manipulation of focus areas. For example, panels being ‘stacked’ to increase the likelihood of support or sympathy for particular issues.

• Existing connections. For example, the same commissioners being selected by the same councils, leaving little room for newer certificate holders and leading to questions of true independence.

As a result, the current system is open to both real and perceived issues of fairness based on concerns about:

• The appropriateness of an ongoing financial arrangement for retained availability, as well as the ability of this relationship to really remain independent and impartial. For example, would an ‘unfavourable’ decision jeopardise the financial benefit for a commissioner in this position?

• A balance of experience and expertise on the panel when many of the same commissioners, with similar backgrounds (planners, lawyers, elected members) are used on a consistent basis.

• Missed opportunities to provide practical experience to a broader spread of certificate holders in a more even way (rather than the same familiar options being selected).

• The ability to achieve genuine impartiality when commissioners can be picked based on prior relationships and knowledge of their position (and therefore likely decisions) on particular issues.

• An absence of local and external collaboration on decisions – missing important opportunities to upskill lesser experienced commissioners and provide the right mix of local versus external perspectives to equally inform good decision-making.

• A lack of standardisation in fee structures throughout the country, potentially leading to ‘cherry-picking’ of hearings.

• Poor Māori representation on hearing panels in areas where co-management legislation does not yet apply.

There is also no process for receiving or addressing complaints about commissioner conduct.


The remit would require amendment to the RMA and the development of a centralised and independently managed appointment process to allocate commissioners in a systematic and fair manner. This would be supported by regulations which would set out the steps to be followed.


75

Such provisions are already contained in legislation such as the Waikato-Tainui Raupatu Claims (Waikato River) Settlement Act 2010 (s 25 and s28).


The work programme notes that ‘major reform’ of the RMA is required. It does not, however, specifically relate to the recommendations of this remit.


No work has been undertaken specifically on this. However, the proposed model recommends use of the Victorian State Government approach: https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/panels-and-committees/panels-and-committees

In addition, the New Zealand Environment Court uses a mixed model approach, with the Judge as chair and two or more court appointed commissioners. These commissioners have a varied background (across planning, ecology, landscape architecture, civil engineering, Tikanga Māori etc) and have all completed the “LEADR” mediation programme to assist the Court in mediated resolutions of court appeals. Many have also undertaken the “Making Good Decisions” programme.


That the selection of all accredited commissioners for RMA hearings be centralised and independently managed by the Ministry for the Environment.

The new process could follow the Victorian State Government example. In essence this involves making an initial hearing panel application online, followed by a formal letter of request. A panel is then appointed by the Minister (or a delegate) in accordance with the specific details of the particular issue, eg the complexity of the topic, the number of submissions received or the special expertise required. This enables administrative ‘filtering’ to sort panellists according to their suitability across a spectrum of hearing complexities. For example, smaller and less controversial issues would be resourced differently to more difficult topics. This would also ensure a tailored mix of expertise and backgrounds – enabling greater Māori representation, a balance of newer and more experienced commissioners and a spread of local and external knowledge.

In Victoria the pool of available commissioners is managed by an ‘Office of Planning Panels’ acting as a conduit between panels and interested parties to “ensure an independent and transparent process is upheld”.


https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/panels-and-committees/panels-and-committees

https://www.planning.vic.gov.au/panels-and-committees/panels-and-committees

76

If MfE took this on it would also be expected to manage the contracts, oversee the effectiveness of the process, receive and adjudicate on any complaints about commissioner conduct and regulate the fee structure. It would also deliver administrative support for the process (although where hearings are cost recoverable from applicants then this would be managed accordingly). MfE could also maintain the register of accredited commissioners and chairs and ensure that it remained up to date, with sufficient information provided to ensure the effective appointment of panels.


77

23 Mayor decision to appoint Deputy Mayor

Remit: That LGNZ request the Government to amend S.41A of the LGA2002 to give Mayors the same powers to appoint a deputy mayor as held by the Mayor of Auckland.

Proposed by: Horowhenua District Council, Invercargill District Council and Whanganui District Council

Supported by: Provincial Sector



Since 2013 mayors have had the power to determine who their deputy mayor should be, however a mayor’s choice of deputy can be overturned by a majority vote of councillors. Not only has this caused confusion the fact that councils can over turn a mayor’s choice undermines the original intent of the legislation.


The 2012 LGA 2002 Amendment Act introduced Section 41A which recognised mayors’ leadership role and gave mayors the authority to appoint their deputy as well as committee chairs. The select committee amended the original bill to provide councils with an ability to reverse a mayor’s decision. Not only did that change make a nonsense of the original intent it has also undermined the credibility of the legislation in the eyes of citizens who generally expect a mayor to be able to choose who their deputy will be, given the importance of that working relationship.


The problems mayors face with implementation of section 41A is not currently on the LGNZ work programme.


78


The Government is re-drafting the Local Government Amendment Bill 2 which is expected to be given its second reading later this year. The Bill could provide a vehicle to amend S.41A in order to strengthen mayors’ ability to appoint their deputies without the risk of that decision being reversed.


79

24 Beauty industry

Remit: That LGNZ calls on the Government to develop and implement national guidelines, policy or regulations to achieve national consistency for the largely unregulated ‘health and beauty clinic’ industry.

Proposed by: Whangarei District Council

Supported by: Selwyn District Council

Kawerau District Council

Dunedin City Council

Rangitikei District Council

Far North District Council



Over recent years, the ‘health and beauty clinic’ industry has seen tremendous growth and continues to expand rapidly. Unfortunately, there is no national legislation or guidance to regulate this industry.

The Health Act 1956 is currently the only legislative tool at the disposal of local authorities to deal with concerns and complaints. However, the powers under the Act are very limited, and do not relate specifically to quality and community safety.

Several councils have developed their own Bylaws to deal with the potential risks that this industry poses to its clientele, with varying degrees of success, but by large the industry remains unregulated. By contrast, national regulations to regulate the hairdressing industry have existed since the 1980’s. It is considered that the ‘health and beauty clinic’ industry faces much higher risks and challenges.


Nationally, as well as locally, Environmental Health Practitioners are dealing with an ever-increasing number of complaints about this industry and the fallout from botched procedures, as well as infections. Whilst, practitioners can address some of these concerns under the Health Act 1956, it is felt that specific legislation or guidance is the only way to regulate this industry and achieve national consistency.


80

In the absence of national legislation, territorial authorities such as the Whangarei District Council are unable to regulate the industry, except through the development of a specific Bylaw. The development of Bylaws is an expensive and time consuming process and the cost of that process and any complaint investigation, outside the Bylaw process, falls solely on ratepayers whilst creation of Bylaws can mitigate risk at local level, they do not result in national consistency.


New policy.


The issue aligns to the LGNZ Three Year Business Plan (2019/20 – 2021/22), that recognises quality and community safety as a key social issue, with social issues being one of the five big issues for New Zealand councils. Specifically, the commitment to “work alongside central government and iwi to address social issues and needs in our communities, including a rapidly growing and an ageing population, inequality, housing (including social housing) supply and quality and community safety.”


Aside from some council’s developing their own Bylaws, as far as the Whangarei District Council is aware, central government has no plan to develop legislation or guidance for this sector.

Notably, as New Zealand-wide complaints regarding the industry continue to rise and the serious risks associated with the industry continue to be better understood a national approach is needed to make any substantive progress on regulating the ‘health and beauty clinic’ industry in New Zealand.


As described above, the Health Act 1956 is currently the only legislative tool at the disposal of local authorities to deal with concerns and complaints. However, the powers under the Act are very limited, and do not relate specifically to quality and community safety.


81


That LGNZ calls on the Government to develop and implement national guidelines, policy or regulations to achieve national consistency for the largely unregulated ‘health and beauty clinic’ industry.

It is also suggested that LGNZ engage directly with relevant ministers and ministries to ensure local government has an appropriate role in the development of nationally consistent legislation or guidelines to address the challenges the industry brings.


82

Remits not going to AGM

The remit Screening Committee has referred the following remits to the National Council of LGNZ for action, rather than to the Annual General Meeting for consideration. The Remit Screening Committee’s role is to ensure that remits referred to the AGM are relevant, significant in nature and require agreement from the membership. In general, proposed remits that are already LGNZ policy, are already on the LGNZ work programme or technical in nature will be referred directly to the National Council for their action.

1. Earthquake strengthening – tax relief

Remit: That LGNZ lobby central government to provide tax relief for buildings owners for the compulsory earthquake strengthening of their buildings either by way of reinstating depreciation or some other tax relief for earthquake compliance costs.

Proposed by: Horowhenua District Council


Recommendation: That the remit is referred to National Council for action

2. Benchmark Programme

Remit: That LGNZ investigate and implement an infrastructure delivery benchmark programme, including working with the Department of Internal Affairs to improve the Non-Financial Performance Measures Rules 2013 to be more meaningful measures of infrastructure service delivery.

Proposed by: New Plymouth District Council

Supported by: Central Hawkes Bay District Council; Otorohanga District Council; South Taranaki District Council; Stratford District Council; Thames-Coromandel District Council; Waitomo District Council; Wellington City Council; Whanganui District Council

Recommendation: That the remit is referred to the National Council for action


83

3. On-line voting

Remit: That LGNZ advocates to the Government for it to provide financial support for the Local Government on-line voting trial.




4. E-waste

Remit: That LGNZ advocates to the Government to introduce a mandatory product stewardship programme for e-waste.




5. Tourism Industry Aotearoa

Remit: That LGNZ actively consider the Tourism Industry Aotearoa Local Government Funding Model to Support Regional Tourism Growth.

Proposed by: Ruapehu District Council

Supported by: Palmerston North City Council; Horizons Regional Council: New Plymouth District Council; Rangitikei District Council; Stratford District Council



of 10

Information Report

To: Council

From: Group Manager Corporate Services

Date: Monday, 20 May 2019

File reference: Document: 2584864

Portfolio holder: Deputy Mayor Toby Adams


Subject: Financial Report for the Period to 30 April 2019.

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received.

1 Summary

Operating For the ten months to the end of April, Council is $244,000 or 1.1% under budget on its

expenditure, and $269,000 or 6.34 above budget on its revenue. This gives a $513,000 or

2.9% favourable variance.

Rates and Water Rates Arrears

The following two graphs show the overdue property rates and water rates for the

2017/18 and 2018/19 financial years. Note there may be some distortion within years

on the water rates arrears graph as ‘major users’ transitioned to bi-monthly over the

first three to four months of the 2017/18 financial year.


of 10

Duncan Peddie GROUP MANAGER CORPORATE SERVICES

-

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

July August September October November December January February March April May June

Water Rates Arrears by Month

2018/19 2017/18

-

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

1,600,000

1,800,000

Property Rates Arrears by Month

2018/19 2017/18


of 10

Groups of activities overview - Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019

Operating Revenue (excluding Rates & Roading capital funding from NZTA) Operating Expenditure Capital Expenditure

-Favourable YTD $269,734 Favourable YTD $244,000 Favourable YTD $4,717,000

YTD budget $4,237,000 YTD budget $22,245,000 YTD Forecast $12,349,000Full year budget $5,084,900 Full year budget $37,271,000 Full year budget (Original) $10,812,000

Full year forecast $5,354,634 Full year forecast $37,027,000 Full year forecast $14,819,000

$4,506,734 $22,001,000 $7,632,000

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0

Leadership

Networks

Community Services

Community Development

Regulatory

Millions

Operating Expenditure

YTD Actual YTD Budget

Revenue

Regulatory income is ahead of budget as a result of large consent applications received.

Expenditure

Processing the large consent applications have meant that Regulatory costs exceed the budget. Additional revenue does offset this.

Favourable variances is shown in Networks is due largely to the favourable variances across a range of components within the Water and Wastewater activities.

Leadership favourable variance is attributed largely due to Liaison Officer not being appointed until February 2019. In addition no meetings of the Mana Whenua Forum have occurred so far this year.

Capital Expenditure

Capital expenditure is tracking below the revised capital works programme approved by Council in December 2018.

As previously signalled this will lead to a number of projects previously anticipated to be delivered prior to 30 June 2019 being completed in the next financial year.

The Project Management Office is continually reviewing the practicality of achieving the approved programme.

0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0

Leadership

Regulatory

Community Development

Community Services

Networks

Millions

Capital Expenditure

YTD Actuals YTD Budget (adjusted)


of 10

Council repaid the $11million LGFA debt that matured in March 2019. Council remains fully compliant to all Policy parameters. However by 30 June 2019 Council will become non-compliant in the three to 5 year

interest rate fixed/floating profile sublimit. In order to manage the non-compliance, staff have entered into a forward starting interest rate

swap for a notional value of $2million with a start date of 15 July 2020 and a maturity date of 15 April 2024. KPI’s Status Comments or risks

Total net external debt will not exceed

175% of total revenue in any year.

Net interest expense is ≤ 15% of rates

revenue in any year.

Net interest expense is ≤ 10% of total

revenue in any year.

Net external debt per rating unit is ≤

$5,000 in any year.

Fixed/floating interest rates Profile

Loan Maturity Profile

parameters for the fixed/floating interest

rates and Profile

Hauraki District Council Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019

Borrowings Cash and cash equivalents Net borrowings Available Credit Facilities

External debt net of cash and cash equivalents

- =

Full year budget $46.63m Full year budget $.58m Full year budget $46.04m Full year budget $7.0m

Full year forecast $46.63m Full year forecast $.58m Full year forecast $46.04m Full year forecast $7.0m

$34.48m $7.00m$38.00m $3.52m


of 10

Hauraki District Council Financial MeasuresKey Indicators - For the period ending 30 April 2019

Forecast capital expenditure is tracking below the revised capital works programme approved by Council in December 2018.

The latest forecast indicates a capital works programme of around $12m for the year. Staff will continue to monitor progress and will keep you updated

over the coming months.

-

5,000,000

10,000,000

15,000,000

20,000,000

25,000,000

Jul-18 Aug-18 Sep-18 Oct-18 Nov-18 Dec-18 Jan-19 Feb-19 Mar-19 Apr-19 May-19 Jun-19

Capital Expenditure Forecast - 30 April 2019

Actual Spend LTP Budget

Revised budget - Sept 2018 (and subsequent Council decisions) Revised budget - Dec 2018 (and subsequent Council decisions)

Forecast - April 2019


of 10

Regulatory Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019

Operating Revenue (excluding Rates) Operating Expenditure Capital Expenditure

-Favourable YTD $294,000 Unfavourable YTD $(129,000) Favourable YTD $0

YTD budget $1,478,000 YTD budget $3,261,000 YTD Forecast $0Full year budget $1,719,000 Full year budget $3,967,000 Full year budget (Original) $0

Full year forecast $2,013,000 Full year forecast $4,096,000 Full year forecast $0

$1,772,000 $3,390,000 $0

0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400

Animal Control

Building Services

Community Protection

RMA Implementation

Thousands



Operating Revenue (Excluding Rates)

Higher income due to increased activity around building consents.

Expenditure

Higher costs due to increased planning consultant costs with increased resource consents. This is offset by higher income.

Budget for Abandoned Mine and Ground Settlement sub activities unlikely to be spent.

Capital Expenditure

No capital spend or budget for this group of activities.


of 10

Community Development Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019



YTD budget $0 YTD budget $1,636,000 YTD Forecast $0Full year budget $0 Full year budget $2,562,000 Full year budget (Original) $0

Full year forecast $3,000 Full year forecast $2,608,000 Full year forecast $0

$3,000 $1,682,000 $0

100 300 500 700 900 1,100

Community Growth

Community Initiatives

Thousands




Expenditure

Grants and Donations more than budget as a result of Paeroa Promotions Trust loan reclassified as a grant per council decision of 31 January 2019.

Capital Expenditure

No capital spend or budget for this group of activities.


of 10

Community Services Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019


-Unfavourable YTD $(18,000) Favourable YTD $18,000 Favourable YTD $1,299,000

YTD budget $555,000 YTD budget $4,339,000 YTD Forecast $1,826,000Full year budget $672,000 Full year budget $6,373,000 Full year budget (Original) $2,750,000

Full year forecast $654,000 Full year forecast $6,355,000 Full year forecast $2,192,000

$537,000 $4,321,000 $527,000

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500

Community Facilities

Recreation

Thousands




Sport Fields, Pools and Events Centre are not achieving income targets.

Expenditure

FacilitiesAdditional costs in the public Toilets activity due to the delay in connection of Karangahake toilets to the reticulation system.Recreation ReservesRefuse collection costs exceed budget with $128k. A report on the Manco 'Big Belly" solar compacting bin was presented to the Community Services and Development Committee on the 17th of October 2018 (Document No. 2471685). Partially offsetting the unfavourable variances is a number of favourable variances across other activities under this group.

Swimming pool savings of $110k are a result of lower than expected costs particularly in the areas of energy and routine maintenance and reactive repairs.

Capital Expenditure

Capital expenditure is tracking below the revised capital works programme approved by Council in December.It is likely that the construction of the Ngatea Main Street Renewal will not take place until the new financial year as are the additional toilet projects for Kaiaua and Paeroa Domain.

0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 1,400

Community Facilities

Recreation

Thousands

Capital Expenditure



of 10

Networks Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019

Operating Revenue (excluding Rates & Roading capital funding from NZTA) Operating Expenditure Capital Expenditure




$2,192,000 $10,150,000 $7,105,000

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0

Land Drainage

Roading

Solid Waste

Stormwater

Wastewater

Water

Millions


YTD Actuals YTD Budget


Expenditure

The Water and Wastewater Activities are showing favourable variances year to date. This is in part due to changes implemented in the way we deliver the treatment aspects of these activities as well as a resource shortage.

Within the Solid Waste Activity we have seen a drop in kerbside collection expenditure as collections have been taken to RTS before landfill. This is reflected with increased costs in that aspect of the Activity. We have also seen increased volumes through the RTS's. An external audit into the RTS's has been undertaken all of which leaves us with an unfavourable variance in this activity.

Land Drainage saw the highest rainfall in Oct, Nov & Dec since 1974, resulting in pumps running more than anticipated.

Capital ExpenditureOverall capital expenditure is tracking below the revised capital works programme approved by Council in December 2018.

As previously signalled this will lead to a number of projects previously anticipated to be delivered prior to 30 June 2019 being completed in the next financial year.

Bucking this trend is the Water Activity where the Kaimanawa to Paeroa connection has entered the construction phase earlier than was anticipated in the December revision.0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

Land Drainage

Roading

Solid Waste

Stormwater

Wastewater

Water

Millions

Capital Expenditure

YTD Actuals


of 10

Leadership Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019


-Favourable YTD $2,000 Favourable YTD $115,000 Favourable YTD $0

YTD budget $0 YTD budget $2,573,000 YTD Forecast $0Full year budget $0 Full year budget $3,244,000 Full year budget (Original) $0

Full year forecast $2,000 Full year forecast $3,129,000 Full year forecast $0

$2,000 $2,458,000 $0

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000

Democracy

Iwi Liaison

Policy Development

Thousands




Expenditure

Iwi Liaison Officer was not appointed until February 2019 and the Mana Whenua Forum meetings that have not yet taken place this year.

Capital Expenditure

No capital spend or budget for this group of activities


of 4

Decision Report


From: Group Manager Community Services and Development

Date: Thursday, 4 April 2019

File reference: Document: 2559081

Portfolio holder: Councillor Daley (Property) Councillor Leonard (Community Facilities)


Subject: Elderly Person Housing rental fees

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received, and That the Elderly Person Housing rental fees from 1st July 2019 be,$150 per week for all existing tenants, and $180 (bedsit units) and $187 (single bedroom units) for all new tenants and THAT from the 1st July 2020 increase the rental fees for all existing tenants to market rental rates, and THAT staff continue to work with tenants and Ministry of Social Development in the transition of the rental fee to market rental rates, and THAT staff report back to Council on the work programme of the installation of heating and ventilation systems into the units.

1 Purpose

This purpose of this report is to seek Council’s approval for increasing Council’s Elderly Person Housing rental fees from the 1 July 2019 to $150 per week for all existing tenants, and $180 (bedsit units) and $187 (single bedroom units) for all new tenants and from the 1st July 2020 increase the rental fees for all existing tenants to market rental rates.

2 Background

Elderly Person Housing Council’s 57 elderly persons housing units were developed in Paeroa, Waihi and Ngatea between 1960 and 1985.


of 4

The 2018/19 rental rates are set at $122 for a bedsit and $128 for a one bedroom unit, per week. It has been Council’s policy not to increase rents by more than $6 a week/ per year in order to maintain affordability for residents. Building condition grading has shown that the units are in a well maintained condition and have a full operational maintenance and renewal programme in place for the future, to maintain the units to the layout and standard as they are. As this is a ring fenced financially funded activity the operational, maintenance and renewal costs can only be funded from rentals. There are significant costs involved in maintaining and renovating units in line with best practise standards for elderly accommodation. This cost is expected to rise dramatically in line with the Government’s legislation for healthy, dry and warm homes which comes into effect on 1 July 2019 and is proposed that this work must be completed by 21 July 2021 for any new tenancy and all rental properties in New Zealand must meet the Healthy Homes Standards by 1 July 2024. Existing rental rates will not be sufficient to fund these additional works to meet the Government’s new healthy Homes legislation requirements and to bring the units up to a standard to meet best practice for elderly persons housing.

3 Issue and options

Council’s 2018/19 weekly rental rates are $122 for a bedsit and $128 for a one bedroom unit. Currently, Council subsidises the rentals by 30% of market rates (with agreeing to reducing this to 15% over the next few years). It is also Council’s policy not to increase rents by more than $6 a week in order to maintain affordability for residents. These policies have conflicted with each other over a number of years, as market rental rates have risen on average by more than $6 a week, resulting in Council currently subsidising the rentals by approximately 32%. In order to meet the requirements of the Government’s new healthy and warm dry homes legislation, staff have estimated an expenditure of $4,000 per unit which will allow for a heat pump heating/cooling system, extractor fan in the bathroom and extractor fan in the kitchen to remove excess moisture and maintain circulation. The cost of this work over all the 57 units is estimated at $228,000. Current annual budgets allow for $102,000 in depreciation ($1,800 per unit) which is used for replacement of existing components within each complex, such as stoves, hot water cylinders, roofs etc. The current loss of annual revenue is estimated to be around $166,000 by the rental fees being at the 32% subsidy. In order to fund increased operational costs and identified works to meet legislation, it is proposed that rental fees increase over the next 2 years to full market rates for existing tenants, and full market rates for new tenants. Rent statistics received from Tenancy Services / MBIE and that compared to neighbouring councils have indicated that a market rent of $180 (bedsit units) and $187 (single bedroom units) is realistic for the Hauraki District Council’s units.


of 4

The proposed rental fee structure is:

1st July 2019 increase the rental fees to $150 per week for all existing tenants, and $180 (bedsit units) and $187 (single bedroom units) for all new tenants.

1st July 2020 increase the rental fees for all existing tenants to market rental rates. A small number of tenants’ have entered into a periodic tenancy agreement with Hauraki District Council since February 2019. Legislation prescribes that rent may not be increased for 180 days from the starting date of a tenancy. A minimum of 60 days’ notice in writing is required prior to any proposed rent increase. Financial support for existing tenants It may already be a stretch for some tenants to afford to pay rent, however additional support from Work and Income NZ (WINZ) is available to help cover any rises in rental costs. Staff and Portfolio Holders have met with Ministry of Social Development (MSD) in December 2018. MSD have financial aid provisions to support people on low income, including older people. MSD’s financial provisions are dispensed through Work and Income and Senior Services. The accommodation supplement weekly payment is one such support system provided which helps people with paying rent. Hauraki District’s elderly can receive some form of Accommodation Supplement, the amount paid is dependent on what other benefits and supplements they already receive. One third of our tenants are not receiving the supplement for reasons unknown to Work and Income, however, residents need to inform Work and Income when the rent increases in order for the accommodation supplement to be reassessed to reflect the increase. MSD have given staff assurances that they will be assisting our tenants with applications and eligibility to receive the additional support to cover the rise in rental fees. Staff is happy to help set up appointments and assist with transport if the tenants may need it.

4 Significance and Engagement Assessment

This decision does not trigger the Significance and Engagement Policy Assessment Tool and therefore is not considered significant under the Significance and Engagement Policy 2017 The level of engagement considered appropriate for this matter, at this point in time, is to inform (i.e. one-way communication disseminating information) the tenants of the increase in rental fee. Legally we are required give 60 days’ notice of any rent increases to occur.

5 Budget Implications

The new 2019/20 budgets have allowed for a $70,000 increase in rental income, based on the 1st July 2019 increase of the rental fees to $150 per week for all existing tenants, and $180 (bedsit units) and $187 (single bedroom units) for all new tenants.


of 4

6 Recommendation

The Council should make its decision on which option to choose based on that option being the most cost effective, and good quality option for the Hauraki District (s10 of the Local Government Act 2002). Staff and Portfolio Holders are recommending to Council, That the Elderly Person Housing rental fees from the 1st July 2019 be, $150 per week for all existing tenants, and $180 (bedsit units) and $187 (single bedroom units) for all new tenants and THAT from the 1st July 2020 increase the rental fees for all existing tenants to market rental rates, and THAT staff continue to work with tenants and Ministry of Social Development in the transition of the rental fee to market rental rates, and THAT staff report back to Council on the work programme of the installation of heating and ventilation systems into the units Steve Fabish Group Manager- Community Services and Development


Decision Report To: Mayor and Councillors

From: Group Manager Corporate Services

Date: Tuesday, 21 May 2019

File reference: Document: 2568336 Appendix B: 2494459

Portfolio holder:

Mayor Tregidga


Subject: 2019/20 Annual Plan, fees and charges and rates, balanced budget and borrowing delegation resolutions

Recommendation: THAT the report be received, and THAT the Council adopts the Annual Plan 2019/20 in accordance with section 95 of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act), and THAT the Chief Executive be authorised to correct any minor errors or omissions to the Annual Plan 2019/20 before it is made publicly available, and THAT in adopting the 2019/20 Annual Plan, that as per the balanced budget statement in the Annual Plan, its operating revenue is not sufficient to meet its operating expenditure in the plan, and that Council considers if financially prudent to set operating revenue at this level, and THAT pursuant to clause 6.5.6 of Council’s Delegations Manual, the Council delegates to the Group Manager Corporate Services the authority to borrow up to a maximum net debt level of $56 million during the 2019/20 financial year for the purposes of meeting Council’s expected maximum funding requirements during that year, and THAT the Fees and Charges Schedule be updated to include all proposed changes for the 2019/20 year, effective as of 1st July 2019, and THAT the community be informed of the availability of the Annual Plan prior to 29 June 2019, and THAT the rates resolution for the 2019/20 rating year as detailed be adopted as per appendix A.


1 Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present Council with the proposed 2019/20 Annual Plan for consideration.

2 Background

Over the past seven months the Council has been preparing the background supporting information for the upcoming financial year. Subsequently the Annual Plan 2019/20 is now in a proposed state that reflects all Council decisions made to date. The purpose of an annual plan is to- a) contain the proposed annual budget and funding impact statement for the year to

which the annual plan relates b) identify any variation from the financial statements and funding impact statement

included in the Council’s Long Term Plan in respect of that year c) provide integrated decision making and co-ordination of the resources of the Council,

and d) contribute to the accountability of the Council to the community (Local Government

Act 2002, s.95). Unless major changes are warranted, the Annual Plan in essence provides for a refinement and update of that planned for in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan (LTP) for the 2019/20 year. Any changes that are considered to be material or significant require the Council to consult on a draft annual plan. At its meeting on 13th March the Community Services and Development Committee considered: 1. the changes that had been proposed to year two of the Council’s 2018-28 Long Term

Plan (LTP) up to that meeting 2. the financial impact of the annual plan proposals, including the impact on rates 3. an assessment of the materiality and significance of the decisions made. At that meeting the Committee resolved that the changes and financial implications could be included in an annual plan document, and that the changes were not considered to be significant or material and did not warrant public consultation. There were some minor changes to be made through a working party, and these were approved at the March 2019 Council meeting. As such, the Annual Plan 2019/20 is presented as Appendix B.

2.1 Fees and Charges – background

To align to the funding decisions made as part of the Annual Plan process, fees and charges are reviewed. These changes to the fees and charges are not specifically stated in the Annual Plan itself, but in a separate schedule of fees and charges. Due to the differing requirements of consultation for each of these, these have already or will be presented to Council separately, rather in a collective manner. In summary, the fees and charges that either have recently been presented to Council or will be in the near future relate to:


• Housing for the elderly – included as a separate item on the 29 May Council agenda

• Libraries meeting room charges – as presented to Community Services and Development Committee in May 2019 to come into effect 1st July 2019

• Road corridor access – as presented to Council in April 2019 with the proposed changes to be distributed shortly for targeted consultation

• Cemeteries – alongside the bylaw review process • Keeping of animals – alongside the bylaw review process • Permits for vehicles on the beach – alongside the bylaw review process if this

goes ahead. • Removal of transitional food registration fees – alongside the bylaw review

process • Dog Registration and Impounding fees – as presented to Council in March 2019 to

come into effect 1st July 2019. • Refuse disposal changes – changes made to the schedule and fees and charges

are in effect as of 20th May 2019. • Corporate Services fees and charges as presented to Council in March 2019 for

the updating of minor fees to reflect current processes (e.g. remove the fee of $20 to transfer information onto CD and the charge to send information via email)

Further to the report presented to the Community Services and Development Committee in April, staff also request an addition be made to the Fees and Charges Schedule for libraries and swimming pools that a disclaimer be added that the set fees and charges may be subject to change depending on current promotions. This is to provide some flexibility with regards to promotions such as one off promotional days/periods that have the purpose of increasing book circulation or pool attendance. Through this report, staff are seeking Council confirmation to incorporate these changes into the Fees and Charges Schedule to come into effect on 1 July 2019.

3 Issue and options

4 Rating implications The overall rates increases forecast is shown on Table 1 and reflected in both Appendix A and the Annual Plan attached as Appendix B. Table 1: Forecast Rating Increases in the LTP and Proposed Annual Plan Rate type Increase

Forecast in LTP Increase proposed Annual Plan 2019/20

Rates cap

Non-Water Rates 5.74% 5.7% 7.7% (within limit) Water Rates 6.0% 6.0% 8.2% (within limit)

The options available to the Council include: 1. adopting the 2019/20 Annual Plan, or 2. instructing staff to further revise the proposed changes. There is no preferred option.


As at the time of including the Annual Plan on the agenda, the Sample Properties were being finalised. These will be circulated separately.

5 New deliverable

The Local Government Act 2002 now requires that all local government deliverables (whether it be an activity, service, project, programme, grant or involve any other form of expenditure) must align to the purpose of local government as outlined in Section 10 of the Local Government Act. The decision to proceed with the changes proposed to year two of the LTP involves new expenditure and projects as outlined in the Annual Plan 2019/20 document in Appendix B. These are considered to be aligned with the purpose of local government as they each provide for at least one of the following: • local infrastructure • local public service.


This decision does not trigger the Significance and Engagement Policy and therefore is not considered significant under the Significance and Engagement Policy 2017. At its 13 March meeting, the Council resolved that the 2019/20 annual plan proposals as drafted to date did not constitute a significant or material change from the 2018-28 Long Term Plan. Staff recommend that the Council approve the Annual Plan for 2019/20 and approve the process suggested to inform the public of the annual plan adoption and its content. The level of engagement considered appropriate for this matter, is to inform the community of the availability of the Annual Plan 2019/20. This communication would involve: • publishing, distributing and making these documents available • informing the public on the adoption of the annual plan • informing the public of other means where the they may still provide feedback on

Council matters e.g. customer services requests • preparing a summary of variations from the Long Term Plan for 2019/20 • informing the public on the proposed funding impacts for the year (what rates will look

like) • informing the public where additional information can be found (for example, the levels

of service for the year as noted in Long Term Plan).


7 Recommendation

The Council should make its decision on which option to choose based on that option being the most cost effective, and good quality option for the Hauraki District (s10 of the Local Government Act 2002). The Council is being asked to decide whether to adopt the proposed 2019/20 Annual Plan which will become effective on 1 July 2019. If agreed, following the adoption of the 2019/20 Annual Plan staff will organise the publishing of the documents and communication of the decisions as indicated above. Duncan Peddie Jolene Nelson Group Manager Corporate Services Strategic Planner


Appendix A: RATES RESOLUTION The Council is requested to adopt the rates resolution for the year commencing 1 July 2019 through to 30 June 2020, as follows:

RESOLVED THAT:

Rating

That pursuant to Section 23(1) the following rates be set under the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, on rating units in the district for the year 1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020, and that the Rates be set at the following values including GST at the prevailing rate.

Uniform Annual General Charge A uniform annual general charge (as per section 15) of $591.66 on each rating unit within the District.

General Rate A capital value general rate (as per section 13) set on a differential basis based on land use. The rates in cents per dollar of Capital Value being:

• Residential/Rural 0.09780

• Commercial/Industrial 0.14671

• Mineral Extraction 1.06314

• Mining 31.40480

Roading Rate A capital value targeted rate (as per section 16) set on a differential basis based on land use. The rates in cents per dollar of Capital Value being:

• Residential/Rural 0.07649

• Commercial/Industrial 0.08912

• Mineral Extraction 0.27536

• Mining 5.62012

Paeroa Ward Targeted Rate A rate (as per section 16) of $384.68 on each rating unit within the Paeroa Ward

Plains Ward Targeted Rate A rate (as per section 16) of $290.80 on each rating unit within the Plains Ward


Waihi Ward Targeted Rate A rate (as per section 16) of $340.92 on each rating unit within the Waihi Ward

Paeroa Ward Business Targeted Rate A rate (as per section 16) on each commercial/industrial separately used or inhabited part of a commercial/industrial rating unit in the Paeroa Ward set on a differential basis based on location. The annual charges being:

• Paeroa Urban $653.08

• Paeroa Rural $326.53

Plains Ward Business Targeted Rate A rate (as per section 16) on each commercial/industrial separately used or inhabited part of a commercial/industrial rating unit in the Plains Ward set on a differential basis based on location. The annual charges being:

• Plains Urban $673.38

• Plains Rural $377.19

Waihi Ward Business Targeted Rate A rate (as per section 16) on each commercial/industrial separately used or inhabited part of a commercial/industrial rating unit in the Waihi Ward set on a differential basis based on location. The annual charges being:

• Waihi Urban $559.08

• Waihi Rural $279.65

Paeroa Ward Business Capital Value Targeted Rate A capital value targeted rate (as per section 16) on each commercial/industrial rating unit in the Paeroa Ward set on a differential basis based on location. The rates in cents per dollar of Capital Value being:

• Paeroa Urban 0.06479

• Paeroa Rural 0.03240


Plains Ward Business Capital Value Targeted Rate A capital value targeted rate (as per section 16) on each commercial/industrial rating unit in the Plains Ward set on a differential basis based on location. The rates in cents per dollar of Capital Value being:

• Plains Urban 0.02087

• Plains Rural 0.01044

Waihi Ward Business Capital Value Targeted Rate A capital value targeted rate (as per section 16) on each commercial/industrial rating unit in the Waihi Ward set on a differential basis based on location. The rates in cents per dollar of Capital Value being:

• Waihi Urban 0.04686

• Waihi Rural 0.02342

Kaihere Hall Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Kaihere Hall Rating Area of 0.00437 cents per dollar of land value.

Patetonga Hall Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Patetonga Hall Rating Area of 0.00140 cents per dollar of land value.

Hikutaia Hall Targeted Rate A targeted rate (per section 16) of $23.00 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Hikutaia Hall Rating Area.

Kaiaua Hall Targeted Rate A targeted rate (per section 16) of $10.00 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Kaiaua Hall Rating Area.

Karangahake Hall Targeted Rate A targeted rate (per section 16) of $25.00 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Karangahake Hall Rating Area.

Kerepehi Hall Targeted Rate A targeted rate (per section 16) of $15.00 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Kerepehi Hall Rating Area.


Mangatangi Community Centre Targeted Rate A targeted rate (per section 16) of $23.00 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Mangatangi Community Centre Rating Area.

Netherton Hall Targeted Rate A targeted rate (per section 16) of $20.45 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Netherton Hall Rating Area.

Turua Hall Targeted Rate A targeted rate (per section 16) of $22.00 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Turua Hall Rating Area.

Waikino Hall Targeted Rate A targeted rate (per section 16) of $23.00 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Waikino Hall Rating Area.

Waitakaruru Hall Targeted Rate A targeted rate (per section 16) of $25.30 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Waitakaruru Hall Rating Area.

Eastern Plains Drainage District Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Eastern Plains Drainage District, as shown in document 1439194, excluding those Residential, Commercial & Industrial and Community land use rating units within the townships of Kerepehi and Turua of 0.04734 cents per dollar of land value.

Komata North Drainage Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Komata North Drainage District, as shown in document 1439195, of 0.08911 cents per dollar of land value.

Opukeko Drainage District Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Opukeko Drainage District, as shown in document 1439199, of 0.12428 cents per dollar of land value.

Tirohia-Rotokohu Drainage District Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Tirohia-Rotokohu Drainage District, as shown in document 1439172, of 0.15953 cents per dollar of land value.


Taramaire Drainage District Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Taramaire Drainage District, as shown in document 2090793, of 0.12032 cents per dollar of land value.

Western Plains Drainage District Drainage Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Western Plains Drainage District, as shown in document 1439208, excluding those Residential, Commercial & Industrial and Community land use rating units within the town of Ngatea of 0.07200 cents per dollar of land value.

Western Plains Drainage District Flood Protection Class 1 Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on each rating unit within the Western Plains Drainage District Flood Protection Area 1, as shown in Document 1439208, of 0.09563 cents per dollar of land value

Western Plains Drainage District Flood Protection Class 2 Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on each rating unit within the Western Plains Drainage District Flood Protection Area 2, as shown in Document 1439208, of 0.02261 cents per dollar of land value.

Taramaire Flood Protection Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on each rating unit within the Taramaire Flood Protection Area, as shown in Document 2101799, of 0.09471 cents per dollar of land value

Kaiaua Flood Protection Targeted Rate A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on each rating unit within the Kaiaua Flood Protection Area, as shown in Document 916138, of 0.00459 cents per dollar of land value

Western Plains Drainage District Pumping Land Area Targeted Rate A land area targeted rate (per section 16) of $26.51 per hectare, on all land serviced by the Hopai West, Martinovich, Central, North and Rawerawe West pump stations.

Paeroa Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Paeroa Stormwater Rating Area, as shown in document 2584737, of 0.04160 cents per dollar of capital value.


Ngatea Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Ngatea Stormwater Rating Area, as shown in document 2584734, of 0.05350 cents per dollar of capital value.

Kerepehi Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Kerepehi Stormwater Rating Area, as shown in document 2584732, of 0.06453 cents per dollar of capital value.

Turua Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Turua Stormwater Rating Area, as shown in document 2584740, of 0.08843 cents per dollar of capital value.

Waihi Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Waihi Stormwater Rating Area, as shown in document 2584744, of 0.02501 cents per dollar of capital value.

Whiritoa Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Whiritoa Stormwater Rating Area, as shown in document 2584747, of 0.01438 cents per dollar of capital value.

Kaiaua Stormwater Targeted Rate A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Kaiaua and Whakatiwai Stormwater Rating Areas, as shown in documents 2584728 and 2584745, of 0.04657 cents per dollar of capital value.

Water Supply Annual Charge Targeted Rate An annual charge (per section 16) of $120.61 per connection will be charged on all rating units connected to a Council water supply. For the purposes of water supply, properties are ‘connected’ to a water supply when the means to connect has been installed, i.e. a water lead has been installed from the Council water main to the boundary.

Water Supply Volume Targeted Rate A rate according to a scale of charges per unit of water supplied (per section 19) will be charged on all rating units on a differential basis within the following categories based on location and the extent of provision of service.


The categories being: • Category One – all rating units connected to the Paeroa, Plains, and Waihi water

supplies.

• Category Two – all rating units connected to the Kaimanawa water supply.

• Category Three – rating units connected to a Council raw water main that receive completely untreated water.

The rates in cents per cubic metre of water supplied being:

• Category One:

Base Rate – Consumption up to 200 cubic metres 195.40c

Step One – Consumption between 200 and 400 cubic metres 164.02c

Step Two – Consumption over 400 cubic metres 148.34c

• Category Two - 153.16c

• Category Three 71.15c

Wastewater Unconnected Targeted Rate An annual charge (per section 16) of $321.19 on each rating unit not connected to the Kerepehi, Ngatea, Paeroa, Turua, Waitakaruru, Waihi or Whiritoa wastewater schemes but with a boundary within 30 metres of a wastewater main belonging to one of those schemes.

Wastewater Connected Targeted Rate An annual charge (per section 16) per toilet pan or urinal according to a scale of charges based on the number of pans or urinals on the rating unit. The annual charges per pan or urinal being:

• Up to & including 2 Pans $642.85







• Over 20 pans $238.05

Rating units used primarily as a residence for one household will be treated as having one pan (per Note 4 to Schedule 3 of the Act).


Refuse Collection Targeted Rate An annual charge (per section 16) per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit on a differential basis based location and the provision of service. The annual charges being:

• District Collected $33.43

• Whiritoa Collected $43.29

PENALTIES FOR LATE PAYMENTS AND DUE DATE OF PAYMENTS Payment dates and methods That the above rates are payable at the Council Offices at William Street, Paeroa, Orchard Rd, Ngatea and Rosemont Rd, Waihi between 8.00am and 4.30pm Monday to Friday. That payments may also be made by way of Direct Debits and Automatic Payments, and that Direct Credits in the form of telephone and internet banking services are accepted. Credit Card payments are also accepted with a fee being payable. That, excluding water supply targeted rates, the above rates are by way of four instalments, the dates of such instalments being:

Instalment Number

Due Date Penalty Added

One 28 August 2019 30 August 2019

Two 27 November 2019 29 November 2019

Three 26 February 2020 28 February 2020

Four 27 May 2020 29 May 2020

That, water supply targeted rates are by way of six instalments per year for all properties that have been identified as receiving more then 10,000kl over the last two billing periods in 2016/17. These properties are listed in document 2225325. Water supply targeted rates for all other properties are by way of two instalments per year. Instalment dates for the various water supply areas being staggered throughout the year. The instalment dates for water rates are as follows:


For rating units invoiced twice a year:

Instalment Number

Reading area Due date Penalty added

One 1 – Ngatea township - Paeroa township - Waihi township

26 August 2019 28 August 2019

One

2 – Turua & surrounds - Paeroa commercial - Waihi commercial - Waihi gold

30 September 2019

2 October 2019

One 3 – Waitakururu & Ngatea North – Waihi rural

28 October 2019 30 October 2019

One 4 – Kerepehi & Ngatea South – Ohinemuri & Kaimanawa

25 November 2019

27 November 2019

One 5 - Netherton 30 December

2019 3 January 2020

One 6 – Karangahake/Mackaytown - Waikino

27 January 2020 29 January 2020

Two 1 – Ngatea township - Paeroa township - Waihi township

24 February 2020

26 February 2020

Two 2 – Turua & surrounds - Paeroa commercial - Waihi commercial - Waihi gold

31 March 2020 2 April 2020

Two 3 – Waitakururu & Ngatea North – Waihi rural

28 April 2020 30 April 2020

Two 4 – Kerepehi & Ngatea South – Ohinemuri & Kaimanawa

26 May 2020 28 May 2020

Two 5 - Netherton 30 June 2020 2 July 2020

Two 6 – Karangahake/Mackaytown - Waikino

28 July 2020 30 July 2020

For rating units invoiced six times a year:

Instalment Number Due date Penalty added

One 20 August 2019

Two 20 October 2019 29 October 2019

Three 20 December 2019

Four 20 February 2020

Five 20 April 2020 29 April 2020

Six 20 June 2020


PENALTIES FOR LATE PAYMENT That Council delegates authority to the Revenue Team Leader and rating staff to apply penalties to outstanding rates: That pursuant to sections 57 and 58 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002, the following penalties be applied: For all rates (excluding water supply rates):

• A penalty of 10% will be added to the amount of any instalment remaining unpaid by the relevant due date above. The penalty will be added on the date stated in the ‘Penalty Added’ column in the tables above.

• A penalty of 10% will be added to all rates assessed in a previous year which remain unpaid on 2 September 2019. The penalty will be added on 2 September 2019.

• A further penalty of 10% will be added to all rates assessed in a previous year which remain unpaid on 2 March 2020. The penalty will be added on 2 March 2020.

For water supply rates: For rating units invoiced six times a year:

• A penalty of 5% will be added to all current and previous years’ rates outstanding on 27 October 2019. The penalty will be added on 29 October 2019

• A penalty of 5% will be added to all current and previous years’ rates outstanding on 27 April 2020. The penalty will be added on 29 April 2020

For rating units invoiced twice a year: • An additional charge of 5% will be added to all current and previous years’ rates that

remain outstanding on date showing in the “Due Date” column in the tables above for Instalment Number One. The penalty will be added on the date showing in the “Penalty Added’ column in the tables above for Instalment Number One.

• An additional charge of 5% will be added to all current and previous years’ rates that remain outstanding on date showing in the “Due Date” column in the tables above for Instalment Number Two. The penalty will be added on the date showing in the “Penalty Added’ column in the tables above for Instalment Number Two.


Document 1439194


Document 1439195


Document 1439199


Document 2090793


Document 1439172


Document 1439208


Document 2101799


of 32

Document 916138


of 32

Document 2584737


of 32

Document 2584734


of 32

Document 2584732


of 32

Document 2584740


of 32

Document 2584744


of 32

Document 2584747


of 32

Document 2584728


of 32

Document 2584745


of 32

Document 2225325 - Ratepayers to be billed bi-monthly for water Below is a list of ratepayers, by assessment number, who will be billed for water use bi-monthly, beginning 1 July 2017. This includes those who have used water in excess of 10,000kl over the last two billing periods in 2016 /17. To find your assessment number refer to an assessment notice you have received from HDC, or you can search your property in the Rating Information Database to obtain your assessment number.

Assessment No.

49 38698

230 231 251 256 257 296 304 309 337

38817 474 774 788 792 917

1005 1009 1080 1112

38727 1162 1606 1695 1762 1849 6409 7011 7030 7060 7723 7730 7743

28184 31841 32978 33465 33651 34126 34179 34773 35286 35625 35764

38266 38496 38646 38818 38649 38654 38655 38657 38663 38669 38677 38679 38688 38690 38708 38710 38712 38713 38724 38730 38735 38737 38740 38744 38749 38752 38753 38757 38758 38759 38765 38767 38770 38771 38774 38775 38778 38786 38789 38806 38809 38810 38819 38888 38982 39016



KatherineQ�

FreeText

APPENDIX B

Contents

The year ahead ................................................................................................................... A message from the Mayor

Some background ..............................................................................................................

Summary of changes for / .........................................................................................

The services we provide ......................................................................................................

Progress against our financial strategy .................................................................................

Governance and Leadership ................................................................................................ Democracy Iwi liaison Policy development

Land Transport .................................................................................................................

Water supply ....................................................................................................................

Wastewater .....................................................................................................................

Stormwater .....................................................................................................................

Land drainage ..................................................................................................................

Solid waste ......................................................................................................................

Community services.......................................................................................................... Community recreation Community facilities

Community development .................................................................................................. Community growth Community initiatives


Regulatory Services .......................................................................................................... Resource management implementation Building control Community protection Animal control

Capital project list..............................................................................................................

Financial statements......................................................................................................... Funding impact statement for July to June (whole of council) Prospective statement of financial position Prospective statement of changes in net assets/equity Prospective statement of comprehensive revenue and expense Prospective cash flow statement Reserve funds statement Notes supporting our financial statements

Funding impact statement: rating implications ...................................................................

Rating changes ‐ Summary of rating changes by type ........................................................... Examples of changes to rates

Doc Ref:


/ Annual Plan |

The year ahead A message from the Mayor They say a goal without a plan is just a wish. And they’re right. Which is why every three years we put together a Long Term Plan that sets out what we intend to do, and how much it will cost, for the next ten years. Then, to make sure we stay on track, we follow it up with an Annual Plan that takes into account any unexpected changes that might crop up along the way. This year’s Annual Plan is based on the ten-year plan we mapped out with you last year during our We Need to Talk road trip. It covers pretty much the same ground as the ten-year plan, and we can’t see any surprise road works or stray sheep on the road ahead, so we decided there was no need to head out and ask for more feedback from you before signing it off on May . So, let’s get down to business! This year, business as usual includes investing . million to upgrade the Kaimanawa drinking water supply near Hikutaia. This is the last of our rural supplies to be upgraded as part of an ambitious project to improve all of our rural drinking water supplies to meet national drinking water standards. All flowing well, Kaimanawa people will be throwing their boil water notices in the bin and happily clinking their drinking glasses together in time for Christmas. Other major projects include a major facelift for the Ngatea Library and Service Centre, which is being consulted on with the community at present; and some groundbreaking work with our Kaiaua Coast communities to develop a community led strategy around how we will respond to coastal hazard risks in the future. Construction of the Pūkorokoro Miranda to Kaiaua leg of the Hauraki Rail Trail is also due for completion by the end of this year, capping off a stunningly successful seven-year project. By all accounts the Hauraki Rail Trail has been a wild success both economically and in terms of the health and well-being of our communities, and I’ll certainly have a lump in my throat when the ribbon is cut at the opening of this final leg. � On the political front, this year is election year and following a review of the number of councillors in each ward, we’ve been allocated an extra seat around the council table. This means you’ll have the opportunity to vote for four councillors in the Paeroa Ward, four councillors in the Plains Ward and five councillors in the Waihi Ward, as well as a Mayor at large. Which leads me to my final note, which is that this Annual Plan will be my last. After years in Local Government and years as Mayor I won’t be standing for the top spot again this year. It’s time for someone else to wear the Mayoral chains. I’ll miss it of course, but I know I’m leaving it in good heart. This year council received an A-rating from the Independent Assessment Board that oversees Local Government Excellence Programme CouncilMARK and you only need to take a quick drive around to see the place is humming. The biggest thrill of all my time in local government has been the growth and development I’ve witnessed here over the last few years. So, thank you for all your support. It’s been an absolute privilege to have had the opportunity to serve the communities I care so deeply about, and I look forward to putting my feet up and watching the district continue to thrive well into the future. John Tregidga Mayor – Hauraki District, MPZM, JP


| / Annual Plan

Some background - Hauraki Long Term Plan

Every three years all councils must prepare a detailed plan setting out their direction for the next years – a Long Term Plan. The - Long Term Plan (LTP) sets out Council’s current priorities, what is intended to be completed over the next ten years (where money will be spent), and how the work will be funded. The next LTP preparations will begin this coming year in preparation for the - LTP. When developing the - LTP document, Council spoke to individuals and community groups at various times through a significant campaign titled ‘’We need to talk”. The campaign described the main issues Council and the community were facing at the time, and asked for public views on key issues such as: • how well should Council maintain roads • what the local prioritisation of projects is and • discussed the changes to the way council funds some services to keep rates affordable. Written feedback was received by individual or organisations and even more shared through face to face conversations. Over points were raised and based on the feedback the following decisions were made: • the investment in roading will be increased to get the road maintenance programme back on track. • Council will further investigate an upgrade to the library services provided in Ngatea. • a partial upgrade of Ngatea main street will take place, following further consultation with the community on

what it would look like. • a streetscape development will be completed in Wharf Street, Paeroa. • Council will shift about % of the general rate funding from uniform annual charges to capital value based rates. • Council will only mow berms in Waihi in streets wider than metres, and berms adjacent to council land and

reserves. • Council will reduce the amount of funding provided to town promotional organisations by %.

Why prepare an annual plan Things change from year to year so an annual plan is prepared in the interim years that an LTP isn’t, to update the Council work programme and expected financial costs and income. The annual plan explains changes made to the work programmes that were outlined in the second year of the LTP – the / year. Being that Council are not proposing to make any major changes to the work programme1, and Council undertook an extensive community consultation in , Council has chosen to adopt this document as the plan for / on the

th May .

What you’ll find in this document • Progress against Councils financial strategy – how this plan stacks up. • How much it costs Council to provide each service group. • The specific changes to each activity including operating expenditure, capital programmes and income. • Our forecast financial statements including sample rates properties. • A full capital schedule of work to be carried out this year ( / ).

1 Section of the Local Government Act, , does not require consultation to be undertaken on the annual plan if there are no significant or material differences proposed to the relevant year of the Long Term Plan.


/ Annual Plan |

Summary of changes for / Councils plans for / are still largely on track with no major changes envisaged to what was originally published for this year in the LTP. The changes made are described in this plan under the headings ‘What’s changed since the Long Term Plan?’ within each Group of Activities2. The changes made include: • continuing to look for efficiencies and making savings to operating costs where possible • unforeseen increases to operating costs • increases and decreases to fee income received • projects that need to be carried over to / as they are incomplete • projects that need to be brought forward to / from future years due to demand. • Anything else? Council values your feedback on the Council’s services at any time. If you have any queries on this annual plan or on any Council-related problems you would like to see addressed, such as a pothole on your road, please get in touch with Councils customer service advisors at each service centre in Waihi, Paeroa and Ngatea who are available to take your queries from : am- : pm on weekdays. Alternatively you can send your query or feedback to [email protected].

Our fees and charges The full fees and charges schedule is available as a separate document on our website, or from any service centre. These fees and charges are updated as changes come into effect so are continually up dated.

Our easy reference stamp As mentioned above, a lot more information on Councils plans can be found in the LTP and that this annual plan is a supportive document to the LTP for the coming year. This handy stamp placed throughout this annual plan will let you know where you can find out more in the LTP which is available at each Council service centre, or you can download an electronic copy from www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz.

2 Changes over , have been described in detail. Changes less than , have been included in the financial figures only, not in the commentary.

Page # Our Long Term Plan


| / Annual Plan

The services we provide Council provides the residents and ratepayers of the Hauraki District community with a wide range of services – some essential and some nice to have. Some services are provided as it is a requirement to do so by law. The services you can expect us to provide are:

Governance and

Leadership Democracy

Policy development

Iwi Liaison

Land Transport

Water supply Wastewater Stormwater Land drainage Solid waste

Community services

Community recreation

Community facilities

Community development

Community growth

Community initiatives

Regulatory Resource

management implementation

Building control

Community protection

Animal control

For more detail on each activity that we provide, please refer to the - LTP document.


/ Annual Plan |

Progress against our financial strategy Our financial strategy presented in our LTP consists of carefully reducing debt levels, minimising and smoothing rates increases and ensuring our business is well-managed. We have three caps set out in our financial strategy, one which limits the amount of debt we hold, and two that limit the rates we set. If we go over our limits (or caps), we need to provide good reason as to why it happened. There are also a number of other benchmarks that we use to measure our performance.

Annual plan disclosure statement for the year ending June

What is the purpose of this statement? The purpose of this statement is to disclose the Council's planned financial performance in relation to various benchmarks to enable the assessment of whether the Council is prudently managing its revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities, and general financial dealings. The Council is required to include this statement in its annual plan in accordance with the Local Government (Financial Reporting and Prudence) Regulations (the regulations). Refer to the regulations for more information, including definitions of some of the terms used in this statement.

Benchmark Limit Planned Met

Rates affordability benchmark

Non‐water rates

. Non-water rates increases . % . % Yes

. Non‐water rates cap total . m . m Yes

Water rates

Water rates increases . % . %% Yes

. Water rates cap total . m . m Yes

Debt affordability benchmark

a. External debt per rating unit (assessment) , , Yes

b. Interest to total revenue % . % Yes

c. Interest to rates revenue % . % Yes

d. Debt to total revenue % % Yes

Balanced budget benchmark

Revenue to operating expenditure 100% % No

Essential services benchmark

Capital expenditure to depreciation 100% % Yes

Debt Servicing benchmark

Interest to revenue % . % Yes

Page b‐ Our Long Term Plan


| / Annual Plan

Rates affordability benchmark For this benchmark the Council's quantified limits on rates as stated in the financial strategy included in the Council's long-term plan are quantified limits on rates increases, not rates income. The Council has not therefore reported on planned rates income. Council has two quantified limits for rates increases for both its water and non-water rates: Non-water rates

• the Council's planned non-water rates increase for the year is compared with forecast LGCI plus . % on non-water rates increases for the year contained in the financial strategy included in the Council's long-term plan; and

• A rates cap of % on top of the forecasted rates requirement set out in the - LTP for the year covered by the Annual Plan.

Water Rates . the Council's planned water rates increase for the year is compared with forecast LGCI plus . % on water

rates increases for the year contained in the financial strategy included in the Council's long term plan; and . A rates cap of % on top of the forecasted rates requirement set out in the - LTP for the year

covered by the Annual Plan. The Council meets the rates affordability benchmark if its planned rates increases for the year equal or are less than each quantified limit on rates increases.

Debt affordability benchmark For this benchmark, the Council's planned borrowing is compared with four quantified limits on borrowing: • external public debt per assessment is equal to or less than , , • net interest expense is equal to or less than % of total revenue, • net interest expense is equal to or less than % of rates revenue, • debt is equal to or less than % of total revenue. The Council meets the debt affordability benchmark if its planned borrowing is within each quantified limit on borrowing.

Balanced budget benchmark For this benchmark, the Council's planned revenue (excluding development contributions, vested assets, financial contributions, gains on derivative financial instruments, and revaluations of property, plant, or equipment) is presented as a proportion of its planned operating expenses (excluding losses on derivative financial instruments and revaluations of property, plant, or equipment. The Council meets the balanced budget benchmark if its revenue equals or is greater than its operating expenses. The Council has a policy of smoothing rates increases and also of smoothing the funding of “lumpy” expenditure over several years (e.g. election costs fall every three years, but are funded evenly). This can cause surpluses or deficits in individual years. The Council is forecasting that the Balanced Budget Benchmark will not be met in / (as was forecast for the / year in the - Long Term Plan). However, this is offset by small surpluses in each of the other years in the - Long Term Plan.

Essential services benchmark For this benchmark, the Council's planned capital expenditure on network services is presented as a proportion of expected depreciation on network services. The Council meets the essential services benchmark if its planned capital expenditure on network services equals or is greater than expected depreciation on network services.


/ Annual Plan |

Debt servicing benchmark For this benchmark, the Council's planned borrowing costs are presented as a proportion of planned revenue (excluding development contributions, financial contributions, vested assets, gains on derivative financial instruments, and revaluations of property, plant, or equipment).

Because Statistics New Zealand projects the Council's population will grow more slowly than the national population growth rate, it meets the debt servicing benchmark if its planned borrowing costs equal or are less than % of its planned revenue.


| / Annual Plan

Governance and Leadership The governance and leadership group includes the local democratic system which represents the residents of the Hauraki district, relationships with Māori, and the development of policies – including those required by law and other voluntary local policies. This includes: • council and committee meetings • council elections • the setting of strategic direction to contribute to meeting the Hauraki district’s needs • engaging with local communities and specifically with Iwi on all significant issues • determining local policy and legislation in the best interests of the Hauraki community • determining policies, strategies and plans and service delivery approaches • administering various statutes and regulations • ensuring the integrity of management control systems • safeguarding public interest • reporting on progress to ratepayers and residents.

Cost of operating governance and leadership

/ / /

Annual

planLong‐term

plan Annual

plan EXPENDITURE

Democracy , , , Iwi Liaison Policy Development , , , ,

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income External Subsidies Targeted Rates General Rates , , ,

, , , OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) ( ) ( ) ( )



/ Annual Plan |

Democracy Local government in New Zealand receives its mandate from the government through legislation. Local democratic representation is currently considered to be the most appropriate way for local communities’ voices to be heard. The majority of democracy services are set in law; the Local Government Act and the Local Electoral Act determine the processes that ensure each community is fairly represented.

What’s changed since the Long Term Plan? Key

Decrease in income or expenditure Deferred from current or previous years

Increase in income or expenditure Brought forward from future years

= No overall change

Changes Change from LTP to /

AP Type

Councillor remuneration has been increased to meet what the Local Government Members Determination as set by the national Remuneration Authority released.

, Expenditure

Iwi liaison The iwi liaison function is provided to facilitate input from Māori and iwi into democratic and community decision making processes. Council recognises Māori and iwi as an important group within the community and also has some responsibilities clarified in law regarding relationships with Māori and iwi. This includes providing opportunities for Māori to be involved in decision making processes. Council acknowledge the cultural and spiritual relationships that Māori and iwi have with ancestral lands and taonga.

What’s changed since the Long Term Plan? As budgeted for in the Long Term Plan an Iwi Liaison Officer has been recruited to help improve this space for Council in the coming years.




| / Annual Plan

Policy development The policy development function involves establishing Councils strategic direction via policy, strategy, bylaw and planning. Whilst many of Councils policies are developed to address local issues or to achieve desired outcomes, Council also have a responsibility by law to develop and review some policies, strategies and plans (and to report on these) under legislation.




= No overall change

Changes Change from

LTP to / AP Type

To prepare for the development of the Kaiaua Community Plan, additional , is required for / and , for / . There has also been a reallocation of , between the Strategic Planning budget and the Resource Management budget to assist with this Community Plan development in / . The total project cost is

, which will be funded over five years.

, Expenditure

To include for a possible Plan Change to the District Plan for Paeroa. , Expenditure



/ Annual Plan |

Land Transport The land transport activity is one of Councils biggest spend areas and is where the local transport network connects to the national state highways network. Council maintains a range of assets including kilometres of roads ( kilometres sealed and kilometres unsealed), kilometres of footpaths, bridges, street lights and signs and stock underpasses. The New Zealand Transport Agency provides subsidies for a lot of Councils road works. Council promotes road safety and having an increasing focus on improving how our residents with more limited transport options can get around, including children, the elderly and the mobility impaired. Council also has a small role in supporting public transport.

Cost of Land Transport / / /

Annual

planLong‐term

planAnnual

plan EXPENDITURE

Pavement Maintenance , , , Amenity Maintenance Professional Services Other Subsidised , , , Administration Non-Subsidised Works Public Transport Depreciation/Assets written off , , , Interest , , ,

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income External Subsidies , , , Targeted Rates , , , General Rates

, , , OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)

Page c‐ Our Long Term Plan


| / Annual Plan

What’s changed since the Long Term Plan?

Key



= No overall change

Changes Change from LTP

to / AP Type

Operating

Reallocation of , for a request system from the Traffic Management Plan budget to the Professional Service budget.

= No overall change

Expenditure

Historical overspend in the streetlighting budget has indicated a need to provide a greater budget to meet contractual commitments and electricity supply costs.

, Expenditure

Introduction of a Traffic Management Controller to help to achieve regulatory compliance. , Expenditure

Costs involved with the data collection contract have increased for / , however are expected to reduce in / so a redistribution

across the two years is included. , Expenditure

Increase of , in subsidised budgets, however is dependent on other subsidised budget increases being approved. , Expenditure

Capital

, has been rolled over from / as the items were not expected to be completed by the end of the financial year. These include minor improvements to meet levels of service ( , ), access and mobility ( , ), minor improvements for renewals ( , ), sealed road resurfacing ( , ) and drainage renewals ( , ).

, Expenditure

The extension of Bradford Street ( , ) and the Belcher right of way ( , ) both in Waihi has been added to the work programme. This is partially offset by a reduction of , in the overall budget.

, Expenditure


/ Annual Plan |

Water supply Council provides water to urban and smaller communities as well as rural areas in the Hauraki district. Water is treated before it’s used to ensure it’s safe to drink. Bulk raw water and treated water are also stored so Council is able to provide a continuous service. Nearly

% of Council provided water is used for agriculture (but not irrigation). Council has been investing a lot in improving the quality of water so it meets drinking water standards as well as been increasing storage. This work is due to be completed this coming year with Kaimanawa being the final supply to be upgraded.

Cost of water supply / / /

Annual

plan Long‐term

plan Annual

plan EXPENDITURE

Treatment , , , Reticulation Intakes and Headworks Fixed Costs Overheads Pump stations Major Maintenance Other Depreciation/Assets written off , , , Interest , , , ,

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income External Subsidies Targeted Rates , , , General Rates


Page d‐ Our Long Term Plan


| / Annual Plan

What’s changed since the Long Term Plan?

Key



= No overall change

Changes Change from

LTP to / AP Type

Operating

Changes in costs associated with headworks. There have been some increases for additional connections to supplies with greater pumping required. This has been partly offset by reductions around the capping of bores/plants.

, Expenditure

Major maintenance costs have reduced to reflect more accurately actual costs.

, Expenditure

Unexpected weather events contingency costs. , Expenditure

Increase in the energy costs for new pump stations. , Expenditure

Increase in larger than anticipated reactive repair costs for water reticulation and for the monitoring required with the population increases to meet the drinking water standards.

, Expenditure

Additional treatment costs to meet DHB requirements and for additional chemicals. This is partially offset by a reduction in some areas where decommissioning has taken place.

, Expenditure

Capital

Delay in part of the District water demand management programme as the full task was not expected to be completed in / . , Expenditure

Plains Zone metering. , Expenditure

Additional funds have been budgeted for Waihi zone metering to help isolate and address unidentified water loss. , Expenditure

District upgrading & replacing of SCADA equipment to improve the communication between transmitting equipment. , Expenditure

District wide water meter renewals has been held off to align with new technology. , Expenditure

Part of the budget for the district wide pipe renewal programmes (service continuity) has been carried forward as the entire project was unexpected to be completed in / .

, Expenditure

Some Kerepehi Membrane asset parts are nearing the end of their expected life and it is envisaged some renewals will be required earlier than were originally expected (originally expected in / ).

, Expenditure


/ Annual Plan |

Changes Change from

LTP to / AP Type

Kerepehi Tanner Pond desludging is required to be completed sooner than expected as capacity is near premium. , Expenditure

District wide bulk water takes points was not essential in / so was delayed. , Expenditure

Changes Change from

LTP to / AP Type

Capital

Plains reticulation booster and transfer pumps was not essential in / so was delayed. , Expenditure

The connection of the Kaimanawa water supply with Paeroa has begun in / . The total project cost over / and / is , , which

includes , , in / .

, , , ,

Expenditure

Additional health and safety upgrades required. , Expenditure

The Plains Pipiroa Rd pump station works have been deferred. Other already completed work has mitigated the issue and therefore the work is not expected to be required in the short term, so has been delayed until

/ where a reassessment will take place as to if it is required.

, Expenditure

A new item for the Kerepehi water treatment plant working platform has been allowed for to help improve accessibility and safety on site. , Expenditure


| / Annual Plan

Wastewater We collect the wastewater from homes and businesses – their toilets, sinks, showers, washing machines and so on and transport it via pipes and pumps to treatment plants. At our treatment plants the wastewater is treated to clean it up before releasing it – mostly to waterways. We also make sure that trade wastes are appropriately disposed of. We do this to keep our communities healthy and free from disease and protect our environment – especially our waterways from pollution. Just over , properties are connected to our wastewater systems.

Cost of wastewater / / /

Annual

plan Long‐term

plan Annual

plan EXPENDITURE

Treatment Reticulation Intakes and Headworks Fixed Costs Overheads Pump stations Major Maintenance Other Depreciation/Assets written off Interest , , ,

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income External Subsidies Targeted Rates , , , General Rates


Page e‐ Our Long Term Plan


/ Annual Plan |




= No overall change

Changes Change from

LTP to / AP Type

Operating

Varied increases/decreases within the wastewater pump stations budget have meant an overall reduction. , Expenditure

The increase for wastewater reticulation costs is predominantly required for the jetting of the network. , Expenditure

A large increase in some chemicals required and an increase in repairs/servicing is offset by expected reduced spend in other areas of wastewater treatment.

, Expenditure

Capital

Optimisation of the Ngatea Pump network , Expenditure

District Wide SCADA upgrade to connect the major pump stations to the SCADA warning system. , Expenditure

Pipe renewals in Waihi have been deferred. The total project for / is , as , was previously allocated for / .

, Expenditure

Pipe renewals in Paeroa have been deferred. The total project for / is , , as , was previously allocated for / . , , Expenditure

District wide pond desludging, as part of the long term programme of sludge removal. , Expenditure

District wide replacement of pump station cabinets has been deferred from / .

, Expenditure

Paeroa waveband renewals has been deferred from / . , Expenditure

Whiritoa Irrigation block renewals was originally planned for in / but delayed. The trees are at the end of their life and are required to be harvested and replanted.

, Expenditure

Kerepehi Resource Consents.

, ,

Expenditure

Paeroa Resource Consents. , Expenditure

The replacement screen for Paeroa has been deferred from / . , Expenditure

Additional health and safety upgrades required , Expenditure


| / Annual Plan

Changes Change from

LTP to / AP Type

The Dissolved Airflow Flotation (DAF) sludge process in Waihi has been deferred from / . , Expenditure

The Paeroa chemical phosphorus removal drum filter at the Wastewater Treatment Plant has been deferred from / as it is not expected to be required in / .

, Expenditure

The renewal of the Waihi East manholes as part of the district wide renewals is continuing to help reduce leaks and overflows , Expenditure

Performance Measures Council has identified an error in the performance measures of the Long Term Plan. The following performance measure regarding dry weather overflows is a duplicate to a mandatory measure already included in the Wastewater activity and therefore has been removed from the Annual Plan / and subsequent reporting documents.

Level of service Performance measure Baseline Target You can expect: the risk of environmental and public health impacts to be mitigated.

The frequency of dry weather overflows from the wastewater network will be minimized.

/ : . overflows per km of wastewater pipe length per year

< per km of wastewater pipe length per year.


/ Annual Plan |

Stormwater Stormwater is rainwater runoff that usually results from heavy or prolonged periods of rain. Runoff flows from surfaces on urban properties, footpaths and roads. Council uses a series of drainage systems to remove rainwater runoff from urban areas in Waihi, Waikino, Karangahake, Mackaytown, Paeroa, Ngatea, Kerepehi, Turua, Kaiaua and Whiritoa. Redirecting stormwater so it doesn’t pool and flood is important in protecting our residents’ properties. Council collects stormwater through natural watercourses and built structures like drains and pipes and has around

km of stormwater pipes and km of open drains. As the network is limited in how much stormwater can be collected and disposed of, Council is increasingly requiring new developments to provide onsite options like ground soakage. Some of the stormwater Council disposes of is treated first.

Cost of operating stormwater / / /

Annual

plan Long‐term

plan Annual

plan EXPENDITURE

Vegetation Control Reticulation Maintenance/Fencing/Culverts Mechanical Cleaning Floodgates Pumps Overheads Other Depreciation/Assets written off Interest ( ) ( ) ( )

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income External Subsidies Targeted Rates General Rates

, , OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT)

Page f‐ Our Long Term Plan


| / Annual Plan




= No overall change


to / AP Type

Operating

An overall reduction in vegetation control across the activity. , Expenditure

Capital

Paeroa stormwater condition assessments are required to obtain a greater understanding of the networks. , Expenditure

Waihi stormwater condition assessments are required to obtain a greater understanding of the network. , Expenditure

Council is looking at reducing the incidences of flood events in the Kaiaua area by increasing the capacity of the river. This is expected to cost , however will not progress until further consultation has taken place with the community.

= no change for /


/ Annual Plan |

Land drainage A large area of the Hauraki Plains lies at or below the Firth of Thames’ high tide levels. The rest of the area is only slightly higher. Protection against high water tables, extreme weather events, high tides and river floods is essential for land productivity. Council works with the Waikato Regional Council to provide land drainage and flood protection for the Plains. The Regional Council provides stopbanks, flood gates and pump stations across the Plains - except the north western part from Waitakaruru to Pūkorokoro / Miranda which Council manages - to provide protection from river and tidal flooding. Council provides additional land drainage support by collecting water runoff from rural areas and redirecting it to the flood protection schemes through, for example, pumping water from one drain to another larger one. Drainage schemes are designed to ensure that water from a in -year probability rainfall event does not lie on the ground for more than three days in order to protect pasture. Council has kilometres of land drains and kilometres of stopbanks.

Cost of land drainage / / /

Annual

plan Long‐term

plan Annual

plan EXPENDITURE

Vegetation Control Maintenance/Fencing/Culverts Mechanical Cleaning Floodgates Pumps Overheads Other Depreciation/Assets written off Interest ( ) ( ) ( ) , , ,

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income External Subsidies Targeted Rates , General Rates


Page g‐ Our Long Term Plan


| / Annual Plan




= No overall change


to / AP Type

Operating

An increase in mechanical cleaning costs has been incorporated to ensure an appropriate amount of drains are cleaned annually. , Expenditure

Capital

A , increase allowing for the Council’s contribution to the Waikato Regional Council’s Muggeridge’s pump project. This contribution is % of the capital cost of the project. The total cost for the project for / is

, combined with , previously allocated for / .

, ,

Expenditure

Internal drainage structures for the Pouarua Maukoro drain in the Western Plains has been carried over from / while the Regional Council’s work is completed.

, Expenditure

Proposal for a council managed drainage district centred around the Pūkorokoro and Miranda streams. The budget has been included, however targeted consultation will take place outside of the Annual Plan before further progress is made.

, Expenditure


/ Annual Plan |

Solid waste Our solid waste services consist of the minimisation, collection, and disposal of solid waste. These services involve kerbside collection of refuse and recyclables and the management of two refuse transfer stations located in Paeroa and Waihi. We aim to meet all legislative requirements relating to solid waste, and aim to reduce the environmental impact of waste.

Cost of solid waste / / /

Annual

plan Long‐term

plan Annual

plan EXPENDITURE

Refuse Collection Closed Tip Sites Transfer Stations Other Interest

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income External Subsidies Targeted Rates General Rates

OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) ( ) ( ) ( )




= No overall change


to / AP Type

Paeroa Refuse Transfer Station upgrade , Expenditure

Waihi Refuse Transfer Station upgrade , Expenditure

Page h‐ Our Long Term Plan


| / Annual Plan

Community services The community services group involves the provision of recreation services such as district swimming pools, Waihi Event Centre, libraries, parks, recreation reserves, sports fields, the Sport Waikato district sports coordinator and facilities like memorial halls, public toilets, cemeteries, elderly persons housing. We provide a number of services intended to enhance our communities’ needs for recreation and enjoyment. We provide these services to meet our district’s recreational, sporting and educational expectations. In addition to this we provide facilities for public use, such as public toilets, halls, cemeteries and housing for the elderly. We do this to help make our communities a vibrant place to live and visit.

Cost of operating community services

/ / /

Annual

plan Long‐term

plan Annual

plan EXPENDITURE

Recreation , , , Community Facilities , , , , , ,

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income External Subsidies Targeted Rates , , , General Rates , , ,


Page i‐ Our Long Term Plan


/ Annual Plan |

Community recreation Our community recreation services include: • providing public libraries in Ngatea, Paeroa and Waihi which lend a variety of resources,

deliver education programmes and free internet access through our libraries, • support of community-operated libraries at Kaiaua, Turua and Whiritoa, • operating three community pools in Ngatea, Paeroa and Waihi, • providing sports fields in Paeroa, Ngatea, Waihi and Whiritoa, • maintaining a number of recreation reserves, including playgrounds, furniture, walkways

and other amenities, • two jetties/boat ramps on the Waihou River available for community use, • providing a Waihi event centre facility for indoor sporting and some non-recreational use, • provision of sports co-ordination services to foster residents’ participation in sports, recreation and leisure.




= No overall change

Changes Change from

LTP to / AP Type

Operating

Increase in expenditure for the Waihi Event Centre to meet costs of the cleaning contract.

, Expenditure

Library software development costs have increased over recent years and there is a need to meet these costs. , Expenditure

Reallocation of the mowing costs at Waitakaruru Domain to the minor reserves budget for the Plains.

= , Expenditure

Increased gardening following the Ngatea Main St and Paeroa Wharf St upgrades. , Expenditure

A reduction in the vegetation control predominantly at the Dell Reserve, in Paeroa, pre-empting future changes proposed for the reserve as proposed by NZ Transport Agency.

, Expenditure

An improvement to the playing field standard of the number one field at the Paeroa Domain. , Expenditure

An expected reduction in energy costs for district swimming pools across the District , Expenditure



| / Annual Plan

Changes Change from

LTP to / AP Type

Capital

% deferral of the costs associated with the Karangahake Reserve development due to the complete project not being able to completed in

/ . , Expenditure

The sealing of the metal road between the Plains College and Ngatea Sparky shop has been delayed from / until required.

, Expenditure

Ngatea Main Street renewal. This / component of this project has been deferred to / . The total cost of the project for / is

, , .

, ,

Expenditure

The Wharf Street Jetty Project in Paeroa was unable to be completed in / so delayed. , Expenditure

Paeora Primrose Hill project – this is a combination and reallocation of two aspects of the Primrose Hill project including tying in the carpark extension and the cenotaph area into one project cost and has been deferred to /

, Expenditure

Deferral of the purchase of pool toys for district swimming pools. , Expenditure

The Paeroa Domain playground refurbishment has been deferred to / .

, Expenditure

The Pioneer Park playground refurbishment in Ngatea has been brought forward and is expected to be completed in / .

, Expenditure


/ Annual Plan |

Community facilities Our community facilities services provide a range of facilities to meet public health, social and cultural, pensioner housing and amenity needs. Council owns pensioner housing units across Waihi, Paeroa and Ngatea. Council provides memorial halls (Paeroa, Ngatea and Waihi) and rural community halls some of which are owned and managed by hall committees or incorporated societies (those being Kaihere, Karangahake, Mangatarata, Netherton, Kaiaua, Kopuarahi, Patetonga, Turua, Waikino and Waitakaruru halls). Council also owns or manages public toilets over the district, cemetery sites, and ashes and memorial wall site. Our community facilities also include numerous small reserves provided for a range of purposes including protecting vegetation, landforms, historic/archaeological sites and buildings or they have a specific purpose that excludes recreational use (e.g. drainage, plantation and segregation).




= No overall change


to / AP Type

Operating

An increase in mowing and vegetation control at Pukerimu Cemetery in Paeroa. , Expenditure

Changes in cleaning costs and cleaning materials has resulted in an overall reduction of approximately , in the three halls in Ngatea, Paeroa and Waihi.

, Expenditure

Pensioner Housing rental charges are to increase from st July . , Income - self

funding activity

Capital

Pukerimu Cemetery Major Development was unable to be completed in / so has been delayed.

, Expenditure

To replace deteriorating plastic chairs in the Waihi Memorial Hall , Expenditure

To finalise the programme of the replacement of the Waihi Event Centre lighting with LED lights a budget increase has been included. This will help to reduce energy costs long term.

, Expenditure

Replace lights in Council’s Hauraki House with LEDs to reduce the lighting costs longer term

, Expenditure



| / Annual Plan


to / AP Type

New toilets in Hauraki House as part of the refurbishment of the office , Expenditure

Re-carpeting Hauraki House Council Chambers , kitchen and Hauraki Room as part of the wider refurbishment , Expenditure

The reroofing of the Paeroa Skate Leisure Centre is now no longer required as is expected to be completed in / for less than originally estimated.

, Expenditure

Extension of Paeroa Dog Pound due to limitation with capacity and the need to replace old cages. , Expenditure

Security fencing to enable Council cars to be housed at Hauraki House. , Expenditure

The additional two Waihi Cemetery berms have been delayed from / . , Expenditure

The Wharf Street upgrade in Paeroa was unable to be completed in / so delayed. , Expenditure

Repair of the Waihi Chambers Restaurant windows. , Expenditure

The windows at the Waihi Art Centre are to be replaced. , was allocated in / , however , has also been carried over from

/ . , Expenditure

Property maintenance renewals at the Paeroa Croquet Clubrooms carried over from / . , Expenditure

Ngatea Service Centre upgrade – deferral of allocated funds to / until decision has been made over the Ngatea hub with the community. , Expenditure

The roof of the Waihi Museum was to be replaced. This budget has been deferred to / . , Expenditure


/ Annual Plan |

Community development We work with communities and agencies to promote a better quality of life. We have a strong focus on ‘helping our communities to help themselves’ and an emphasis on community initiatives and community growth through economic development programmes. We aim to achieve balanced and sustained growth in our district.

Cost of operating community development

/ / /

Annual

plan Long‐term

plan Annual

plan EXPENDITURE

Community Growth Community Initiatives , , , , , ,

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income External Subsidies Targeted Rates General Rates , , ,

, , , OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) ( ) ( )

Page j‐ Our Long Term Plan


| / Annual Plan

Community growth The community growth activity involves: • progressing economic development strategically across the District including strategic

initiatives, plans or actions • maximising opportunities for new industry, commercial development and existing

businesses • supporting visitor information services and tourism promotion • supporting township promotion




= No overall change


to / AP Type

A reduction has been made of , towards miscellaneous economic development projects. , Expenditure

There has been an increase of funding for Go Waihi to align with the funding Positive Paeroa receives. , Expenditure

Council has reduced the amount it expects to pay to match external funding sources of township co-ordinators. Council funds , for each coordinator and it matches up to , of external funding received by each coordinator. Council will still match up to

, of external funding per Township Coordinator group, however Council’s best estimate of the amount it will be required to match is , per Township Coordinator.

, Expenditure



/ Annual Plan |

Community initiatives Council undertakes a number of projects to help ensure that we have a positive climate that encourages social and cultural wellbeing throughout our District. We support a number of agencies with grants and funding. We also help to coordinate community events such as the ANZAC parades and citizen awards to recognise valuable members of our communities. We also deliver other initiatives and work with a number of external agencies. These initiatives include: • working towards a social strategy for the Hauraki District, including opportunities for youth and positive ageing • participating in Better Futures Hauraki • administering the Creative NZ Creative Community Scheme.




= No overall change


to / AP Type

An additional amount for maintenance costs of the Hauraki Rail Trail for the Miranda to Kaiaua cycleway

, Expenditure

There has been a reduction in the expected spend on conservation initiatives. , Expenditure



| / Annual Plan

Regulatory Services We’re involved in a number of regulatory services from preparing regulations to promoting compliance. Our focus areas include supporting: • appropriate land use management • safe building development (including building consent) • community health and safety (including food and alcohol safety, civil defence, animal

control) • animal welfare. We aim to ensure our processes promote safely constructed buildings so people can have confidence that buildings within our district are safe to use. Our animal control and community protection services ensure a safe environment for the public and ensures we are prepared for natural hazards. Some of our regulatory services are provided so that we continue to meet our legal responsibilities to ensure the protection of the environment and the community.

Cost of regulatory services

/ / /

Annual

plan Long‐term

plan Annual

plan EXPENDITURE

RMA Implementation , , , Building Services , , , Community Protection Animal Control , , ,

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income , , , External Subsidies Targeted Rates General Rates , , ,


Page k‐ Our Long Term Plan


/ Annual Plan |

Resource management implementation The resource management implementation service includes processing applications that are subject to District Plan or other regulatory legislative requirements. That includes applications for subdivision consent, land use consent, certificates of compliance, outline plans, notices of requirement, and other planning approvals or information. We also monitor that customers are adhering to consent conditions, as well as provides technical advice on mining matters.

What’s changed since the Long Term Plan? We haven’t changed our investment in this activity for / to what was programmed in the Long Term Plan.



| / Annual Plan

Building control We implement building regulations to ensure our buildings are safe for use. This includes assessing building consent applications and monitoring compliance.

What’s changed since the Long Term Plan? We haven’t changed our investment in this activity for / to what was programmed in the Long Term Plan.



/ Annual Plan |

Community protection Council provides services to protect our communities from health and safety issues including preparing for and responding to and recovering from civil defence emergencies. Additionally, we ensure adequate liquor licensing controls are in place, control the density of gambling venues and legal high retailers, and ensure the safety of public places (including eating areas and public pools). We support this role with our monitoring and enforcement functions in a number of areas which include notifiable disease investigations under the Health Act ; implementing our policy on the number of gaming machines allowed for in the District, and regulation, monitoring and host responsibility education through our local alcohol policy, District Licensing Committee, and Local Approved Products (Legal Highs) Policy. Council also provides noise control services to ensure that our communities are free from nuisance noise.




= No overall change


to / AP Type

A change in legislation has meant some food premises are required to be inspected less frequently therefore income has subsequently decreased.

, Income

Liquor licensing income has decreased as a result of less applications , Income

There has been a reduction in the expected spend on abandoned mine workings.

, Expenditure

The Thames Valley Emergency Operating Area is to be disestablished as of July and Council is working with the Waikato Group Emergency Management Office to establish a Civil Defence Emergency Management professional role within Council

= no change



| / Annual Plan

Animal control We play a role in protecting public safety from nuisance animal behaviours as well as promoting animal control.

What’s changed since the Long Term Plan? We haven’t changed our investment in this activity.



/ Annual Plan |

Capital project list

Capital project description / as per ‐ LTP

( )

Revised /Annual Plan

( )

Land transport ‐ Levels of Service

Minor improvements , ,

New footpaths - Paeroa , ,

New footpaths - Waihi , ,

New road extensions , ,

New kerb channel stormwater control - Paeroa , ,

Access and mobility , ,

New kerb channel stormwater control - Waihi , ,

New kerb channel stormwater control - Plains , ,

Land transport ‐ Levels of Service total , , ,

Land transport ‐ Renewals

Footpath renewal - Paeroa , ,

Footpath renewal - Plains , ,

Footpath renewal - Waihi , ,

Minor improvements , ,

Unsealed roading renewals , ,

Sealed road resurfacing , , , ,

Pavement rehabilitation , ,

Drainage renewals , ,

Structures component replacement , ,

Traffic services renewal , ,

Land transport – Renewals total , , , ,

Land transport ‐ total , , , ,

Water ‐ Levels of Service

District water demand management , ,

Plains Pipiroa RD pump station , -

Kaimanawa connection with Plains or Paeroa - , ,

Kerepehi working platform - ,

Waihi zone metering ,


| / Annual Plan


( )


( )

Water ‐ Levels of Service total , , ,

Water ‐ Renewals

District cast iron pipe renewal , ,

District treatment asset renewals , ,

District upgrading and replacing of SCADA equipment , ,

District water meter renewals , ,

District wide pipe renewal programme (service continuity) , ,

Paeroa UV Lamps , ,

Waitakaruru caustic dose pump , ,

Kerepehi membrane renewals - ,

Kerepehi reservoir sealing , ,

Kerepehi Tanners pond desludging - ,

Kerepehi UV lamps renewal , ,

District wide water bulk water take points - ,

Plains reticulation booster and transfer pumps - ,

H&S upgrades ,

Water – Renewals total , , , ,

Water ‐ Total , , , ,

Wastewater Levels of Service

Optimisation of the Ngatea Pump network to allow for the Ngatea North bd

, ,

District Wide SCADA upgrade - ,

Wastewater Waihi DAF sludge process - ,

Paeroa chemical phosphorus removal drum filter etc - ,

Wastewater Levels of Service total , ,

Wastewater ‐ Renewals

District wide pipe renewals condition , ,

Waihi East - pipe renewals hydraulic , ,

Paeroa - pipe renewals hydraulic , , ,

District wide pond desludging , ,

District wide reactive renewals plants pump stations , ,

District wide replacement pump station cabinets etc , ,


/ Annual Plan |


( )


( )

District wide sewer pump renewals , ,

Kerepehi resource consents - ,

Ngatea aerator component renewals , ,

Ngatea screen refurbishment , ,

Paeroa resource consents - ,

Paeroa waveband renewals , ,

Waihi DAF sludge process , -

Waitakaruru prostep onsite set renewals , ,

Waitakaruru STP component renewals , ,

Wastewater district wide pipe renewals Waihi East manholes - ,

Wastewater Paeroa replacement screen - ,

Whiritoa aerator component renewals , ,

Whiritoa irrigation block renewals - ,

H&S upgrades - ,

Wastewater – Renewals total , , , ,

Waste Water ‐ Total , , , ,

Land Drainage ‐ Levels of Service

EPDD H Drain Culverts , ,

WPDD Central North SCADA installation , ,

WPDD Hopai West SCADA installation , ,

WPDD Martinovich SCADA installation , ,

WPDD Miranda SCADA installation , ,

WPDD Capital contribution to WRC Muggeridge pump project ,

Pūkorokoro - Land Drainage and flood protection ,

WPDD Pouarua Maukoro structures - ,

WPDD Rawerawe SCADA installation , ,

Land Drainage ‐ Levels of Service total , , ,

Land Drainage ‐ Renewals

WPDD Hopai West pump screens , ,

Land Drainage – Renewals total , ,

Land Drainage ‐ Total , , ,


| / Annual Plan


( )


( )

Stormwater ‐ Levels of Service

Stormwater Kaiaua upgrades , ,

Stormwater Kerepehi upgrades , ,

Stormwater Paeroa upgrades , ,

Stormwater Whirtoa upgrades , ,

Stormwater ‐ Levels of Service , ,

Stormwater ‐ Renewals

Stormwater Waihi renewals , ,

Stormwater Paeroa renewals , ,

Stormwater Ngatea renewals , ,

Stormwater Kerepehi renewals , ,

Stormwater Turua renewals , ,

Stormwater Kaiaua renewals , ,

Stormwater ‐ Renewals , ,

Storm Water ‐ Total , ,

Solid Waste ‐ Renewals

Paeroa Transfer Station - upgrade ,

Waihi Transfer Station - upgrade ,

Solid Waste – Renewals total - ,

Community Facilities ‐ Levels of Service

Kaiaua toilets , ,

Miranda Cemetery drainage , ,

Pukerimu Cemetery Major development - ,

Community Facilities ‐ Levels of Service total , ,

Community Facilities ‐ Renewals

Paeroa Pensioner Housing renewals , ,

Plains Pensioner Housing renewals , ,

Waihi Cemetery berms ,

Waihi Memorial Hall - new chairs ,


/ Annual Plan |


( )


( )

Waihi Event Centre - new LED lights ,

Waihi Pensioner Housing Renewals , ,

Community Facilities – Renewals total , ,

Community Facilities ‐ Total , ,

Recreation ‐ Levels of Service

Ngatea library and service centre , ,

District Libraries - radio frequency identification , ,

Paeroa - Wharf Street upgrade - ,

Recreation ‐ Levels of Service total , ,

Recreation ‐ Renewals

District Libraries - book budget , ,

District Pools - pool toys - ,

Ngatea - Main Street renewal - , ,

College Sparky Shop - seal metal road ,

Paeroa - Renewals recreation , ,

Paeroa Domain entrance upgrade , ,

Paeroa Domain playground upgrade - ,

Swimming Pools annual allowance (District wide) , ,

Pioneer Park playground upgrade , -

Plains - Renewals recreation , ,

Waihi - Gilmour Park playground poured surface , ,

Waihi - Renewals recreation , ,

Karangahake Reserve development ,

Wharf Street Jetty project ,

Whiritoa tennis court resurface , ,

Recreation – Renewals total , , ,

Recreation ‐ Total , , ,

Property ‐ Renewals

Hauraki House air conditioning unit replacement , ,

Hauraki House - replace lights with LEDs ,


| / Annual Plan


( )


( )

Hauraki House - toilets downstairs ,

Carpeting Council Chambers area ,

Waihi - Replace Windows Waihi Art Centre , ,

Reroof Skate Leisure Centre , -

Croquet club renewals - ,

Paeroa Dog Pound , ,

Paeroa Depot reroof , ,

Ngatea Service Centre upgrade , -

Waihi Museum replace roof , -

Chambers Restaurant ,

Security fencing for pool cars ,

Miscellaneous property renewal , ,

Property – Renewals total , ,

Property ‐ total , ,

Corporate renewals

Plant renewals , ,

Technology renewals (incl CCTV) , ,

Corporate renewals total , ,

Corporate ‐ total , ,

Overall Capital ‐total , , , ,


/ Annual Plan |

Financial statements Funding impact statement for July to June (whole of council)

/ / /

Annual

planLong‐term

planAnnual

plan

SOURCES OF OPERATING FUNDING General rates, uniform annual general charges, rates penalties , , , Targeted rates , , , Subsidies and grants for operating purposes , , , Fees and charges , , , Internal charges and overheads recovered Interest and dividends from investments Local Authorities fuel tax, fines, infringement fees, and other receipts Total Operating Funding (A) , , , APPLICATIONS OF OPERATING FUNDING Payments to staff and suppliers , , , Finance Costs , , , Internal charges and overheads applied Other operating funding applications Total Applications of Operating Funding (B) , , , SURPLUS (DEFICIT) OF OPERATING FUNDING (A ‐ B) , , , SOURCES OF CAPITAL FUNDING Subsidies and grants for capital expenditure , , , Development and financial contributions Increase (decrease) in debt , , , Gross proceeds from sale of assets Lump sum contributions Other dedicated capital funding Total Sources of Capital Funding (C) , , , APPLICATIONS OF CAPITAL FUNDING Capital Expenditure - to meet additional demand - to improve the level of service , , , - to replace existing assets , , , Increase (decrease) in reserves ( ) ( , ) Increase (decrease) of investments Total Applications of Capital Funding (D) , , , SURPLUS (DEFICIT) OF CAPITAL FUNDING (C ‐ D) ( , ) ( , ) ( , ) FUNDING BALANCE ((A ‐ B) + (C ‐ D))


| / Annual Plan

/ / /

Annual

planLong‐term

planAnnual

plan

Reconciliation of Comprehensive Income Statement to Funding Impact Statement OPERATING SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) ( , ) ( ) ( ) Depreciation/Assets written off , , , Subsidies and grants for capital expenditure ( , ) ( , ) ( , ) Development and financial contributions - - - Less Doubtful Debts - - - Vested Asset Income ( ) ( ) ( ) Gains and Losses ( ) ( ) ( ) SURPLUS (DEFICIT) OF OPERATING FUNDING (A ‐ B) , , ,


/ Annual Plan |

Prospective statement of financial position

/ Annual

plan

/ Long‐term

plan

/ Annual

plan ASSETS Current Assets Cash and cash equivalents Exchange transaction receivables , , , Non-Exchange transaction receivables , , , Non-current assets held for resale Inventories Other Financial Assets Total Current Assets , , , Current Liabilities Trade and other payables , , , Landfill Aftercare Provision Borrowings Employee Entitlements , , , Total Current Liabilities , , , Working Capital , , , Non‐Current Assets Property, Plant & Equipment , , , Biological Assets (Forestry) , , , Intangible Assets - Computer Software Investment Properties Investments in CCO's and similar entities - Investments in Associates - Investments in Joint Ventures - Investments in Other Entities Total Investments in CCO's and similar entities Derivative Financial Instruments Other Financial Assets Total Non‐Current Assets , , , Non‐Current Liabilities Employee Entitlements Landfill Aftercare Provision Derivative Financial Instruments , Borrowings , , , Total Non‐Current Liabilities , , , NET ASSETS , , , Represented by: EQUITY Accumulated Funds , , , Other reserves , , , Asset revaluation reserve , , , TOTAL EQUITY , , ,


| / Annual Plan

Prospective statement of changes in net assets/equity /

Annual plan

/ Long‐term

plan

/ Annual

plan TOTAL EQUITY As at July , , , Comprehensive Revenue & Expense for the year , , As at June , , , TOTAL EQUITY CONSISTS OF: Accumulated Funds As at July , , , Transfers from/(to): Asset Revaluation Reserve on disposal of PPE Restricted Reserves ( ) ( ) ( ) Surplus/(Deficit) for the year ( , ) ( ) ( ) As at June , , , Other Reserves As at July , , , Transfers to Retained Earnings ( ) ( ) ( ) Transfers from Retained Earnings As at June , , , Other Reserves consists of: Trusts & Bequests Financial Contributions , , , Council Created Reserves , , , As at June , , , Asset Revaluation Reserves As at July , , , Revaluation gains/(losses) , , , Transfer of revaluation reserve to retained earnings PPE As at June , , , Asset Revaluation Reserves consist of: Operational Assets Land , , , Buildings , , , Library Books Infrastructural Assets Wastewater System , , , Water System , , , Drainage Network , , , Land Transport Network , , , Restricted Assets Land Buildings Total , , , As at June , , ,


/ Annual Plan |

Prospective statement of comprehensive revenue and expense / / / Annual

plan Long‐term

plan Annual

Plan REVENUE Rates , , , Non-Exchange Revenue General Rates , , , Targeted Rates (excl. Water Rates) , , , Total Non-Exchange Revenue , , , Exchange Revenue Targeted Rates for Water Supplies , , , Subsidies and Grants , , , Development/Financial Contributions Other Revenue , , , Total Exchange Revenue , , , Other Gains/(Losses)

TOTAL REVENUE , , , EXPENDITURE Employee Benefit Expenses , , , Depreciation and Amortisation , , , Finance Costs , , , (Gains)/Losses Other Expenses , , , TOTAL EXPENDITURE , , , Share of Joint Venture Surplus/(Deficit) Share of Associates Surplus/(Deficit) SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) BEFORE TAX ( , ) ( ) ( ) Income Tax Expense SURPLUS/(DEFICIT) AFTER TAX ( , ) ( ) ( ) OTHER COMPREHENSIVE REVENUE & EXPENSE Gain/(Loss) on Revaluation , , , Movement in fair value of available for sale financial instruments TOTAL COMPREHENSIVE REVENUE & EXPENSE , ,


| / Annual Plan

Prospective cash flow statement

/ Annual

plan

/ Long‐

term plan

/ Annual

Plan Cash Flows from operating activities

Receipts from rates revenue , , , Interest received Dividends received Receipts from other revenue , , , Payments to suppliers and employees ( , ) ( , ) ( , ) Interest paid ( , ) ( , ) ( , ) Goods and services tax (net) Net cash from operating activities , , ,

Cash Flows from investing activities Proceeds from sale of property, plant & equipment Community Loan payments received Proceeds from sale of investment properties Proceeds from sale of other financial assets Purchase of intangible assets ( ) ( ) Purchase of property, plant & equipment ( , ) ( , ) ( , ) Purchase of other financial assets Purchase of other financial assets Community Loan payments received Forestry asset development Investment in Associates Net cash from investing activities ( , ) ( , ) ( , )

Cash Flows from financing activities

Proceeds from borrowings , , , Receipts from Finance Lease Liabilities Repayment of borrowings Repayment of Finance Lease Liabilities Net cash from financing activities , , ,

Net (decrease) increase in cash, cash equivalents and bank overdrafts

( ) ( , )

Cash, cash equivalents and bank overdrafts at the beginning of the year

,

Cash, cash equivalents and bank overdrafts at the end of the year

The GST (net) component of operating activities reflects the net GST paid and received with the Inland Revenue Department. The GST (net) component has been presented on a net basis, as the gross amounts do not provide meaningful information for financial statement purposes.


/ Annual Plan |

Reserve funds statement

Opening Deposited Withdrawn Closing Activity that the

reserve relates to Balance IntoReserve

from Reserve

Balance

Other Reserves District Community Recreation Community Services Plains Community Recreation Community Services Paeroa Community Recreation Community Services Waihi Community Recreation Community Services Dist. Community Projects Assistance

All Activities

Quarry Renewal , , Corporate , , Asset Revaluation Reserves Land , , All Activities Buildings , , All Activities Wastewater System , , Wastewater Water System , , Water Drainage Network , , Land Drainage Land Transport Network , , , Land Transport , , ,

District Community Projects Assistance Fund This reserve fund is to provide funding for community projects.

Paeroa, Plains, and Waihi Community Recreational Funds These reserve funds are historic and were used to accumulate financial contributions prior to the HDC changing to a development contributions regime. The balances will be used to fund recreation and community facilities capital works.

Quarry Renewal Fund This reserve fund is to provide funding for the cost of rehabilitating Tetley’s Quarry post-closure.

Asset Revaluation Reserves These reserve funds are to hold the net balances from gains/losses from asset revaluations.


| / Annual Plan

Notes supporting our financial statements Note : Statement of Accounting Policies for the Forecast Year Ending June

Reporting entity The Hauraki District Council (HDC) is a territorial local authority governed by the Local Government Act (LGA) and is domiciled and operates in New Zealand. The relevant legislation governing the HDC’s operations includes the LGA and the Local Government (Rating) Act . HDC provides local infrastructure, local public services, and performs regulatory functions to our communities. HDC does not operate to make a financial return. HDC has designated itself as a public benefit entity (PBE) for financial reporting purposes. These prospective financial statements are for Hauraki District Council (HDC) as a separate legal entity. Consolidated perspective financial statements comprising of the Council and its subsidiaries and associates have not been prepared.

Basis of preparation The financial statements have been prepared on the going concern basis, and the accounting policies have been applied consistently throughout the period.

Budget figures The budget figures are those approved by the Council. The budget figures have been prepared in accordance with PBE FRS , using accounting policies that are consistent with those adopted by the Council in preparing these financial statements.

Standards issued and not yet effective that have been early adopted Standards and amendments issued but not yet effective that have been early adopted are:

Impairment of Revalued Assets In April , the XRB issued Impairment of Revalued Assets, which now scopes in revalued property, plant and equipment into the impairment accounting standards. Previously, only property, plant and equipment assets measured at cost were scoped into the impairment accounting standards. The Council has early adopted this amendment in preparing its June financial statements and in preparing the financial statements for this Annual Plan. From the June year onwards, Council is required to assess at each reporting date whether there is any indication that an asset may be impaired. If any indication exists, the Council is required to assess the recoverable amount of that asset and recognise an impairment loss if the recoverable amount is less than the carrying amount. The Council can therefore impair a revalued asset without having to revalue the entire class-of-asset to which the asset belongs.

Standards issued and not yet effective that have not been early adopted Standards and amendments, issued but not yet effective that have not been early adopted, and which are relevant to the Council and group are:

Interests in other entities In January , the XRB issued new standards for interests in other entities (PBE IPSAS - ). These new standards replace the existing standards for interests in other entities (PBE IPSAS - ). The new standards are effective for annual periods beginning on or after January , with early application permitted. The Council plans to apply the new standards in preparing the June financial statements. The Council and group has not yet assessed the effects of these new standards.

Financial instruments In January , the XRB issued PBE IFRS Financial Instruments. PBE IFRS replaces PBE IPSAS Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement. PBE IFRS is effective for annual periods beginning on or after


/ Annual Plan |

January , with early application permitted. The main changes under PBE IFRS are: • New financial asset classification requirements for determining whether an asset is measured at fair value or

amortised cost. • A new impairment model for financial assets based on expected losses, which may result in the earlier recognition

of impairment losses. • Revised hedge accounting requirements to better reflect the management of risks. The Council plans to apply this standard in preparing its June financial statements. The Council and group has not yet assessed the effects of the new standard.

Statement of compliance The prospective financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the LGA, which includes the requirement to comply with New Zealand Generally Accepted Accounting Practice (NZ GAAP). They comply with PBE FRS Prospective Financial Statements, NZ PBE (Tier ) IPSAS and other applicable Financial Reporting Standards, as appropriate for New Zealand public benefit entities. It is a requirement of the LGA to present prospective financial statements. This provides an opportunity for ratepayers and residents to review the prospective financial results and position of HDC. The information in these statements may not be appropriate for purposes other than those prescribed above. Prospective financial statements are revised annually to reflect updated assumptions and costs. These financial statements are for the period July to June and are presented in New Zealand dollars, and rounded to the nearest thousand ( ), unless otherwise stated. The accounting policies set out below have been applied consistently to all periods presented in these prospective financial statements. The prospective financial statements were authorised for issue by the Hauraki District Council on May . HDC is responsible for the prospective financial statements presented, including underlying assumptions underlying prospective financial statements and other disclosures. To meet all requirements of the local government legislation we provide three sets of financial information as set out in the table below.

Set of financial information Key differences between these three sets of information

Usual Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) regulated statements of financial position, comprehensive revenue and expenses, etc.

The GAAP regulated financial statements must adhere to GAAP requirements;

Non‐GAAP compliant Funding Impact Statements (FIS’s)

The FIS is intended to make the sources and applications of HDC funds more transparent to its stakeholders than might be the case if only the usual GAAP financial statements were provided. The FIS is prescribed by the Local Government (Financial Reporting and Prudence) Regulations and is required by the LGA; and

Annual Plan disclosure statement as required by the Local Government (Financial Reporting and Prudence) Regulations .

The Annual Plan disclosure statement is to disclose HDC’s planned financial performance in relation to various benchmarks to help our communities assess whether HDC is prudently managing its revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities, and general financial dealings.

Measurement Base The financial statements have been prepared on a historical cost basis, except where modified by the revaluation of land and buildings, certain infrastructural assets, investment property, biological assets and financial instruments.


| / Annual Plan

Judgements and estimations The preparation of prospective financial statements using public benefit entity (PBE) standards requires the use of judgements, estimates and assumptions. Where material, information on the main assumptions is provided in the relevant accounting policy. The estimates and assumptions are based on historical experience as well as other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. Subsequent actual results may differ from these estimates. The estimates and assumptions are reviewed on an ongoing basis and adjustments are made where necessary. Judgements that have a significant effect on the financial statements and estimates, with a significant risk of material adjustment in the next year, are discussed in the relevant notes within this section. Significant judgements and estimations include asset revaluations, impairments, certain fair value calculations and provisions.

Subsidiaries HDC has no subsidiaries.

Associates HDC’s associate investment is accounted for in the financial statements using the equity method. An associate is an entity over which HDC has significant influence and that is neither a subsidiary nor an interest in a joint venture. The investment in an associate is initially recognised at cost and the carrying amount in the financial statements is increased or decreased to recognise HDC’s share of the surplus or deficit of the associate after the date of acquisition. Distributions received from an associate reduce the carrying amount of the investment. HDC discontinues recognising its share of further deficits if the share of deficits of an associate equals or exceeds its interest in the associate. After HDC’s interest is reduced to zero, additional deficits are provided for, and a liability is recognised, only to the extent that HDC has incurred legal or constructive obligations or made payments on behalf of the associate. If the associate subsequently reports surpluses, HDC will resume recognising its share of those surpluses only after its share of the surpluses equals the share of deficits not recognised. Where HDC transacts with an associate, surpluses or deficits are eliminated to the extent of HDC’s interest in the associate.

Joint ventures A joint venture is a contractual arrangement whereby two or more parties undertake an economic activity that is subject to joint control. HDC accounts for its interest in a jointly controlled operation using the equity method. HDC’s share of joint venture net revenue is included in the surplus or deficit.

Revenue Revenue is measured at the fair value of consideration received or receivable. Revenue may be derived from either exchange or non-exchange transactions.

Exchange transactions Exchange transactions are transactions where HDC receives assets (primarily cash) or services, or has liabilities extinguished, and directly gives approximately equal value (primarily in the form of goods, services, or use of assets) to another entity in exchange.

Non‐exchange transactions Non-exchange transactions are transactions that do not fall within the above definition of exchange transactions. In a non-exchange transaction, HDC either receives value or gives value to another entity without directly giving or receiving approximately equal value in exchange.

Rates revenue Rates are set by HDC annually by resolution and relate to a particular financial year. All ratepayers are invoiced within the financial year for which the rates have been set. Rates revenue is recognised proportionately throughout the year. Rates revenue is classified as non-exchange except for water by volume rates which are classed as exchange revenue.


/ Annual Plan |

Late payment penalties arising from overdue rates are recognised as revenue when rates become overdue. Rates remissions are recognised as a reduction of rates revenue when HDC has received an application that satisfies its rates remission policy.

Metered water rates revenue Water billing revenue is recognised on an accrual basis. Unbilled water usage, as a result of unread meters at year end, is accrued on an average usage basis.

Roading subsidies HDC receives funding assistance from the New Zealand Transport Agency, which subsidises part of HDC’s maintenance and capital costs of maintaining the local roading infrastructure. The subsidies are recognised as revenue upon entitlement as conditions pertaining to eligible expenditure have been fulfilled.

Grants and reimbursements Grants and reimbursements are recognised as revenue at their fair value where there is reasonable assurance that the payment will be received and all conditions will be complied with. Where there is an obligation to return the funds if conditions of the grant are not net, the grants are recorded as grants received in advance and not recognised as revenue until the conditions of the grant are satisfied.

Provision of Services Revenue from the rendering of services is recognised by reference to the stage of completion of the transaction at balance date, based on the actual service provided as a percentage of the total services to be provided.

Sales of Goods Sales of goods are recognised when a product is sold to the customer. The recorded revenue is the gross amount of the sale.

Vested Assets Where a physical asset is acquired for nil or nominal consideration the fair value of the asset received is recognised as revenue. Assets vested in HDC are recognised as revenue when control over the asset is obtained. A liability is recognised only if HDC expects that it will need to return or pass the asset to another party. The fair value of vested or donated assets is usually determined by reference to the cost of constructing the asset. For assets received from property developments, the fair value is based on construction price information provided by the property developer.

Commissions and Fees Where revenue is derived by acting as an agent for another party, the revenue that is recognised is the commission or fee on the transaction.

Interest and Dividends Interest revenue is recognised using the effective interest method. Interest revenue on an impaired financial asset is recognised using the original effective interest rate. Dividends are recognised when the right to receive payment has been established.

Development contributions Development contributions are recognised as revenue when HDC provides, or is able to provide, the service for which the contribution was paid. In cases where contributions are collected in advance to fund a service that is not currently provided in an area, the contribution is initially recognised as revenue in advance, until such time as the service is provided.

Construction contracts During the period covered by the - Annual Plan, HDC does not foresee itself in engaging in construction contracts as a contractor, apart from minor public works.

Borrowing costs Borrowing costs are recognised as an expense in the period in which they are incurred.


| / Annual Plan

Grant expenditure Non-discretionary grants are those grants that are awarded if the grant application meets the specified criteria and are recognised as expenditure when an application that meets the specified criteria for the grant has been received. Discretionary grants are those grants where HDC has no obligation to award on receipt of the grant application and are recognised as expenditure when a successful applicant has been notified of HDC’s decision.

Taxation

Goods and Services Tax (GST) The financial statements have been prepared on a GST exclusive basis with the exception of accounts receivable and accounts payable, which are stated with GST included. Where GST is not recoverable as input tax, it is recognised as part of the related asset or expense. The net amount of GST recoverable from, or payable to, the Inland Revenue Department (IRD) is included as part of receivables or payables in the statement of financial position. The net GST paid to, or received from the IRD, including the GST relating to investing and financing activities, is classified as an operating cash flow in the statement of cash flows. Commitments and contingencies are disclosed exclusive of GST.

Fringe Benefit Tax (FBT) Where a fringe benefit tax liability arises this has been charged to operating expenditure.

Leases

Finance leases A finance lease is a lease that transfers to the lessee substantially all the risks and rewards incidental to ownership of an asset, whether or not title is eventually transferred. At the commencement of the lease term, HDC recognises finance leases as assets and liabilities in the statement of financial position at the lower of the fair value of the leased item or the present value of the minimum lease payments. The amount recognised as an asset is depreciated over its useful life. If there is no certainty as to whether HDC will obtain ownership at the end of the lease term, the asset is fully depreciated over the shorter of the lease term and its useful life. The finance charge is charged to surplus or deficit, over the lease period so as to produce a constant periodic rate of interest on the remaining balance of the liability.

Operating leases An operating lease is a lease that does not transfer substantially all the risks and rewards incidental to ownership of an asset. Lease payments under an operating lease are recognised as an expense on a straight-line basis over the lease term.

Cash and cash equivalents Cash and cash equivalents includes cash in hand, deposits held at call with banks, other short-term highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less, and bank overdrafts. Bank overdrafts are shown within borrowings in current liabilities in the statement of financial position.

Trade and other receivables Trade and other receivables are recorded at their face value, less any provision for impairment. Impairment of a receivable is established when there is objective evidence that HDC will not be able to collect amounts due according to the original terms of the receivable. The amount of the impairment is the difference between the asset’s carrying amount and the present value of estimated future cash flows, discounted using the original effective interest rate.


/ Annual Plan |

Inventories Inventory held for use in the production of goods and services on a commercial basis is valued at the lower of cost and net realisable value. The cost of purchased inventory is determined using the first-in first-out (FIFO) method. Inventories held for distribution or consumption in the provision of services that are not supplied on a commercial basis are measured at cost (using the FIFO method), adjusted, when applicable, for any loss of service potential. Where inventory is acquired at no cost or for nominal consideration, the cost is the current replacement cost at the date of acquisition. The amount of any write-down for the loss of service potential or from cost to net realisable value is recognised in the surplus or deficit in the period of the write-down. When land held for development and future resale is transferred from investment property/property, plant, and equipment to inventory, the fair value of the land at the date of the transfer is its deemed cost. Costs directly attributable to the developed land are capitalised to inventory, with the exception of infrastructural asset costs which are capitalised to property, plant, and equipment.

Financial assets HDC classifies its financial assets into four categories. The classification depends on the purpose for which the investments were acquired. Management determines the classification of its investments at initial recognition and re-evaluates this designation at every reporting date. Financial assets and liabilities are initially measured at fair value plus transaction costs unless they are carried at fair value through surplus or deficit in which case the transaction costs are recognised in the surplus or deficit. Purchases and sales of investments are recognised on trade-date, the date on which HDC commits to purchase or sell the asset. Financial assets are derecognised when the rights to receive cash flows from the financial assets have expired or have been transferred and HDC has transferred substantially all the risks and rewards of ownership. The fair value of financial instruments traded in active markets is based on quoted market prices at the balance sheet date. The quoted market price used is the current bid price. The fair value of financial instruments that are not traded in an active market is determined using valuation techniques. HDC uses a variety of methods and makes assumptions that are based on market conditions existing at each balance date. Quoted market prices or dealer quotes for similar instruments are used for long-term debt instruments held. Other techniques, such as estimated discounted cash flows, are used to determine fair value for the remaining financial instruments. The four categories of financial assets are as follows.

. Financial assets at fair value through surplus or deficit

Financial assets at fair value through surplus or deficit include financial assets held for trading. A financial asset is classified in this category if acquired principally for the purpose of selling in the short-term or it is part of a portfolio of identified financial instruments that are managed together and for which there is evidence of short-term profit-taking. Derivatives are also categorised as held for trading unless they are designated into a hedge accounting relationship for which hedge accounting is applied. Financial assets acquired principally for the purpose of selling in the short-term or part of a portfolio classified as held for trading are classified as a current asset. Derivatives are classified as current if they mature within months of balance date, and are classified as non-current if they mature greater than months after balance date. After initial recognition, financial assets in this category are measured at their fair values with gains or losses on re-measurement recognised in the surplus or deficit.

. Loans and Receivables

These are non-derivative financial assets with fixed or determinable payments that are not quoted in an active market. They are included in current assets, except for maturities greater than months after the balance date, which are included in non-current assets.


| / Annual Plan

After initial recognition, they are measured at amortised cost, using the effective interest method, less impairment. Gains and losses when the asset is impaired or derecognised are recognised in the surplus or deficit. Loans to community organisations made at nil or below-market interest rates are initially recognised at the present value of their expected future cash flows, discounted at the current market rate of return for a similar financial instrument. The loans are subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method. The difference between the face value and present value of the expected future cash flows of the loan is recognised in the surplus or deficit as a grant.

. Held to maturity investments

Held to maturity investments are assets with fixed or determinable payments and fixed maturities that HDC has the positive intention and ability to hold to maturity. After initial recognition they are measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method less impairment. Gains and losses when the asset is impaired or derecognised are recognised in the surplus or deficit. They are included in current assets, except for those with maturities greater than months after balance date, which are included in non-current assets. HDC does not hold any assets in this category at present.

. Financial assets at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense

Financial assets at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense are those that are designated into the category at initial recognition or are not classified in any of the other categories above. They are included in non-current assets unless management intends to dispose of, or realise, the investment within months of balance date. HDC includes in this category: • investments that it intends to hold long-term but which may be realised before maturity; and • shareholdings that it holds for strategic purposes. These investments are measured at their fair value, with gains and losses recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense, except for impairment losses, which are recognised in the surplus or deficit. On derecognition, the cumulative gain or loss previously recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense is reclassified from equity to the surplus or deficit.

Impairment of financial assets

Loans and receivables Impairment of a loan or a receivable is established when there is objective evidence that HDC will not be able to collect amounts due according to the original terms. Significant financial difficulties of the debtor/issuer, probability that the debtor/issuer will enter into bankruptcy, and default in payments are considered indicators that the asset is impaired. The amount of the impairment is the difference between the asset’s carrying amount and the present value of estimated future cash flows, discounted using the original effective interest rate. For debtors and other receivables, the carrying amount of the asset is reduced through the use of an allowance account, and the amount of the loss is recognised in the surplus or deficit. When the receivable is uncollectible, it is written off against the allowance account. Overdue receivables that have been renegotiated are reclassified as current (i.e. not past due). For term deposits, local authority stock, government stock and community loans, impairment losses are recognised directly against the instruments carrying amount. At each balance sheet date HDC assesses whether there is any objective evidence that a financial asset or group of financial assets is impaired. Any impairment losses are recognised in the surplus or deficit.

Financial assets at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense For equity investments, a significant or prolonged decline in the fair value of the investment below its cost is considered objective evidence of impairment. For debt investments, significant financial difficulties of the debtor, probability that the debtor will enter into bankruptcy, and default in payments are considered objective indicators that the asset is impaired. If impairment evidence exists for investments at fair value through other comprehensive revenue and expense, the


/ Annual Plan |

cumulative loss (measured as the difference between the acquisition cost and the current fair value, less any impairment loss on that financial asset previously recognised in the surplus or deficit) recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense is reclassified from equity to the surplus or deficit. Equity instrument impairment losses recognised in the surplus or deficit are not reversed through the surplus or deficit. If in a subsequent period the fair value of a debt instrument increases and the increase can be objectively related to an event occurring after the impairment loss was recognised, the impairment loss is reversed in the surplus or deficit.

Accounting for derivative financial instruments HDC uses derivative financial instruments to manage exposure to foreign exchange and interest rate risks arising from financing activities. In accordance with its Investment and Liability Management Policy, HDC does not hold or issue derivative financial instruments for trading purposes. HDC’s interest rate swap portfolio was valued as at June by Council staff using software provided by Hedgebook, and the - Annual Plan assumes no change to this valuation. The movement in fair value has been included in surplus/(deficit) in the Statement of Comprehensive Revenue and Expense. HDC did not hold any forward foreign exchange contracts at balance date.

Non-current assets held for sale The only asset currently included in this category is property held for sale. The majority of property intended for sale relates to subdivisions that HDC has developed in Kerepehi and Ngatea. HDC has capitalised the cost of the land, design/survey fees, power and telephone reticulation, and other expenses directly associated with the project. HDC considers the amounts capitalised to be less than net realisable value. Expenditure incurred on the development of roading, including footpaths and kerb and channelling, wastewater and water reticulation and stormwater have not been included. The cost of these assets has been added to the appropriate infrastructural classification. Non-current assets held for sale are classified as held for sale if their carrying amount will be recovered principally through a sale transaction, not through continuing use. Non-current assets held for sale are measured at the lower of their carrying amount and fair value less costs to sell. Any impairment losses for write-downs of non-current assets held for sale are recognised in the surplus or deficit. Any increases in fair value (less costs to sell) are recognised up to the level of any impairment losses that have been previously recognised. Non-current assets (including those that are part of a disposal group) are not depreciated or amortised while they are classified as held for sale. Interest and other expenses attributable to the liabilities of a disposal group classified as held for sale continue to be recognised.

Property, plant and equipment This category of assets includes: • operational assets, being tangible assets such as land, buildings, library books, plant and equipment, and motor

vehicles • restricted assets, being property, owned by HDC which provide a benefit or service to the community and cannot

be disposed of because of legal or other restrictions, such as parks and reserves, or landfill post closure • infrastructure assets, being the fixed utility systems owned by HDC. Each infrastructural asset class includes all

items that are required for the network to function, for example, wastewater reticulation includes reticulation piping and wastewater pump stations. These are generally not regarded as tradable.

Land (operational and restricted) is measured at fair value, and buildings (operational and restricted), library books, and infrastructural assets (except land under roads) are measured at fair value less accumulated depreciation. All other asset classes are measured at cost less accumulated depreciation and impairment losses.


| / Annual Plan

Revaluation Land and buildings (operational and restricted), library books, and infrastructural assets (except land under roads) are revalued with sufficient regularity to ensure that their carrying amount does not differ materiality from the assets’ fair value and at least every three years. The carrying values of revalued assets are assessed annually to ensure that they do not differ materially from the assets’ fair values. If there is a material difference, then the off-cycle asset classes are revalued. Revaluations of property, plant and equipment are accounted for on a class of asset basis. The net revaluation results are credited or debited to other comprehensive revenue and expense and are accumulated to an asset revaluation reserve in equity for that class of asset. Where this would result in a debit balance in the asset revaluation reserve, this balance is not recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense but is recognised in the surplus or deficit. Any subsequent increase on revaluation that reverses a previous decrease in value recognised in the surplus or deficit will be recognised first in the surplus or deficit up to the amount previously expensed, and then recognised in other comprehensive revenue and expense.

Additions The cost of an item of property, plant and equipment is recognised as an asset if, and only if, it is probable that future economic benefits or service potential associated with the item will flow to HDC and the cost of the item can be measured reliably. In most instances, an item of property, plant and equipment is recognised at its cost. Where an asset is acquired through a non-exchange transaction, it is recognised at fair value as at the date of acquisition. Work in progress is recognised at cost less impairment and is not depreciated.

Subsequent costs Costs incurred subsequent to initial acquisition are capitalised only when it is probable that future economic benefits or service potential associated with the item will flow to HDC and the cost of the item can be measured reliably. The costs of day to day servicing of property, plant and equipment are recognised in the surplus or deficit as they are incurred.

Land All land was valued as at June plus additions/development at cost, less disposals. Land valuations were completed by Quotable Value NZ, qualified independent valuers, and confirmed as being suitable for financial reporting. Land is valued at fair value using market-based evidence based on its highest and best use with reference to comparable land values. Adjustments have been made to the ‘unencumbered’ land value where there is a designation against the land or the use of the land is restricted because of reserve or endowment status. These adjustments are intended to reflect the negative effect on the value of the land where an owner is unable to use the land more intensely.

Buildings All buildings were valued at July plus additions/development at cost, less disposals. Building valuations were completed by independent valuers, and confirmed as being suitable for financial reporting. Specialised buildings were valued by SPM Assets Ltd at fair value using depreciated replacement cost because no reliable market data is available for such buildings. Depreciated replacement cost is determined using a number of significant assumptions. Significant assumptions include:


/ Annual Plan |

• the replacement asset is based on the replacement with modern equivalent assets with adjustments where appropriate for obsolescence due to over-design or surplus capacity

• the replacement cost is derived from recent construction contracts of similar assets and Property Institute of New Zealand cost information

• the remaining useful life of assets is estimated • straight-line depreciation has been applied in determining the depreciated replacement cost value of the asset. Non-specialised buildings (for example, residential buildings) were valued by Curnow Tizard Ltd at fair value using market-based evidence. Market rents and capitalisation rates were applied to reflect market value. The valuation of earthquake prone buildings does not include any adjustment for estimated building strengthening and costs or any association lost rental during the time to undertake the strengthening work.

Infrastructural assets Roading assets were valued by the independent valuers, Beca Limited as at June . Land under roads was valued by the independent valuers, Opus International Consultants Ltd as at June using the average market value of land by ward and land use category. Since the introduction of International Financial Reporting Standards, on June , land under roads has been recognised at deemed cost The Annual Plan has assumed roading infrastructural assets will have a positive revaluation June of . million Water (with the exception of the Waihi water treatment plant), wastewater, stormwater and drainage assets were valued by internal staff which was peer reviewed by Waugh Valuers Ltd as at July . Infrastructural assets are also carried at fair value, which is deemed to be depreciated replacement cost because the assets are of a specialised nature. The depreciated replacement costs are determined on the basis of valuations prepared every three years. The revaluation process involves assessing the current optimised replacement cost on a brownfields basis, using highest and best use basis and remaining useful lives.

Library books These are valued annually and are valued at depreciated replacement cost by HDC staff. Estimates of the remaining useful life over which the asset will be depreciated have been determined based on HDC’s policy on book replacement, as well as historical book replacement data.

Vehicles, equipment and technology These assets are carried at cost less accumulated depreciation.

Disposals Gains and losses on disposals are determined by comparing the proceeds with the carrying amount of the asset. Gains and losses on disposals are included in the surplus or deficit. When re-valued assets are sold, the amounts included in asset revaluation reserves in respect of those assets are transferred to retained earnings.

Depreciation Land and assets under construction are not depreciated. All other assets are depreciated on a straight line basis that will spread the cost of the asset, less any residual value, over the expected useful life of the asset. The useful lives of assets have been identified on a component–by–component basis. A summary of the range of expected useful lives of assets follows: Roading: • Seal ( - years) • Base course ( - years) • Surface Water Channels ( - years) • Retaining Walls ( years) • Railings ( - years)


| / Annual Plan

• Culverts ( years) • Footpaths ( - years) • Bridges ( - years) • Street lighting ( years) • Signs ( . - years) Buildings: • Structure ( years) • Roof cladding ( years) • Electrical/Mechanical ( years) • Plumbing ( years) • Internal wall linings ( years) • Lifts ( years) • Air Conditioners ( years) • Site Improvements ( years) Other Assets: • Water Reticulation ( - years) • Water Treatment ( - years) • Wastewater ( - years) • Computer Hardware ( - years) • Stormwater/Drainage ( - years) • Fixtures and Fitting ( - years) • Communications Equipment ( years) • Heavy Plant and Machinery ( - years) • Light Plant ( - years) • Motor Vehicles–Cars and Utilities ( - years) • Library Books ( years) Assets purchased during the financial year are depreciated on a remaining month’s basis.

Intangible assets

Software acquisition and development Acquired computer software licenses are capitalised on the basis of the costs incurred to acquire and bring to use the specific software. Costs associated with maintaining computer software are recognised as an expense when incurred. Costs that are directly associated with the development of software for internal use by HDC, are recognised as an intangible asset. Direct costs include the software development employee costs and an appropriate portion of relevant overheads. Staff training costs are recognised in the surplus or deficit when incurred.

Amortisation The carrying value of an intangible asset with a finite life is amortised on a straight-line basis over its useful life. Amortisation begins when the asset is available for use and ceases at the date that the asset is derecognised. The amortisation charge for each period is recognised in the surplus or deficit. The useful lives of major classes of intangible assets have been estimated as follows: • computer software - years ( %- %)

Carbon Credits Purchased carbon credits are recognised at cost on acquisition. Free carbon credits received from the Crown are recognised at fair value on receipt. They are not amortised, but are instead tested for impairment annually. They are derecognised when they are used to satisfy carbon emission obligations.


/ Annual Plan |

Forestry assets Forestry assets are independently re-valued by PF Olsen & Company, a registered forest valuer annually at fair value less estimated point of sale costs. Fair value is determined based on the present value of expected net cash flows discounted at a current market determined pre-tax rate. Gains or losses arising on initial recognition of biological assets at fair value less estimated point of sale costs and from a change in fair value less estimated point of sale costs are recognised in the surplus or deficit. The costs to maintain the forestry assets are included in the surplus or deficit.

Investment property Properties leased to third parties under operating leases are classified as investment property unless the property is held to meet service delivery objectives, rather than to earn rentals or for capital appreciation. Investment property is measured initially at its cost, including transaction costs. After initial recognition, HDC measures all investment property at fair value as determined annually by an independent valuer. Gains or losses arising from a change in the fair value of investment property are recognised in the surplus or deficit.

Impairment of property, plant and equipment, and intangible assets Intangible assets subsequently measured at cost that have an indefinite useful life are not subject to amortisation and are tested annually for impairment. Property, plant and equipment and intangible assets subsequently measured at cost that have a finite useful life are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. An impairment loss is recognised for the amount by which the asset’s carrying amount exceeds its recoverable amount. The recoverable amount is the higher of an asset’s fair value less costs to sell and value in use. If an asset’s carrying amount exceeds its recoverable amount the asset is impaired and the carrying amount is written down to the recoverable amount. The total impairment loss is recognised in the surplus or deficit. The reversal of an impairment loss is recognised in the surplus or deficit. For assets not carried at a revalued amount, the total impairment loss is recognised in the surplus or deficit. The reversal of an impairment loss on a revalued asset is credited to other comprehensive revenue and expense and increases the asset revaluation reserve for that class of asset. However, to the extent that an impairment loss for that class of asset was previously recognised in the surplus or deficit, a reversal of the impairment loss is also recognised in the surplus or deficit. For assets not carried at a revalued amount, the reversal of an impairment loss is recognised in the surplus or deficit.

Value in use for non‐cash generating assets Non-cash-generating assets are those assets that are not held with the primary objective of generating a commercial return. For non-cash-generating assets, value in use is determined using an approach based on either a depreciated replacement cost approach, restoration approach, or a service units’ approach. The most appropriate approach used to measure value in use depends on the nature of the impairment and availability of information.

Value in use for cash‐generating assets Cash generating assets are those assets that are held with the primary objective of generating a commercial return. The value in use for cash-generating assets is the present value of expected future cash flows.


| / Annual Plan

Trade and other payables Trade and other payables are recognised at face value.

Employee benefits

Short‐term benefits Employee benefits that HDC expects to be settled within months of balance date are measured at nominal values based on accrued entitlements at current rates of pay. These include salaries and wages accrued up to balance date, annual leave earned to, but not yet taken at balance date, retiring and long service leave entitlements expected to be settled within months, and sick leave. HDC recognises a liability for sick leave to the extent that absences in the coming year are expected to be greater than the sick leave entitlements earned in the coming year. The amount is calculated based on the unused sick leave entitlement that can be carried forward at balance date, to the extent that HDC anticipates it will be used by staff to cover those future absences. The liability and an expense are recognised for bonuses where HDC has a contractual obligation or where there is a past practice that has created a constructive obligation.

Long‐term benefits Long service leave and retirement leave entitlements that are payable beyond months have been calculated on an actuarial basis. The calculations are based on: • likely future entitlements accruing to staff, based on years of service, years to entitlement, the likelihood that

staff will reach the point of entitlement and contractual entitlements information, and • the present value of the estimated future cash flows. A discount rate of % and an inflation factor of % were

used. The discount rate is based on expected interest rates for terms to maturity similar to those of the relevant liabilities. The inflation factor is based on the expected long-term increase in remuneration for employees.

Presentation of employee entitlements Sick leave, annual leave, and vested long service leave are classified as a current liability. Non-vested long service leave and retirement gratuities expected to be settled within months of balance date are classified as a current liability. All other employee entitlements are classified as a non-current liability.

Superannuation schemes HDC has not entered into a defined benefit scheme. Payments to defined contributions schemes are expensed in the surplus or deficit when incurred.

Provisions HDC recognises a provision for future expenditure of uncertain amount or timing when there is a present obligation (either legal or constructive) as a result of a past event, it is probable that an outflow of future economic benefits will be required to settle the obligation and a reliable estimate can be made of the amount of the obligation. Provisions are measured at the present value of the expenditures expected to be required to settle the obligation using a pre-tax discount rate that reflects current market assessments of the time value of money and the risks specific to the obligation. The increase in the provision due to the passage of time is recognised as an interest expense and is included in finance costs.

Financial guarantee contracts A financial guarantee contract is a contract that requires HDC to make specified payments to reimburse the holder of the contract for a loss it incurs because a specified debtor fails to make payment when due. Financial guarantee contracts are initially recognised at fair value. If a financial guarantee contract was issued in a stand-alone arm's length transaction to an unrelated party, its fair value at inception is equal to the consideration received. When no consideration is received a provision is recognised based on the probability that HDC will be required to reimburse a holder for a loss incurred discounted to present value. The portion of the guarantee that


/ Annual Plan |

remains unrecognised, prior to discounting to fair value, is disclosed as a contingent liability. Financial guarantees are subsequently measured at the initial recognition amount less any amortisation, however if HDC assesses that it is probable that expenditure will be required to settle a guarantee, then the provision for the guarantee is measured at the present value of the future expenditure.

Borrowings Borrowings are initially recognised at their fair value. After initial recognition, all borrowings are measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method. Borrowings are classified as current liabilities unless the HDC has an unconditional right to defer settlement of the liability for at least months after balance date or if the borrowings are expected to be settled within months of balance date.

Equity Equity is the community’s interest in HDC and is measured as the difference between total assets and total liabilities. Equity is disaggregated and classified into a number of reserves. The components of equity are: • accumulated funds • other reserves • asset revaluation reserves.

Other reserves Other reserves are a component of equity generally representing a particular use to which various parts of equity have been assigned. Other reserves are those subject to specific conditions accepted as binding by HDC and which may not be revised by HDC without approval by HDC. Transfers from these reserves may be made only for certain specified purposes or when certain specified conditions are met.

Asset revaluation reserves This relates to the revaluation of property, plant and equipment to fair value.

Cost allocation The cost of service for each significant activity of HDC has been derived using the cost allocation system outlined below. Direct costs are those costs directly attributable to a significant activity. Indirect costs are those costs that cannot be identified in an economically feasible manner with a specific significant activity. Direct costs are charged directly to significant activities. Indirect costs are charged to significant activities using appropriate cost drivers such as actual usage, staff numbers, and floor area.

Critical accounting estimates and assumptions In preparing these financial statements HDC has made estimates and assumptions concerning the future. These estimates and assumptions may differ from the subsequent actual results. Estimates and judgements are continually evaluated and are based on historical experience and other factors, including expectations or future events that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances. The estimates and assumptions that have a significant risk of causing a material adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities within the next financial year are discussed below:

Landfill aftercare provision HDC has responsibility under resource consents to provide ongoing maintenance and monitoring of three closed landfills. The cash outflows for landfill post closure are expected to occur over years. The long-term nature of the liability means that there are inherent uncertainties in estimating costs that will be incurred. The provision has been


| / Annual Plan

estimated taking into account existing technology and using a discount rate of . %.

Infrastructural assets There are a number of assumptions and estimates used when performing depreciated replacement cost valuations over infrastructural assets. These include: • The physical deterioration and condition of an asset, for example HDC could be carrying an asset at an amount

that does not reflect its actual condition. This is particularly so for those assets, which are not visible, for example storm water, wastewater and water supply pipes that are underground. This risk is minimised by HDC performing a combination of physical inspections and condition modelling assessments of underground assets;

• Estimating any obsolescence or surplus capacity of an asset; and • Estimates are made when determining the remaining useful lives over which the asset will be depreciated. These

estimates can be impacted by the local conditions, for example weather patterns, ground condition and traffic growth. If useful lives do not reflect the actual consumption of the benefits of the asset, then HDC could be over or under estimating the annual depreciation charge recognised as an expense in the statement of comprehensive revenue and expense. To minimise this risk HDC’s infrastructural asset useful lives have been determined with reference to the NZ Infrastructural Asset Valuation and Depreciation Guidelines published by the National Asset Management Steering Group and have been adjusted for local conditions based on past experience. Asset inspections, deterioration and condition modelling are also carried out regularly as part of HDC’s asset management planning activities, which gives HDC further assurance over its useful life estimates.

• Experienced independent valuers perform/review HDC’s infrastructural asset revaluations.

Critical judgements in applying Council’s accounting policies

Classification of property The receipt of market-based rental from these properties is incidental to holding these properties. These properties are held for service delivery objectives as part of HDC’s social housing policy. These properties are accounted for as property, plant and equipment.


/ Annual Plan |

Funding impact statement: rating implications This statement should be read in conjunction with the HDC’s Revenue and Financing Policy, available in our LTP document. All figures in this statement include GST at the prevailing rate.

Separately Used or Inhabited Part of a Rating Unit (SUIP) Separately used or inhabited rating units include any part of a rating unit used or inhabited by the owner or any other person who has the right to use or inhabit that part by virtue of tenancy, lease or other agreement. At a minimum, the land or premises intended to form the separately used or inhabited part of the rating unit must be capable of actual habitation or actual separate use. For the avoidance of doubt, a rating unit that has only one use (i.e. does not have separate parts or is vacant land) is treated as being one separately used or inhabited part.

In particular, for farms A farming unit with one dwelling will be treated as one use/part, with each additional dwelling counting as an additional separately used part of the rating unit. Each additional dwelling will be assessed as a separate unit for the purposes of assessing any rate calculated on the basis of a SUIP.

In particular, for businesses Separately used and inhabited parts refers to the ability to use part or parts of the rating unit for independent commercial/industrial operations. A separately used and inhabited part includes where the property has been set-up to accommodate, or is accommodating, separate businesses The Council sets the following rates on the basis of Separately Used or Inhabited Parts of a Rating Units: • community halls • refuse collection targeted rates • ward business targeted rates.

Lump Sum Contributions HDC is not inviting lump sum contributions in respect of any targeted rates.

Uniform Annual General Charge (UAGC) The UAGC is a fixed charge per rating unit. It is used to fund the following activities: Iwi liaison, libraries, swimming pools, solid waste, animal control, health, liquor licensing, building services, civil defence, sports fields, events centres, passive reserves, sports co-ordinators, cemetery reserves, town halls, public toilets, community initiatives, HDC sets a Uniform Annual General Charge on each rating unit within the Hauraki District. In the / year this charge is estimated to be . . The revenue sought is approximately , , .

General rate – capital value - district The General Rate is assessed on all rating units in the district based on capital value. It is used to fund activities where HDC believes the activity delivers a public benefit to the whole of the community and where a fixed charge per rating unit is not considered appropriate. In particular, for the purpose of funding the following activities: democracy, policy development, solid waste building services, resource management implementation, civil defence, land drainage, urban stormwater, economic development, information centres, Destination Coromandel, community initiatives, and other sundry activities.


| / Annual Plan

HDC sets the capital value general rate differentially. The differential is based on land use, based on the categories below: • Residential/Rural - Means all rating units used primarily for residential, recreational, cultural purposes or

primarily or predominately for the purposes of agriculture, viticulture, horticulture or silviculture. • Commercial/Industrial - Means all rating units used for commercial or industrial purposes, including utility

networks. • Mineral Extraction - Means all mineral value rating units that are not used in gold mining. • Mining – Means the rating unit with the valuation number 05030/009.00 that is used in gold mining. The / estimated rates (in cents per dollar of capital value) per category are:

Differential General Rate Estimated Rate in cents per Dollar

Revenue Sought /

Residential/Rural . , ,

Commercial/Industrial . ,

Mineral Extraction Land Use . ,

Mining Land Use . ,

Targeted rates HDC uses targeted rates (as defined in the Local Government (Rating Act) ) to collect funds over areas of benefit. Targeted rates are chosen where the services provided are specific to a particular community or area within our District and it is not considered fair to charge all ratepayers, or where it is more transparent to set a separate rate to fund a specific activity. Details of HDC’s targeted rates, how the targeted rates are calculated and revenue to be generated by targeted rates is detailed below.

Roading rate The Roading Rate is assessed on all rating units in the District based on capital value. It is used to fund the roading activity, travellers reserves, and public toilets. HDC is changing from a differential capital value roading rate to a flat capital value roading rate, and is phasing this in over three years from / to / . HDC sets the targeted rate differentially. The differential is based on land use, based on the categories below: • Residential/Rural - Means all rating units used primarily for residential, recreational, cultural purposes or

primarily or predominately for the purposes of agriculture, viticulture, horticulture or silviculture. • Commercial/Industrial - Means all rating units used for commercial or industrial purposes, including utility

networks. • Mineral Extraction - Means all mineral value rating units that are not used in gold mining. • Mining - Means the rating unit with the valuation number / . that is used in gold mining. The / estimated rates (in cents per dollar of capital value) is:

Targeted Rate Estimated Rate in cents per Dollar

Revenue Sought /

Residential/Rural . , , Commercial/Industrial . , Mineral Extraction Land Use . , Mining Land Use . ,


/ Annual Plan |

Ward HDC sets three targeted rates, one for each ward, based on an annual charge per rating unit for the purpose of fully and partially funding activities within the ward. These activities include footpaths and street-cleaning, information and visitors’ centres, town centres, sports fields and recreation reserves, events centres, township co-ordinators and other sundry activities. The charges will be set on a uniform basis per category with the categories based on the matter location. The Paeroa Ward Targeted Rate is set on all rating units situated within the Paeroa Ward. The Plains Ward Targeted Rate is set on all rating units situated within the Plains Ward. The Waihi Ward Targeted Rate is set on all rating units situated within the Waihi Ward.

Annual charges For each rating unit within each of the wards, annual charges are set, which for / are estimated at:

Category Annual Charge Revenue Sought /

Paeroa Ward . ,

Plains Ward . ,

Waihi Ward . , ,

Ward - business HDC sets targeted rates for each ward, based on a differential annual charge per separately used or inhabited part of a commercial and industrial rating unit for the purpose of partially funding activities within the ward. These activities include, information and visitor centres, township co-ordinators, town centre improvements, and economic development. The rate funding of these activities comes partly from this targeted rate, partly from the ward targeted rate and also from general rates. The charges will be set on a differential basis on categories based on location and land use. These rates will only be assessed on separately used or inhabited commercial and industrial parts of commercial and industrial rating units. HDC sets its Community Facilities Business Rate on the basis of separately used and inhabited parts. For the purposes of this rate separately used and inhabited parts refers to the ability to use part or parts of the rating unit for independent trading operations. A separately used and inhabited part will be classified where the property has been set-up to accommodate, or is accommodating, separate businesses. Separately used or inhabited commercial and industrial parts of commercial and industrial rating units in the rural areas of the Paeroa and Waihi Wards will be assessed a rate equivalent to half the rate assessed on urban rating units. In the Plains Ward the rural rate assessed is equivalent to % of the rate assessed on urban rating units. This is due to Positively Promoting the Plains being funded equally by urban and rural rating units. The categories for the Paeroa Ward Business Targeted Rate are: • Paeroa Ward Urban – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and

industrial purposes situated within the valuation rolls , , and . • Paeroa Ward Rural – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and

industrial purposes situated within the Paeroa Ward but outside the valuation rolls , , and . The categories for the Plains Ward Business Targeted Rate are: • Plains Ward Urban – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and

industrial purposes situated within the valuation roll . • Plains Ward Rural – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and

industrial purposes situated within the Plains Ward but outside the valuation roll . The categories for the Waihi Ward Business Targeted Rate are:


| / Annual Plan

• Waihi Ward Urban – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the valuation rolls and .

• Waihi Ward Rural – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the Waihi Ward but outside the valuation rolls and .

Annual charges On each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit within each of the wards, HDC sets the following annual business rate charges. The / estimated rates are:

Category Annual Charge

Revenue Sought/

Paeroa Ward - Urban . ,

- Rural . ,

Plains Ward - Urban . ,

- Rural . ,

Waihi Ward - Urban . ,

- Rural . ,

Capital Value Rates HDC sets targeted rates for each ward, based on capital value on commercial and industrial rating units, for the purpose of partially funding activities within the ward. These activities include, information and visitor centres, township co-ordinators, town centre improvements, and economic development. The rate funding of these activities comes partly from this targeted rate, partly from the ward targeted rate and also from general rates. The charges will be set on a differential basis on categories based on location and land use. These rates will only be assessed on separately used or inhabited commercial and industrial parts of commercial and industrial rating units. HDC sets its Community Facilities Business Rate on the basis of separately used and inhabited parts. For the purposes of this rate separately used and inhabited parts refers to the ability to use part or parts of the rating unit for independent trading operations. A separately used and inhabited part will be classified where the property has been set-up to accommodate, or is accommodating, separate businesses. Separately used or inhabited commercial and industrial parts of commercial and industrial rating units in the rural areas of the Paeroa and Waihi Wards will be assessed a rate equivalent to half the rate assessed on urban rating units. In the Plains Ward the rural rate assessed is equivalent to % of the rate assessed on urban rating units. This is due to Positively Promoting the Plains being funded equally by urban and rural rating units. The categories for the Paeroa Ward Business Targeted Rate are: • Paeroa Ward Urban – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and

industrial purposes situated within the valuation rolls , , and . • Paeroa Ward Rural – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and

industrial purposes situated within the Paeroa Ward but outside the valuation rolls , , and .

The categories for the Plains Ward Business Targeted Rate are: • Plains Ward Urban – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and

industrial purposes situated within the valuation roll . • Plains Ward Rural – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and

industrial purposes situated within the Plains Ward but outside the valuation roll .

The categories for the Waihi Ward Business Targeted Rate are:


/ Annual Plan |

• Waihi Ward Urban – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the valuation rolls and .

• Waihi Ward Rural – all separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the Waihi Ward but outside the valuation rolls and .

The / estimated rates (in cents per dollar of capital value) are:

Category Estimated Rate in cents per Dollar

Revenue Sought/

Paeroa Ward Urban . ,

Paeroa Ward Rural . ,

Plains Ward Urban . ,

Plains Ward Rural . ,

Waihi Ward Urban . ,

Waihi Ward Rural . ,

Community halls HDC sets a separate targeted rate for each Community Hall Rating Area for the purpose of funding community halls. A separate targeted rate will be set for each Community Hall Rating Area. For maps of the Community Hall Rating Areas, refer to the HDC website: www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/rating-area-maps

Land value rates HDC sets the following targeted rates based on land value. The targeted rates are: • Kaihere Hall Targeted Rate – all rating units situated within the Kaihere Hall Rating Area. • Patetonga Hall Targeted Rate– all rating units situated within the Patetonga Hall Rating Area. The / estimated rates (in cents per dollar of land value) are:


Revenue Sought/

Kaihere Hall . ,

Patetonga Hall . ,

Annual charges HDC sets the following targeted rates, based on an annual charge per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit. The targeted rates are: • Hikutaia Hall Targeted Rate– all rating units situated within the Hikutaia Hall Rating Area within the Hauraki

District. • Kaiaua Hall Targeted Rate- all rating units situated within the Kaiaua Hall Rating Area. • Karangahake Hall Targeted Rate– all rating units situated within the Karangahake Hall Rating Area. • Kerepehi Hall Targeted Rate– all rating units situated within the Kerepehi Hall Rating Area. • Mangatangi Community Centre Targeted Rate– all rating units situated within the Mangatangi Community

Centre Rating Area within the Hauraki District. • Netherton Hall Targeted Rate– all rating units situated within the Netherton Hall Rating Area. • Turua Hall Targeted Rate– all rating units situated within the Turua Hall Rating Area. • Waikino Hall Targeted Rate– all rating units situated within the Waikino Hall Rating Area.


| / Annual Plan

• Waitakaruru Hall Targeted Rate– all rating units situated within the Waitakaruru Hall Rating Area. In the / year the estimated charges are:

Category Annual Charge Revenue Sought /

Hikutaia Hall . ,

Kaiaua Hall . ,

Karangahake Hall . ,

Kerepehi Hall . ,

Mangatangi Community Centre . ,

Netherton Hall . ,

Turua Hall . ,

Waikino Hall . ,

Waitakaruru Hall . ,

Land drainage HDC sets targeted rates for each of the Drainage Districts for the purpose of funding drainage activity within those drainage districts. For maps of the Drainage Districts, refer to the HDC website, www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/rating-area-maps

Drainage rates (D rates) HDC sets land value rates on each rating unit within the following locations for the purpose of funding drainage activity. The targeted rates are: • Eastern Plains – all rating units situated within the Eastern Plains Drainage District, excluding those residential,

commercial & industrial, and community land use rating units within the townships of Kerepehi and Turua. • Western Plains – all rating units situated within the Western Plains Drainage District, excluding those residential,

commercial & industrial, and community land use rating units within the town of Ngatea. • Komata North Drainage District – all land situated within the Komata North Drainage District. • Opukeko Drainage District – all land situated within the Opukeko Drainage District excluding those residential,

commercial & industrial, and community land use rating units within the town of Paeroa. • Tirohia‐Rotokohu Drainage District – all land situated within the Tirohia-Rotokohu Drainage District excluding

those residential, commercial & industrial, and community land use rating units within the town of Paeroa. • Taramaire Drainage District – all land situated within the Taramaire Drainage District. The / estimated rates (in cents per dollar of land value) are:


Revenue Sought/

Eastern Plains D Rate . ,

Western Plains D Rate . ,

Komata North D Rate . ,

Opukeko D Rate . ,

Tirohia-Rotokohu D Rate . ,

Taramaire D Rate . ,


/ Annual Plan |

Flood protection rates (F Rates) HDC sets land value rates on a differential basis on each rating unit within the following locations for the purpose of funding flood protection activity. For maps of the Flood Protections Areas, refer to the HDC website, www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/rating-area-maps The targeted rates are: • Flood Protection Class (F ) – all rating units situated within the Western Plains Drainage District Flood

Protection Area . • Flood Protection Class (F ) – all rating units situated within the Western Plains Drainage District Flood

Protection Area . • Flood Protection Taramaire – all rating units situated within the Taramaire Flood Protection area. • Flood Protection Kaiaua – all rating units situated within the Kaiaua Flood Protection area. The / estimated rate (in cents per dollar of land value) is:


Revenue Sought/

Western Plains F . ,

Western Plains F . ,

Taramaire . ,

Kaiaua . ,

Pump rates (P rates) HDC sets a land area rate on a uniform basis on all land within the following category based on provision of service, for the purpose of funding the replacement of drainage pumps. Western Plains Class P – all land serviced by the Hopai West, Martinovich, Central, North and Rawerawe West pump stations. For maps of the land serviced by pump stations, refer to the HDC website, www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/rating-area-maps The / estimated rates (in dollars per hectare of land area) are:

Category Rate perHectare

Revenue Sought/

Western Plains Class P . ,

Urban stormwater HDC sets targeted rates on all non-rural land use rating units in the towns of Paeroa, Ngatea, Kerepehi, Turua, Waihi, Whiritoa and on some rating units within the Kaiaua Coastal Area for the purpose of funding the urban stormwater activity. For maps of the urban stormwater rating areas, refer to the HDC website, www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/rating-area-maps

Capital value rates HDC sets capital value targeted rates on each rating unit within the following locations.


| / Annual Plan

The targeted rates are: • All rating units within the Paeroa Stormwater Rating Area. • All rating units within the Ngatea Stormwater Rating Area. • All rating units within the Kerepehi Stormwater Rating Area. • All rating units within the Turua Stormwater Rating Area. • All rating units within the Waihi Stormwater Rating Area. • All rating units within the Whiritoa Stormwater Rating Area. • All rating units within the Kaiaua Stormwater Rating Area. The / estimated rates (in cents per dollar of capital value) are:

Area Estimated Rate in cents per Dollar

Revenue Sought /

Paeroa . ,

Ngatea . ,

Kerepehi . ,

Turua . ,

Waihi . ,

Whiritoa . ,

Kaiaua . ,

Water supply HDC sets targeted rates for water supply based on, the volume of water supplied and, the number of connections to the supply on all rating units connected to a water supply, for the purpose of funding the water supply activity. The water volume rate is on a differential basis based on location, and the extent of the provision of service. Water supply rates are billed separately twice yearly on varying dates in the various water supply areas. For the purposes of water supply, properties are ‘connected’ to a water supply when the means to connect has been installed, i.e. a water lead has been installed from HDC water main to the boundary.

Annual charges HDC sets an annual charge per connection to a water supply on each rating unit within the following category based on the provision of a service: • Connected – all rating units with a connection to an HDC water supply. The / estimated annual charge is . per connection. Every connection will be charged the annual charge in conjunction with their usage charges for water consumed.

Water volume rates (metered supply) HDC sets a targeted rate on a differential basis per unit of water supplied to each rating unit within the following categories based on location and level of service provided. The categories are: • Category One – all rating units connected to the Paeroa, Plains, and Waihi water supplies according to a scale of

stepped charges. • Category Two – all rating units connected to the Kaimanawa water supply. • Category Three – rating units connected to a HDC raw water main that receive completely untreated water.


/ Annual Plan |

The / estimated rates (in cents per cubic metre of water supplied) are:

/

Category One:

Base Rate – Consumption up to cubic metres . c

Step One – Consumption between and cubic meters . c

Step Two – All consumption over cubic metres . c

Category Two: . c

Category Three: . c The revenue sought from water supply targeted rate annual charges and water volume rates is approximately

, , .

Wastewater HDC sets targeted rates for wastewater based on an annual charge per rating unit for unconnected rating units, or per water closet / urinal (pan) for connected rating units. Rating units used primarily as a residence for one household will only be charged one pan charge. The targeted rates are for the purpose of funding the wastewater activity.

Annual charges HDC sets an annual charge on a differential basis on the following categories based on location, provision of service, and land use. The categories are: • District Unconnected – All rating units not connected to the Kerepehi, Ngatea, Paeroa, Turua, Waitakaruru,

Waihi or Whiritoa wastewater schemes but with part of a boundary within metres of a wastewater main belonging to one of those schemes.

• District Connected – All rating units connected to the Kerepehi, Ngatea, Paeroa, Turua, Waitakaruru, Waihi or Whiritoa wastewater schemes.

The / estimated annual charges are:

Category UniformCharge

Revenue Sought/

District Unconnected . ,

For District Connected rating units the following charges apply: Rating units used primarily as a residence for one household will be treated as having one pan.

Number of Pans % of residential annual charge

Districtconnected

Up to & including Pans % . per pan



Up to & including Pans . % . per pan



Up to & including Pans . % . per pan

Over Pans % . per pan The revenue sought from wastewater connected rates is approximately , , .


| / Annual Plan

There may be further reductions in pan charges for educational establishments dependent upon regulations made under section of the Local Government (Rating) Act . HDC’s remission policy on wastewater charging for educational establishments should be read in conjunction with this policy.

Refuse collection targeted rates HDC sets targeted rates for refuse collection and kerbside recycling based on a uniform charge per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit serviced by a HDC funded refuse collection. The targeted rates are for the purpose of funding the kerbside recycling activity, and the administration of the refuse collection activity. The annual charge is on a differential basis (based on location and the provision of service).

Annual charges HDC sets an annual charge per separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit on a differential basis (based location and the provision of service). Whiritoa rating units have an increased number of collections per year. The categories are: • District Collected – all rating units serviced by HDC’s kerbside recycling collection excluding those in the Whiritoa

township. • Whiritoa Collected – all rating units serviced by HDC’s kerbside recycling collection in the Whiritoa township. The / estimated annual charges are:

Category Uniformcharge

Revenue Sought/

District Collected . ,

Whiritoa Collected . ,


/ Annual Plan |

Penalties for late payments and due date of payments

Payment methods The above rates are payable at HDC Offices at William Street, Paeroa, Orchard Rd, Ngatea and Rosemont Rd, Waihi between . am and . pm Monday to Friday. Payments may also be made by way of Direct Debits and Automatic Payments. Direct Credits in the form of telephone and internet banking services are also accepted. Credit card payments on the HDC website are also accepted.

Rates (excluding water rates) due dates Excluding water supply targeted rates, the above rates are by way of four instalments, the dates of such instalments being:


One August August

Two November November

Three February February

Four May May

Rates (excluding water rates) penalties for late payment The following penalties will be added to outstanding rates (excluding water supply rates): • A penalty of % will be added to the amount of any instalment remaining unpaid by the relevant due date above.

The penalty will be added on the date stated in the ‘Penalty Added’ column in the tables above. • A penalty of % will be added to all rates assessed in a previous year which remain unpaid on September .

The penalty will be added on September . • A further penalty of % will be added to all rates assessed in a previous year which remain unpaid on March

. The penalty will be added on March .

Water supply targeted rates due dates Water supply targeted rates are by way of two instalments per year for those rating units that have received less than

, kl over the last two billing periods. Those rating units who have used more than , kl over the last two billing periods, will be billed bi-monthly. Instalment dates are staggered throughout the year. Refer to HDC’s website to find a map of the various reading areas www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/rating-area-maps. For a list of rating units (over , kl as described above) by assessment number refer to HDC’s website. These rating units will be billed bi-monthly. The dates of instalments are: For rating units billed twice a year:

Instalment Number

Reading area

Due date Penalty added

One - Ngatea township - Paeroa township - Waihi township

August August

One – Turua & surrounds – Paeroa commercial –Waihi commercial – Waihi gold

September October

One – Waitakururu & Ngatea North – Waihi rural

October October

One – Kerepehi & Ngatea South – Ohinemuri & Kaimanawa

November November

One - Netherton December January

One - Karangahake/Mackaytown January January


| / Annual Plan

Instalment Number

Reading area

Due date Penalty added

- Waikino

Two - Ngatea township - Paeroa township - Waihi township

February February

Two – Turua & surrounds – Paeroa commercial –Waihi commercial – Waihi gold

March April

Two – Waitakururu & Ngatea North – Waihi rural

April April

Two – Kerepehi & Ngatea South – Ohinemuri & Kaimanawa

May May

Two - Netherton June July

Two - Karangahake/Mackaytown - Waikino

July July

For rating units billed bi-monthly:


One August

Two October October

Three December

Four February

Five April April

Six June

Water supply targeted rates penalties for late payment The following penalties will be applied to water supply rates:

For rating units billed twice a year: • An additional charge of % will be added to all current and previous years’ rates that remain outstanding on date

showing in the “Due Date” column in the tables above for Instalment Number One. The penalty will be added on the date showing in the “Penalty Added’ column in the tables above for Instalment Number One.

• An additional charge of % will be added to all current and previous years’ rates that remain outstanding on date showing in the “Due Date” column in the tables above for Instalment Number Two. The penalty will be added on the date showing in the “Penalty Added’ column in the tables above for Instalment Number Two.

For rating units billed bi-monthly: • A penalty of % will be added to all current and previous years’ rates outstanding on October . The penalty

will be added on October • A penalty of % will be added to all current and previous years’ rates outstanding on April . The penalty

will be added on April

Rating base information The projected number of rating units within our district at June is , . The projected total capital value of rating units within our district at June is , , , . The projected total land value of rating units within our district at June is , , , .


/ Annual Plan |

Rating changes - Summary of rating changes by type Forecast Changes by Rate (%) Forecast / Long Term Plan Forecast / Annual Plan General Rates . % . % Targeted Rates - Land Transport . % . % Targeted Rates - Paeroa Comm Facilities . % . % Targeted Rates - Paer Comm Fac Business . % . % Targeted Rates - Plains Comm Facilities . % . % Targeted Rates - Plns Comm Fac Business . % . % Targeted Rates - Waihi Comm Facilities . % . % Targeted Rates - Waih Comm Fac Business . % . % Targeted Rates - Wastewater . % . % Targeted Rates - Western Plains 'D' . % . % Targeted Rates - Eastern Plains 'D' . % . % Targeted Rates - Komata North 'D' . % . % Targeted Rates - Opukeko 'D' . % . % Targeted Rates - Tirohia-Rotokohu 'D' . % . % Targeted Rates - Taramaire 'D' . % . % Targeted Rates - Taramaire 'F' . % . % Targeted Rates - Western Plains 'F ' . % . % Targeted Rates - Western Plains 'F ' . % . % Targeted Rates - Western Plains 'P' . % . % Targeted Rates - Paeroa Stormwater . % . % Targeted Rates - Ngatea Stormwater . % . % Targeted Rates - Kerepehi Stormwater . % . % Targeted Rates - Turua Stormwater . % . % Targeted Rates - Waihi Stormwater . % . % Targeted Rates - Whiritoa Stormwater . % . % Targeted Rates - Kaiaua Stormwater . % . % Targeted Rates - Waste Coll'n/Recycling . % . % Rates excluding water . % . % Cap for rates excluding water . % . % Targeted Rates ‐ Water Meter Charges . % . % Water Meter Charges Cap . % . % Total Rates . % . %


| / Annual Plan

Examples of changes to rates To be circulated separately


Decision Report


From: Senior Communications Advisor

Date: Wednesday, 22 May 2019

File reference: Document: 2585061 Appendix A: 2585538

Portfolio

holder:

The Mayor


Subject: Ngatea Library and Service Centre update

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received, and THAT the Ngatea Library and Service Centre stay in the existing council building at the

current site and THAT Council accepts the feedback themes will form the basis of a community concept

and vision for the future Ngatea Library and Service Centre and THAT this concept and vision will be used as a guide when developing more detailed

designs and plans for the future provision of library and service centre services in

Ngatea and THAT a detailed summary of feedback will be presented to the community in a book at

the end of June 2019

1 Purpose This report provides an update on the council’s continued conversation with the

community about the future provision of library and service centre services in Ngatea. It

summarises the main themes of the feedback received so far and makes

recommendations for future actions.


The matter or suggested decision does not involve a new activity, service, programme,

project, expenditure or other deliverable.

2 Background Over the last few years, the council has provided new libraries for the Paeroa and Waihi

communities and incorporated a service centre into the new Waihi Library. Last year,

options for upgrading the Ngatea Library and Service Centre were included in council’s

proposed Long Term Plan. Original preferred option

When the council reviewed all of its libraries and made a commitment to the Paeroa and

Waihi proposals, there was no preferred option for Ngatea. When a decision was made to

proceed with improving the provision of library and service centre services in Ngatea the

council’s preferred option was the possibility of partnering with the Haurakian Trust, or

newly formed Trust, to deliver a joint community space which would include a library

service and other community based services. A possible site for this community space

was identified at 11 Orchard Road. Issues raised

Initial community feedback raised a number of issues about the proposed Trust

partnership and the 11 Orchard Road site, so a working party was formed to address

these issues and provide more information. Back to square one

Following further community feedback, a well-attended community meeting, and a

petition signed by more than 1200 people, the council stopped all work on its preferred

option, ruled out 11 Orchard Road as a potential future site, and has since gone back to

square one with the purpose of working with the community to develop a concept and

vision for a library, service centre and community space that has the community at its

heart. The resolution below is from the december 2018 council meeting:

PLAINS COMMUNITY HUB UPDATE REPORT (2518513) Appendix A - Plains Community Hub - Working Party Report (2518529)

The Group Manager – Community Services and Development presented a report which

updated Council on the work of the Plains Community Hub Working Party to date.

RESOLVED


C19/16 McLean/Adams CARRIED

The working party have investigated and evaluated a number of options for the ownership

and governance options of a library/community hub facility in Ngatea. Copies of minutes

recorded from each of the working party meetings was attached for the member’s

information.


It was concluded, that in consideration of the information provided and in view of the

feedback received from the community, more consultation with the community on the

provision of library services in Ngatea was needed before any advancement of the project

is undertaken at this stage.

RESOLVED

THAT Council acknowledges that further detailed engagement on the provision of future

library services in Ngatea is required, and

THAT no further work on detailed options will be undertaken, and

THAT Council start a new engagement process that encourages broad community

participation in the design and location of future library services in the town of Ngatea,

and

THAT Council wait for the results of this further engagement process and be guided by this

when making its decision.

Hey, let’s start a new conversation

About 80 people attended an event at the Ngatea Hall on 16 April designed to continue

the conversation about the future provision of library and service centre services for

Ngatea. Visitors from the future dropped in to the fun event which included face

painting, lego and duplo areas and drawing tables. There was also plenty of information

about modern libraries and community spaces on offer, boards where people could write

their ideas on post-it notes, and areas to ‘think outside the square’ and fill out feedback

forms on paper and online. Following on from this event further drop-in sessions were held at Turua, Kaiaua,

Waitakaruru, Ngatea, and Kaihere. Feedback has also been received online through the

website and social media, verbally, and via paper feedback forms and drawings.

3 Issue and options Location

Feedback from the community shows there is a strong preference for the Ngatea library

and service centre activity to remain in the existing building on its current site. This

preference was reflected in feedback on council’s 2018-28 Long Term Plan, as well as at

a community meeting in April this year where a petition with more than 1200 signatures

was presented to the Mayor with the motion “TO KEEP THE NGATEA LIBRARY AND

SERVICE CENTRE WHERE IT IS IN THE EXISTING COUNCIL BUILDING.” Feedback from

the current survey to the question of what’s important and meaningful to people also

supports keeping the Library and Service Centre in the existing council building at the

current site. In making its decision the council should be aware that the provision of future library

and service centre services within the current building envelope may place limitations on

what it will be able to achieve due to the existing design of the building. It is suggested

that council acknowledge that the future design may include additions and alterations.


Other feedback

At the time of writing this report feedback was still being received, collated and

analysed. Overall, there has been a good wide-ranging response from people who are

providing an important historical perspective, valuable insights into how the area

functions, an understanding of the critical issues and what is meaningful to people, and a

vision for what’s possible both now and in the future. While it’s accepted that a decision needs to be made at this meeting on the location of

future library and service centre services, there is value in obtaining as much feedback

as possible about what services the Library and Service Centre needs to provide, as this

will form the basis of a concept and vision that can then be used as a guide for more

detailed plans and designs. So although the cut-off date for all feedback was originally stated as 20 May 2019, a

decision has been made to leave this open for feedback about what future library and

service centre services the community wants and needs, for a few more weeks until

Monday 10 June 2019. This will allow more time for people to participate - particularly

via social media (Instagram and Facebook initiatives are still gaining traction) and

through group projects (Ngatea Primary School students are working on a class project

using future problem solving methodology). A detailed summary of the feedback and main themes will be presented to the

community in a book at the end of June. Some of the themes that are emerging so far are outlined below: So far we’ve heard it’s important to the community that the future Library and

Service Centre…

Stays in the existing building on its current site preserves and promotes the history of the area in one place has flexible, airy spaces for community groups and community education and

quieter places for individual study and contemplation is a welcoming and inclusive place for people to interact and learn from each

other provides community based services for all, in places that are at the heart of their

community fosters the joy of reading and supports the development of literacy in all its forms has the flexibility to provide for advancing technology is a learning hub that enables independent lifelong research and innovation opens for longer hours, including a weekend day and a later evening is easily accessible provides combined services (library, council business, photocopying, visiting

services i.e. Regional council, social services etc…) and that the community wishes that there was somewhere to…

hold corporate and Skype meetings print and edit photographs display local art, photographs, historic displays, visiting exhibitions etc… hot desk run a youth club


drink tea and coffee and socialise, play cards, do jigsaw puzzles etc enjoy outdoor spaces encourage visitors to stop in Ngatea welcome visitors and showcase our home keep a public diary of community events coordinate car-pooling to bigger centres paint a mural use technology and media to be creative and use my imagination create a fun zone, including a trampoline room!

4 Significance and Engagement Assessment This decision does trigger the Significance and Engagement Policy Assessment Tool and

therefore is considered significant under the Significance and Engagement Policy 2017

due to the potential future expenditure of the upgrade project as well as the high level of

community interest. The level of engagement considered appropriate for this matter, at this point in time, is

to inform (i.e. one-way communication disseminating information).

5 Recommendation The Council should make its decision on which option to choose based on that option

being the most cost effective, and good quality option for the Hauraki District (s10 of the

Local Government Act 2002). Based on the information above it is recommended: THAT the Ngatea Library and Service Centre stays in the existing council building at the

current site and THAT Council accepts the feedback themes will form the basis of a community concept

and vision for the future Ngatea Library and Service Centre and THAT this concept and vision will be used as a guide when developing more detailed

designs and plans for the future provision of library and service centre services at

Ngatea and THAT a detailed summary of feedback will be presented to the community in a book at

the end of June 2019 Paula Trubshaw Senior Communications Advisor


Appendix A

Hey, let’s start a new conversation

A small sample of some of the feedback we ’ve received so far


of 10


of 12

Decision Report


From: Group Manager Planning and Environmental Services


File reference: Document: M2567282

Portfolio holder: Councillor Paul Milner


Subject: Planning and Environmental Services Report – April 2019

Recommendation:


Summary

In this month’s report Iwi Liaison is preparing training materials for Councillors and staff. Rule

Plan Change 1 to address affordable housing has had its hearing of submissions with the Plan

Change Committee. The consulted Bylaw Review submissions are now before Council for their

consideration. The new Ngatea Library consultative workshops have now almost concluded.

Work continues on Climate Change initiatives. Project Martha implementation conditions at the

Waihi Mine is now well underway.

Customer Services Team

April was another hectic month for the Customer Services team and the team are very much

looking forward to the newly appointed Customer Services Advisor who will start their role on

27th May. The new service request system went live on 30th April covering the areas of roading, parks

and reserves, three waters and land drainage; with all other areas of Council business to be

implemented in the near future. The team has adapted well to the new system and is gaining

confidence with this. The team also continues to use the new cemetery processing system which was implemented

in February. The team received 3,038 calls of which 2,814 were managed successfully, 224 calls abandoned

(result 7.4%, target 6.0%). The service level was almost met with a result of 78.21% (target

80% answered within 20 seconds). Over the month the calls related to building 26%, planning

8%, rates 8%, animal related 6% and the balance of calls spread across all other areas of the

Council.


of 12

Development

30 April 2019 Consents Issued 2017/18 2018/19 Year to date

Building Consents 318 318 100%

Subdivisions 53 40 75%

Land Use 87 83 95%

Designations - - -%

Objections 4 1 25%

Certificates of Compliance - 1 100%

Variations 16 18 113%

Outline Plans - 2 200%

Right of Ways - - -%

Extension of Time 1 - -%

Permitted Boundary Activity Certificates* 6 25 -%

(*only commenced during previous year) 167 170 102%

LIMs 350 383 109%

Consent activity is now showing a slight decrease in Resource Consent numbers for

this financial year with a continued increase in the number of LIMs. Communications It’s been mostly plain-sailing for the communications team this month with a hectic schedule

of drop-in sessions about the Ngatea Library project taking place throughout the Plains Ward

between 9 and 17 May (a separate report has been provided with more detail on this project).

The senior communications advisor was also in attendance at the Hauraki Rail Trail drop-in

session where plans and designs for the proposed Pūkorokoro Miranda to Kaiaua leg of the

Trail were on display. On top of this, the team is currently preparing an engagement plan for

the upcoming Hauarahi Stream project, which will involve a drop-in session with those

benefiting from the proposed stream works in Kaiaua. Other projects this month have included

a three-day photoshoot to upgrade council’s image library, work to progress elections

communication (which kicks off 1 June), and the creation and promotion of an email

subscription list which will allow direct communication with customers on topics of their choice.

The team has also been involved in putting together a communications plan and developing

content for the Smokefree and Vapefree policy engagement process due to be launched on

World Smokefree Day on 31 May. Iwi Liaison A large part of this month has been around developing programmes for staff and councillors

Cultural Responsiveness training. This training is designed to assist Council in becoming better

equipped around Cultural Engagement with Māori. As we begin to transition into a Post Treaty

Environment this will become vital as Māori focus will shift from a Central Government

Engagement to a Local Government Engagement.


of 12

This also saw six staff and the deputy Mayor attend the SOLGM Kia tika, Kia pono Co

Governance Forum held at Tangatarua Marae in Rotorua. With the aim of gaining a better

understanding of what Co-Governance will or could look like.

Policy and Planning - Further involvement in some of the policy and planning engagement and

how this effects Māori. Or how Māori could or would be involved in some of the changes. E.g.

Boat Ramps and Cemetery Bylaws Review. Ngātea developments and Māori and the Kaiaua

Community Plan.

There was also a Māori engagement Hui held with the Maritime Park re the developments

happening on Wharf Street and at the Maritime Park. Under Treaty Iwi will own all the

riverbeds and tribituaries so it is imortant that we engage with relevant Māori now to ensure

there is a smooth process moving forward. Council and DoC Engagement - Regular engagement with TCDC and DoC is beginning to occur

with the focus shifting to how we as all 3 entities begin to engage with Māori throughout the

entire Hauraki/ Coromandel District. As we are all working with the same Iwi, it is wise that we

find common synergies in approach so as not to replicate the same process moving forward.

Although minimal engagement has occurred with MPDC, this should begin to increase in the

next few months.

Regulatory Services Team

Planning Implementation

Processing

For the last month 10 subdivision and 13 land use resource consent applications were lodged

and to date over that period all were processed within the statutory timeframe of 20 working

days.

District Plan Changes

Proposed Rule Plan Change 1 has had the Hearing of submissions on the 9 May and the

decision report will be produced and come to Council for approval at the June Council meeting

once signed off by the Plan Change Committee.

National Planning Standards

The Resource Legislation Amendment Act 2017 introduced National Planning Standards (Planning Standards) into the framework of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA). The purpose of the Planning Standards is to improve consistency in plan and policy statements and remove unnecessary variation.

The first set of Planning Standards contains 17 separate standards and came into legal effect on 3 May 2019. They regulate:

the structure and form of plans, specifying the chapters to be included, their order, zone names and descriptions;

national definitions; noise and vibration metrics; mapping requirements; and electronic accessibility and functionality requirements.

The Planning Standards contain mandatory directions, meaning that councils must implement the Standards without going through a Schedule 1 RMA plan change process. However, in some circumstances the standards provide choice in their implementation, meaning councils may need to initiate a plan change. Territorial authorities have five years to adopt the planning standards.


of 12

There is a significant amount of content in the Planning Standards for Councils to work through

and implement in their plans. We are currently looking into just what is involved.

Healthy rivers plan change

The Waikato Regional Council has released its second report on the written submissions

received relating to policies and rules. A second round of hearings is underway on these

matters. HDC does not intend to speak at this second round, however the Waikato Region

territorial authorities group continues to be involved. Staff to continue to monitor the various communications on submissions and evidence.

Kaimai Windfarm Application

The application is now on hold while the applicant continues with their one on one meetings to

various submitters. The date for the commencement of a hearing is unknown at this point.

Building Team

For the last month Council granted 29 Building Consent applications with 12 new dwellings last

month and all were processed within the statutory timeframe. Of the 29 applications 9 consents did not require further information requests.

General

Dog Control

Dog Control officers last month have been following up unregistered known dogs so that all

known dogs are now registered.

Strategic Planning

Items covered in separate reports on this agenda, include: 2019/20 annual plan

Kaiaua Coast 2120

The next Technical Advisory Group (TAG) meeting for the project is on 20 May and will focus

on stakeholder mapping for the project. WRC will also update on progress with its hazard

assessment work for the area. Smokefree and Vapefree Policy

Public consultation on the draft policy is opening on 31 May - World Smokefree Day. The

consultation period will run for four weeks. In July, the working party will meet to consider all

feedback received over this time.

Reviewing the Bylaws

Phase one – At the time of writing, the hearing of feedback and deliberations on the draft

Nuisance Bylaw, draft Cemeteries Bylaw, draft Food Grading Bylaw and draft Wharves and

Boat Ramps Bylaw was to be undertaken on 22 May 2019. After any changes following this

hearing, it is expected that these bylaws will be adopted by the Council at its meeting on 22

May or at its 26 June meeting, and come into effect on 1 July 2019. Phase two - A bylaw working party meeting is scheduled for 28 May to discuss policy matters

relating to the phase two reviews: Water Supply Bylaw, Land Drainage Bylaw and Solid Waste

Bylaw. Following this, the proposed amendments will be made to these bylaws. The amended

bylaws in draft form for consultation are expected to be considered by the Council at its June


of 12

meeting. The proposed dates for consultation on phase two bylaws are currently 28 June – 29

July 2019. The Wellbeings are back

The Community Wellbeing Amendment Bill (the one that aims to restore the community

wellbeing purpose of local government and the power to collect development contributions for

any public amenities needed as a consequence of development) has now been enacted. A

report will be brought to the Council’s June meeting.

Adapting to climate change

Elected members will be aware that the Government has introduced its Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill. The Bill: sets a new greenhouse gas emissions reduction target to:

o Reduce all greenhouse gases (except biogenic methane) to net zero by 2050 o Reduce emissions of biogenic methane within the range of 24-47% below 2017

levels by 2050 including 10% below 2017 levels by 2030 sets a series of emissions budgets to act as stepping stones towards the long-term target requires the Government to develop and implement policies for climate change adaptation

and mitigation, and establishes a new independent Climate Change Commission to provide expert advice and

monitoring to help keep successive governments on track to meeting long-term goals. Public submissions on the Bill will be invited in the second half of 2019. We’re also receiving requests for information on what the Council is doing to adapt to the effects of climate change. Staff will be pulling together an outline of what the Council is already doing to address the long term challenges of climate change to make this information more readily available. Such actions include: signing the Local Government Leaders’ Climate Change Declaration advocating for Government direction, leadership and action having a plan in place to address climate change impacts. It’s set out at a very high level

in a number of places in the Long Term Plan we put together after talking with our communities last year.

working with Waikato Regional and Waikato District councils, iwi, technical experts and affected Kaiaua Coast communities on a jointly developed and community-led strategy that will describe how we will respond to coastal hazard risks in the future.

purchasing the Future Living Skills product so that our communities can access free learning materials and workshops on how to move towards a low carbon future (among other things)

involvement in many climate change initiatives including: a sea level rise study for Thames and Hauraki Plains, NZSeaRise (Victoria University

of Wellington, GNS Science, NIWA) Sea level rise, housing and insurance, Victoria University of Wellington research Local authorities and community engagement on climate change adaptation, Otago

University research Resilience of the Waikato economy to natural hazards, Massey University and m.e

research (National Science Challenge) upskilling ourselves and keeping up to date with best practice.

More long term planning on the horizon

As previously indicated, staff are kick starting the 2021 long term planning process. Initially we

are looking at what is needed from the next round and how staff can support the newly elected

council in late 2019/early 2020.

What else is up in Wellington?

The series of local government legislation change continues to proceed through Parliament.

The Local Government Amendment Bill Number 2 has implications for local


of 12

government reorganisation and the transfer of responsibilities. It has had its second

reading. The Productivity Commission is due to release its draft report on local government

funding and financing matters in June, when submissions will be invited. The report is

due to be finalised on 30 November 2019.

Mining Matters

Overseas Investment Office – Applications to purchase rural land for future tailing

storage

In November 2018 Oceana Gold applied for approval to purchase rural land for the purposes of

constructing a further tailing impoundment facility to future-proof" its business and enable the

company to continue exploring for additional gold resources in the region.

There is capacity in the current tailings storage facilities for a further decade or so of

processing but not sufficient for any further major mining projects.

Under the provisions of the Overseas Investment Office Act rural land is deemed to be

“sensitive” land and any application from an overseas investor to purchase it must meet the

tests laid out in the Act and in any Ministerial Directive Letter. The current Directive Letter was

issued by the Honourable Grant Robertson, Minister of Finance, in November 2017.

Applications must be approved by the Minister for Land Information New Zealand (Eugenie

Sage) and the Associate Minister of Finance (Dr David Clark). Both Ministers must approve

each application. If one approves an application and the other does not, then the application

must be declined.

The Overseas Investment Office officials and the Associate Minister of Finance recommended

approval of the applications but the Minister for Land Information did not; therefore, the

applications were declined.

It would not be appropriate for staff to provide commentary on this matter.

Project Martha - Implementation

As reported last month implementation of Project Martha is now underway. There are a

number of management plans that need to be prepared by Oceana Gold and then reviewed

and certified by the Council. Management plans for Project Martha that have been received so

far are:

Noise Management Plan: draft (for land use) received 14 March. This was reviewed by

the Council’s Noise expert and staff and amendments made. The plan was certified on 3

May 2019 and is available on the web page. Landscape Management Plan: draft received 28 March. The plan was referred to

Council’s landscape expert and was certified on 23 April 2019 and is available on the

web page. Void Management Plan: draft received 26 March. This was referred to Council’s

geotechnical expert for review. The requested amendments were made and the Plan

was certified on 24 April and is available on the web page. Dewatering and Settlement Monitoring Plan: draft received 3 April; referred to Council’s

geotechnical and ground settlement expert to review land settlement/stability matters.

The requested amendments were made and the Plan was certified by HDC on 2 May.

Certification is also required by the WRC. Once this is received the Plan will be made

available on the webpage. Vibration Management Plan: received 14 March. This was reviewed by Council’s

vibration and blasting expert and staff and comments were sent to Oceana Gold. A

further draft was provided and reviewed by staff and Council’s vibration expert. The

Plan was certified on 17 May 2019. Pit Slope Management Plan: draft provided 18 April. While a preliminary review of the

draft has been undertaken by Council’s geotechnical expert, before certification can be

progressed the Martha Pit Peer Reviewers are required to the review the Plan. Their


of 12

reports have been received. It is expected that their recommendations will be included

in the next draft of the Plan for review. The Hazardous Substances Use and Management Plan has been received and is

currently being reviewed. We are still awaiting the Construction Management Plan which is required prior to work

commencing on the proposed noise bund on the north wall. The consent cannot be exercised until these management plans have all been certified and a

number of other pre-exercise conditions have also been met. Mining Permit Application - Wharekirauponga

Oceana Gold (and Newmont Waihi Gold before it) have undertaken exploration drilling at the

Wharekirauponga site which is situated in the north of the District inland off Parakiwai Quarry

Road. In its latest releases of resources Oceana Gold indicated that, with a limited amount of

exploration drilling, it had identified a significant find of gold bearing veining at the site but

that further exploration drilling would be undertaken to confirm the extent of the resource. Oceana Gold has now announced that it has applied for a mining permit on Friday 10 May

which, if granted, would allow for further exploration activity and resource evaluation to take

place and potentially mining to occur. However, before any mining can occur access

agreements would be required and resource consent applications would have to be granted. The following explanation is from Oceana Gold’s corporate website: “If granted, this means we have the right to extract the minerals underground (which belong

to the government). However, a mining permit doesn’t mean we can mine. Any mining activity

is controlled by the Resource Management Act, and any application for consents for new

mining on this scale would be made in consultation with the public.

If we are granted a mining permit, our next phase of work will be studies and engagement to

see whether we can apply to mine beneath Wharekirauponga in a way that that meets the

technical, cultural, social and environmental requirements of the area.

The area’s primary use is conservation, and everything we do on the conservation estate

respects these values.

Like all the work we do, we’re operating responsibly at Wharekirauponga, and have firm

development commitments that guide the project:

We’ve ruled out mining on the surface due to the location and nature of the Conservation

land.

We believe we can enter from outside Conservation land and tunnel underground to the

minerals, with all processing using existing facilities at Waihi.

A Mining Permit does not give us the right to mine. Our next step is further study and

engagement to assess whether this can all be done in an appropriate manner”.

Monitoring Reports Received

Quarterly Vibration report – January – March. There were no issues arising from this report. Quarterly Noise report – January – March. There were no issues arising from this report. Dewatering and Settlement report – 2018. This report was reviewed by Council’s geotechnical

and ground settlement expert and by staff. A number of clarifications and small amendments

were sought. The report has been updated and a final review is needed. Social Impact Management Plan – 2018 Annual Report – This has been received and is

currently being reviewed by staff. It contains relevant data and analysis on the required


of 12

indicators and has a very well prepared and presented section titled “The 2018 Year in

Review”. Once reviewed and any amendments made the report will be made available on

Council’s website page https://www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/our-district/mining/monitoring Peter Thom Group Manager: Planning and Environmental Services


https://www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/our-district/mining/monitoring

of 12

Appendix A: Monitoring Report Publication of the Annual

Report.

That the Annual Report is

completed, audited and

adopted by Council by 31st

October, each year.

The last Annual Report for 2017/18 was adopted on 24 October

2018.

Special Consultative

Procedure

That all issues subject to a

special consultative

procedure meet the

requirements of the Local

Government Act, 2002.

This has been undertaken as required with all Council Plans; Policies and Bylaws. At the time of writing, the joint sub-regional

review of the Waste Minimisation and Management Plan is

currently being consulted on in the form of the special

consultative procedure.

Resource Consents &

LIMs

Target Progress towards success

All notified resource

consents applications are

decided and issued within

statutory timeframes.

99% of all notified resource

consent applications are


70 working days.

30 April 2019

Notified Consents to the end of April 2019 In 0 Out of time 0 (Limited Notified)

All non-notified resource

consent applications are


statutory timeframes.

All non-notified consent

decisions, not requiring a

hearing, are issued within

20 working days.

1 July 2017 – 30 April 2019

Total 170 In time 170 100% Out of time 0

0%

Land Use 83 In time 83 100% Out of time 0 0 %

Subdivision 40 In time 40 100% Out of time 0 0 %

Other

Misc/Desig 28 In time 28 100% Out of time 0 0 %

Variations 18 In time 18 100% Out of time 0 0 %

Objections 1 In time 1 100% Out of time 0 0 %

Ext. of time

- In time - 100% Out of time 0 0 %


of 12

Issue

building

consents

within

statutory

timeframes.

100% of all

building

consents are

issued within

statutory

timeframes -

20 working

days

Apr-18

YTD 2017/18

Apr-19 YTD

2018/19

No. of Consents 23 318 30 318

% in time 100% 100%

New Houses

Paeroa 18 26

Waihi 54 49

Plains 24 34

TOTAL 96 109

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

No

. o

f B

C's

Month

Number of BC Processed

2017/18 '2018/19

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

18.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Nu

mb

er

of

Days

Month

2018/19 Average Processing Time of BC's

2017/18 2018/19


of 12

All LIMs are

issued within

statutory

timeframes

All LIMS are

issued within

10 working

days

Apr-18 YTD

2017/18 Apr-19

YTD 2018/19

No. of LIMs 49 350 32 383

% in time 100% 100%

LIMs by Ward

Paeroa 96 104

Waihi 146 159

Plains 108 120

TOTAL 350 383

# LIMS 2017/18

%in time 2017/18

Avg Processing

# LIMS 2018/19

%in time 2018/19

% Overtime

Avg Processing

July 20 100% 5.2 49 100% 0% 6.50

August 33 100% 5.7 49 100% 0% 6.00

September 33 100% 6.5 32 100% 0% 6.10

October 34 100% 6.7 45 100% 0% 6.04

November 39 92% 7.1 44 100% 0% 5.30

December 23 100% 5.4 28 100% 0% 4.3

January 28 100% 5 25 100% 0% 4.7

February 39 100% 5.6 34 100% 0% 5.8

March 52 100% 6.6 45 100% 0% 6.5

April 49 98% 6.2 32 100% 0% 5.4

May 38 100% 5.8

June 34 100% 6.9

TOTAL 388 99% 6.05 383 100% 0% 5.60

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

No

. o

f L

IMS

Month

LIMS Processed

2017/18 2018/19


of 12


of 5

Information Report


From: Group Manager Planning and Environmental Services

Date: [Date of the document]

File reference: Document: 2580809 Appendix A:

Portfolio holder: Councillor Milner


Subject: Building System Legislative Reform

Recommendation:


1 Summary

Ministry of Business Innovation & Employment (MBIE) are proposing major changes to New

Zealand’s building laws to improve the quality of building work. These are the most significant

reforms since the current Building Act was introduced in 2004.

The proposed changes affect people, products and practices in the building sector. The proposed changes are outlined in a MBIE discussion paper they have released which is open for submissions until 16th June. This consultation seeks feedback on changes in five areas: building products and methods, risk and liability, occupational regulation, the building levy, and offences, penalties and public notification.

2 Background

The building sector builds and maintains the buildings where New Zealanders work and live. It

is vital to the country’s economic and social success. The building sector is New Zealand’s fourth largest employer, with nearly 10 per cent of the

workforce. It contributed nearly $15 billion to the economy in the year ending March 2017.

Every $1 invested in construction produces between $2.51 and $3.11 in economic activity.1

The building sector helps deliver government programmes that include KiwiBuild, public

housing and infrastructure. House building – just one part of the building sector picture – is

growing to meet demand. Over 31,000 new apartments and houses got building consents in

2017. MBIE expects another 220,000 to get consents by 2023.


of 5

New Zealand needs a building sector that builds safe and durable buildings that meet the

nation’s current and future needs. This Council averages around 350 building consents

annually with the number increasing in recent years. To date this financial year, the value of

work consented is around $55 million dollars for our District.

3 Content

The building sector faces a number of long-standing problems. These problems range from low

productivity and inefficient practices and processes, to skills and labour shortages, to poor

health and safety. During 2018, MBIE met with nearly 50 organisations that represent stakeholders in the

building sector. They met many people who work hard to deliver the best possible results.

These discussions helped us get a better understanding of the problems the sector is facing. MBIE heard concerns about the quality of building products and the lack of information about

them. We also heard concerns about whether some people who work in the building sector

have the right skills and competencies for the type of work they do. There were concerns that

some people avoid responsibility when something goes wrong – meaning the costs fall

disproportionately on homeowners and building consent authorities (BCAs). The concerns fall under three common themes:

Roles and responsibilities are not clear. Information is not available when it is needed. It is difficult to hold people accountable for the quality of their work

Their discussion paper sets out changes that aim to address those problems It can be

accessed via this link Consultation document. They have listened to stakeholders and developed proposals for changes to five areas of the

building regulatory system.

1. Building products and methods 2. Occupational regulation 3. Risk and liability 4. Building levy 5. Offences, penalties and public notification

These five areas make up what we call the building system legislative reform programme. Each

part of the discussion paper outlines the problems in more detail. They then set out proposed

changes that aim to address these problems. The proposed changes won’t address all of the

problems they have heard about. They’re focused on getting the basics right and filling gaps in

the regulatory system. More changes may be needed in the future. MBIE will continue to work

with the sector to implement any changes and identify future areas for reform. Waikato Building Group Cluster will be reviewing the proposed changes and will be providing a

combined submission from all the Waikato Councils that we will be contributing to.

4 Conclusion

MBIE wants our feedback on the building system legislative reform programme They want

feedback from stakeholders involved in every aspect of the building industry and every stage

of the building process. You will find questions throughout the discussion paper. MBIE welcome

other relevant comments in addition to their discussion document questions. This consultation


https://www.mbie.govt.nz/document-library/search?type%5b65%5d=65

of 5

seeks feedback on changes in five areas: building products and methods, risk and liability,

occupational regulation, the building levy, and offences, penalties and public notification. The Waikato Building Cluster group on behalf of the Waikato Councils will be submitting a staff

submission on the discussion document. Peter Thom Group Manager Planning and Environmental Services


of 5

Appendix A:

What’s in the reform package? These are the most significant reforms since the current Building Act was introduced in 2004. They affect people, products and practices across the sector. The proposals are summarised

below. There are more details about these proposals in the full discussion paper and

summaries of each part. Building products and methods

clarify roles and responsibilities for building products and methods require manufacturers and suppliers to provide information about building products strengthen the framework for product certification make consenting easier for modern methods of construction including off-site

manufacturing. Occupational regulation

change the licensed building practitioners scheme to raise the competence standards

and broaden the definition of restricted building work introduce a new licensing scheme for engineers and restrict who can carry out safety-

critical engineering work remove exemptions that allow unlicensed people to carry out plumbing, gas fitting and

drain laying work. Risk and liability

require a guarantee and insurance product for residential new builds and significant

alterations, and allow homeowners to actively opt out of it leave the liability settings for building consent authorities unchanged.

Building levy

reduce the building levy from $2.01 including GST to $1.50 including GST (per $1,000) standardise the building levy threshold at $20,444 including GST allow MBIE to spend funds raised by the building levy on broader stewardship of the

building sector. Offences, penalties and public notification

increase the maximum financial penalties set different maximum penalties for individuals and organisations extend the time enforcement agencies can lay a charge from six months to 12 months modify the definition of ‘publicly notify’ in section 7 of the Building Act.

Submissions close on 16 June 2019 Next steps We will use the information from the submissions to refine our proposals. The Minister for

Building and Construction will then decide what changes to recommend to Cabinet.


of 5

The changes are focused on three areas linked to people’s roles

We want the changes to help people work to high standards, and encourage the behaviours

that a high-performing sector needs. The proposed changes are closely linked to people’s

roles, and focus on three areas:

1. Setting out clear roles and responsibilities for all participants in the building system.

2. Making sure that people in all roles have the information they need to work to high

standards.

3. Holding people accountable to the responsibilities of their role Make sure things go right, and deliver fairer outcomes if things go wrong

The goal of the proposed changes is to lift quality throughout the building sector and: make sure things go right in the building process the first time deliver fairer outcomes when things do go wrong.

MBIE used five criteria to assess whether the proposed changes would lead to the

desired outcomes

Each part of the building system legislative reform programme has its own topic-related

objectives. These objectives are set out in the relevant part of the discussion paper. We have

used the five criteria set out below to assess the proposed changes.

Does the proposal meet the specific objectives for this topic?

Would the proposal support the desired behavioural shifts in the building sector?

Would the benefits of the proposal outweigh the costs and risks?

Is the proposal consistent with other parts of the building regulatory system?

Is the proposal consistent with related government policy and regulations?


of 8

Decision Report


From: Senior Project Planner


File reference: Document: 2582330 Appendix A: Martha Trust Deed Appendix B: Letter from Oceana Gold

Portfolio holder: Mayor Tregidga


Subject: Martha Trust - Activation

Recommendation: THAT the report be received, and THAT a report be taken to the Council’s Appointment Sub-committee to consider future appointments of Council appointed Trustees to the Martha Trust; and THAT the current exemption for the Trust be endorsed until August 2021 at which time a further review is required to be undertaken.

1 Purpose

The purpose of this report is to update Council on the activation of the Martha Trust and to seek decisions around relevant matters. The matter or suggested decision does not involve a new activity, service, programme, project, expenditure or other deliverable.

2 Background

The origin of the Martha Trust is in resource consent conditions for the Extended Martha Mine Area (EMMA) project that were issued by both the Waikato Regional Council and the Hauraki District Council in 1997. The decisions issued by the Councils were appealed to the Environment Court and the conditions, with relatively minor amendments, confirmed by the Court in 1998. The Trust was established to give effect to condition 3.31.13 of the EMMA consent (and the parallel WRC consents) which is as follows:

Report on Martha Trust -Activation

Page 1 of 36


of 8

“13 As soon as practicable after the grant of this consent and in any event prior to the

placement of PAF waste into Storage 1A, the consent holder, in consultation with the Councils, shall establish a Trust (“the Trust”) (charitable if possible) whose purposes and powers shall be:

• to take legal title after completion of the closure of the site to the land on

which Storage 2 and Storage 1A are located (as shown in Appendix G). The Trust shall have no power of sale of the land;

• to take legal title after completion of the closure of the site to the park to be formed at Junction Road (as shown in Appendix G);

• to take legal title after completion of the closure of the site to the land upon which the Water Treatment Plant is located (as shown in Appendix G);

• to monitor and maintain these facilities in perpetuity and to be responsible for such monitoring and maintenance as to ensure that Storage 2 and Storage 1A and the park (and proposed pit lake if acceptable to LINZ) remain in a stable, self- sustaining, rehabilitated state;

• to maintain and monitor the proposed pit lake (subject to agreement with LINZ);

• to obtain any resource consents that may be required after completion of the closure of the site and the expiration or surrender of this consent;

• without limiting the above, to take out insurance cover against unexpected risks;

• to reimburse the Councils for any costs incurred by them in monitoring or maintaining Storage 2 and Storage 1A, the park, and proposed pit lake;

• to invest any funds held to generate the necessary income to pay for the above purposes.

These purposes and powers shall be recorded in a Trust Deed approved by the Councils.

The Trust Deed shall provide: • that the Councils shall have the power to appoint two trustees each to the

Trust; • for the appointment by the Councils, after consultation with Ngati

Tamatera, of one additional trustee representing Ngati Tamatera; and • for the appointment by Te Runanga a Iwi o Ngati Tamatera Incorporated

of one advisory trustee representing Ngati Tamatera.” The Martha Trust Deed (attached as Appendix A) was subsequently prepared and executed in 2000 with the foundation trustees being Keith Laurenson (General Manager, HDC), Basil Morrison (Mayor, HDC), Barry Harris (Chief Executive Officer, WRC) and Neil Clarke (Chair, WRC). To establish the Trust, the Settlor (Waihi Gold Company) paid $10 to the Trust which is still held by Hauraki District Council. The “Exclusively Charitable Objects and Purposes” of the Trust are set out in Section 3 of the Trust Deed as: “3.1.1 Recreational Purposes: maintaining the Land and the facilities thereon in a

stable, safe and self-sustaining rehabilitated state with a view to providing the general public with recreational or leisure time facilities.

3.1.2 General: such things as are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the

charitable objects and purpose described in subclause 3.1.1.” The Trust Deed states that the Trustees shall take title to the Land to be vested in the Trust as soon as possible after closure of the site and after the relevant certificates of title become available. Closure of the site is determined by other consent provisions but is reached “when all the elements of the entire project(s) have been demonstrated by the consent holder to the


Page 2 of 36


of 8

satisfaction of the Councils to have reached a stable, self-sustaining, rehabilitated state as defined in the Rehabilitation Plan”. The Trust Deed also states (Section 4 Commencement of Trustees Functions and Powers) that: “4.1. Exercise of Powers and Functions: The Trustees shall not exercise any of their

powers or functions set out in clauses 5 and 7 until either: 4.1.1 Closure of Site: the closure of the site (as defined in the relevant

resource consents); or 4.1.2 Capital Sum: the Settlor settles any further capital sum(s) upon the

Trust whichever is the sooner.”

3 Activation of Trust

On 30 April 2019 Oceana Gold sent a letter to the current Trustees of the Martha Trust, copied to several staff of the Hauraki District and Waikato Regional Councils, regarding activation of The Martha Trust (letter attached as Appendix B). In the letter Oceana Gold advised of the need to activate the Trust to enable the Trust’s consideration of three matters, namely:

1. The execution of the proposed Escrow Deed in relation to the Martha Trust Land; 2. The amendment of the Deed of Trust to provide a more appropriate provision regarding

the opportunity to appoint trustees (both full and advisory) to represent the interests of iwi that have a special interest in the land to be owned by the Trust;

3. Consideration by the trustees of the opportunity for further land that is likely to be associated with future mine development to be added to the land to be transferred to the Trust for post-closure management.

In order to activate the Trust, Oceana Gold transferred the sum of $50,000 to Hauraki District Council as allowed for in clause 4.1.2 of the Trust Deed. The activation of the Trust enables the above matters and any other ‘activation’ matters to be considered by the Trust. Council staff have subsequently advised Oceana Gold that the $50,000 will be held in a Council suspense account until such time as the Martha Trustees have met and authorised the opening of a Martha Trust bank account. Oceana Gold was further advised that steps were being taken for the Trustees to formally meet to address Trust activation matters. It is important to note that both the EMMA consent and the equivalent Waikato Regional Council consent and the existing Trust Deed currently require that, at completion of the closure of the site, the Trust will take title to the land (the two tailings dams, the water treatment plant, and part of the land comprising the Martha pit and surrounds). These areas are to be monitored and managed in perpetuity in a stable, self-sustaining rehabilitated state and to are to provide the general public with recreational or leisure time activities. For these purposes the Trust is to be settled with a sufficient capital sum that will ‘capitalise’ the Trust. Once operational mining ceases the various sites are required to be rehabilitated to meet the definition of “closure” as detailed above. The required rehabilitation works are detailed in the Rehabilitation and Closure plan which is updated annually. This work includes filling the pit lake (which includes pumping in water from the Ohinemuri river at times of high flow) and will take 10 years. There is then a requirement for 5 year’s post filling water quality monitoring. Assuming Project Martha commences in 2019 and runs for 12 years, then the lake filling and monitoring proceed, the earliest the Trust will be fully capitalised for the sum in the capitalisation bond is 2046. At that point the Trust will also take responsibility and ownership for the ‘lands’.


Page 3 of 36


of 8

4 Issue and options

Appointment of HDC Trustees The Martha Trust Deed states (at section 6.1) that: “Hauraki District Council shall have the power to appoint two Trustees to represent

Hauraki District Council and Waikato Regional Council shall have the power to appoint two Trustees to represent Waikato Regional Council.”

When the Martha Trust Deed was executed in 2000 the Hauraki District Council appointed trustees were Keith Laurenson (General Manager) and Basil Morrison (Mayor). Since that time replacement Council appointments have been made in line with the employment of Langley Cavers as Chief Executive (in 2002) and the election of John Tregidga as Mayor (in 2005). From the start, the Hauraki District Council appointments were made mainly for the sake of convenience as at time the Martha Trust was not expected to be activated for many years and two Council appointed ‘holding’ trustees were required. In this respect it is important to note that the Trust Deed does not require the Council appointees to be the Chief Executive and the Mayor – the Council can appoint anyone it sees as fit to act in the role of Trustee, although appointments would be subject to Council’s Appointment and Remuneration of Directors for Council Organisations Policy 2015. Given that the Martha Trust has recently been activated, it is timely to consider whether or not the current Hauraki District Council Trustees are suitable/appropriate given the skills and expertise likely to be needed of a Council appointed trustee of the Martha Trust. While there is no legal conflict of interest with the current trustees and their Council/Trust roles, there could be a perceived conflict of interest. It is therefore recommended that a report be taken to the Council’s Appointment Sub-committee to consider the appointment of Council appointed Trustees to the Martha Trust. Iwi Trustees The Martha Trust Deed states (at section 6.2) that: “6.2 Appointment of Trustees to Represent Tangata Whenua: Hauraki District

Council and Waikato Regional Council shall jointly have the power to appoint, after consultation with Ngati Tamatera, one further trustee as an additional Trustee to represent Ngati Tamatera. In addition, Te Runanga A Iwi O Nagti Tamatera Incorporated shall have the power to appoint an Advisory Trustee to represent Ngati Tamatera.”

The above provision of the Martha Trust Deed is a reflection of the requirements of the EMMA and WRC consents, issued in 1998. It reflects that Ngati Tamatera was the active Iwi submitter at the time and appellant to the Environment Court. Since that time there have been changes in the levels of engagement between the Company and iwi. The Treaty of Waitangi settlement processes may result in further changes to the levels of engagement. For recent mining consent matters Ngati Hako has been the Iwi that has submitted to these consents (Martha Exploration Project (MEP) and Project Martha) and taken appeals to the Environment Court (MEP). As noted in the attached letter from Oceana Gold (refer to Attachment B), the Company intend to apply to the Councils to change the conditions of the EMMA resource consents (under section 127 of the RMA) to allow for full and advisory trustees to be appointed to represent the interests of all iwi with a special interest in the Trust land. It is important that the provisions of the Trust Deed regarding the appointment of Trustees to represent Tangata Whenua are consistent with the provisions of the EMMA consent/s. To this


Page 4 of 36


of 8

end Oceana Gold wish to initiate discussions with the Trustees around potential amendments to the Trust Deed that the Trust could initiate, and consultation with iwi that should be undertaken, prior to any such changes being initiated. Oceana Gold anticipates that the process of changing the Trust Deed will be coordinated with the process used to change the EMMA condition/s. Given that the EMMA consent expires on 18 October 2019 there is likely to be some urgency from the Company with regard to changing the EMMA consent. Possible amendments to the Trust Deed There are a number of provisions in the Trust Deed, in addition to those relating to the appointment of iwi trustees, that are outdated and in need of review and amendment. Now that the Trust is ‘activated’ there is the opportunity for the Trustees to consider amendments to update the Deed including:

• Updating the ‘Background’ to record Waihi Gold Company sold its undertaking to Oceana Gold Ltd

• Additional definitions for clarity (e.g. “Capitalisation Bond”, “Rehabilitation Bond”, “HDC”, WRC”, etc.).

• Inclusion of reference to the Charities Act 2005. • Provision for attendance at a Trustee meeting by telephone or electronically • Meeting notices able to be served by ‘electronic mail’ in addition to ‘facsimile’ • Provision for the chairperson to have a casting vote • Updating provisions relating to the ‘Eligibility of Trustees’

There are other matters relating to potential amendments to the Trust Deed that the Trustees may wish to consider in due course including: amendments to provide that a limited range of functions be undertaken by the Trustees now (e.g. reviewing the Rehabilitation and Closure Plan); provision that all actual and reasonable costs incurred prior to full capitalisation be met by Oceana Gold; provision that changes to the Trust Deed are to be with the approval of the Councils, etc. Review of CCO exemption The Martha Trust is a council controlled organisation (a CCO), unless exempted by the Hauraki District Council and the Waikato Regional Council, as 50% or more of the trustees are appointed by the Hauraki District Council and the Waikato Regional Council, including the Iwi Trustee. Both the Hauraki District Council and the Waikato Regional Council have passed resolutions every three years to exempt the Martha Trust as a CCO. In the case of the Hauraki District Council it was resolved: “THAT in accordance with section 7(3) of the Local Government Act 2002 the Martha Trust

be exempted as a council-controlled organisation on the basis that:

a) At the present time, the nature and scope of the activities provided by the organisation is effectively "nothing at all", and there are no issues of accountability that would require the imposition of the controls in Part 5 of the LGA.

b) There would be a substantial cost in complying with the requirements of Part 5 of the LGA, without any corresponding benefit until such time as the mine closure or the receipt of further funds activates the Trust, and

THAT the exemption be reviewed earlier than the statutory three years if either:

a) The closure of the site takes place; or b) The Settlor settles any further capital sums upon the Trust.”


Page 5 of 36


of 8

As advised earlier, Oceana Gold has now settled a further capital sum on the Trust and therefore, in line with the above resolutions, the CCO exemption is required to be reviewed. If the Trust is not exempt from the status of a CCO it would be required to meet the accountability and reporting regime in Part 5 of the LGA. The accountability requirements include having a statement of intent, preparing a half yearly report and annual report and financial statements, which must be audited by the Auditor-General (s 70).1 Section 7 of the LGA provides for the Council to exempt a small organisation that is not a council controlled trading organisation from the status of CCO and therefore the CCO requirements of the LGA. The exemption must be granted by way of resolution and the matters that must be considered are:

1. The nature and scope of the activities provided by the organisation; and 2. The costs and benefits, if an exemption is granted, to the local authority, the CCO and

the community. Pursuant to section 7(7) of the LGA Council may at any time revoke an exemption it has granted. The nature and scope of the activities that will be provided by the Trust in due course are significant, and of a type that should be subject to the accountability provisions in Part 5 of the LGA. However, at the present time the nature and scope of activities that the Trust is expected to engage in (outlined in the letter attached as Appendix B) are of a relatively minor and short-term nature as mine closure is not anticipated for many years. At this stage it is envisaged that the Trust will deal with its activation matters and the 3 matters of business requested by Oceana Gold. Following those matters, it is likely that the Trust will effectively “hibernate” until any further matters arise in relation to future consents or until it is capitalised. It is therefore concluded that at the current time there are no issues of accountability that would require the imposition of the controls in Part 5 of the LGA. In terms of the costs and benefits, if an exemption is granted, to the local authority, the CCO and the community, it is noted there is substantial cost in complying with the requirements of Part 5 of the LGA, without any corresponding benefit until such time as the mine is closed and the Trust is engaged in the activities for which it was primarily established for (i.e. to maintain and monitor the land and lake in perpetuity so that it can be used for recreational purposes). Conversely, the benefit to the local authorities, the Trust and the community of the exemption, is that compliance costs will be saved without any corresponding loss of benefit. It is therefore recommended that the current exemption for the Trust be endorsed until August 2021 at which time a further review is required to be undertaken.


This decision does not trigger the Significance and Engagement Policy Assessment Tool and therefore is not considered significant under the Significance and Engagement Policy 2017.

1 Sections - of the Local Government Act .


Page 6 of 36


of 8


There are no budget implications arising from the recommendations in this report as the Martha Trust is independent of Council and Oceana Gold have confirmed they will meet the reasonable costs that are incurred by the Trust in relation to the matters before it.

7 Recommendation

It is recommended that: • the Council’s Appointment Sub-committee consider future HDC appointments to the

Martha Trust • the current CCO exemption for the Martha Trust be reviewed at its scheduled review

date on 2021. Leigh Robcke Senior Project Planner


Page 7 of 36


of 8

Appendix A:


Page 8 of 36



Page 9 of 36



Page 10 of 36



Page 11 of 36



Page 12 of 36



Page 13 of 36



Page 14 of 36



Page 15 of 36



Page 16 of 36



Page 17 of 36



Page 18 of 36



Page 19 of 36



Page 20 of 36



Page 21 of 36



Page 22 of 36



Page 23 of 36



Page 24 of 36



Page 25 of 36



Page 26 of 36



Page 27 of 36



Page 32 of 36



Page 33 of 36


Oceana Gold (New Zealand) Ltd (Incorporated in New Zealand NZBN 9429 0377 53023)

43 Moresby Ave Waihi 3641 New Zealand

P O Box 190 Waihi 3610 New Zealand

Telephone: +64 7 863 8192 Facsimile: +64 7 863 8924 Website: www.oceanagold.com www.waihigold.co.nz

30 April 2019 Waikato Regional Council Hauraki District Council Private Bag 3038 PO Box 17 Waikato Mail Centre Paeroa Hamilton 3240 Attention: Alan Livingston (Chairperson - WRC) Attention: John Tregidga (Mayor – Hauraki District)

Vaughan Payne (CEO - WRC) Langley Cavers (CEO – HDC) cc Jim Milne (Legal Advisor to WRC), Andrew Green (Legal Advisor to HDC), Stephen Christensen (Legal Advisor

to Oceana Gold), Sheryl Roa (WRC Principal Advisor – Consents), Leigh Robcke (HDC Senior Project Planner), Kathy Mason (Oceana Gold Senior Environmental Advisor – Consenting)

By email Dear Trustees RE: ACTIVATION OF THE MARTHA TRUST We write to you as the owner of the Waihi Gold Mine and as the successor of the original settlor of the Martha Trust. We have three matters that Oceana Gold requests the trustees consider as a matter of priority. We recognise that whilst the Martha Trust has been formed, it is not active. We have also been advised that for the trustees to consider these matters, the Martha Trust will need to be activated and I also cover this at the end of this letter. The three matters are:

1. The execution of the proposed Escrow Deed in relation to the Martha Trust Land;

2. The amendment of the Deed of Trust to provide a more appropriate provision regarding the opportunity to appoint trustees (both full and advisory) to represent the interests of Iwi that have a special interest in the land to be owned by the Trust;

3. Consideration by the trustees of the opportunity for further land that is likely to be associated with future mine development to be added to the land to be transferred to the Trust for post-closure management.

Each of these matters is outlined further below. Escrow Deed

The Escrow Deed has been proposed to enable Oceana Gold to effectively achieve compliance with the EMMA conditions (EMMA consent 3.31 15-181). The Escrow Deed addresses the implications of the move to the

1 The same conditions exists in condition 10.15 to 10.18 of Schedule 1 to the WRC consents for the Martha Mine Extended Project and conditions 4 3 to 45 of Schedule 1 of the Project Martha consents (being the common conditions for both HDC and WRC).

Report on Martha Trust - Activation Page 34 of 36


http://www.oceanagold.com/

http://www.waihigold.co.nz/

Landonline regime, and the requirement for a subdivision to be completed so that the correct land identified in the EMMA consent is able to be transferred. The Escrow Deed is not a complicated document. It does however clarify the obligations of Oceana Gold (and its subsidiary company Waihi Gold Company Ltd), the Trust, and the two Councils, and it is important that it is executed. So far as the Trust is concerned, the obligations the Escrow Deed imposes seem to us to be reasonable and not onerous. They are to hold the Transfer Documents in escrow and not to register the transfers of land until completion of closure of the site (clause 3.1 of the Escrow Deed) and to sign documents and generally act as may reasonably be required to give effect to the Trust’s obligations under the Escrow Deed (clause 5.1). Oceana Gold would appreciate it if the Escrow Deed could be executed by the parties, including the Trust. Iwi Representation on the Trust

Clause 6 of the Trust Deed addresses the appointment of trustees and reflects the requirements of condition 3.31 13 of the EMMA consent. I understand that Oceana Gold and the Councils are agreed that the appointment of full and advisory trustees to specifically represent Ngati Tamatera, rather than all Iwi that have a special interest in the trust land, is now inappropriate. It follows that both the Trust Deed and the relevant EMMA consent condition should be changed to allow for full and advisory trustees to be appointed to represent the interests of all Iwi with a special interest in the trust land. We do not know the Trust’s view on this matter. The trustees have the power to amend the Trust Deed including the way future trustees are appointed (clause 8). We need to know whether you are willing to do that or not. Assuming you are willing, we need to understand the process the trustees want to go through in terms of consultation with Iwi before amending the Trust Deed. That process needs to be coordinated with the process of consultation Oceana Gold undertakes for the purpose of an application to change the EMMA land use consent condition, the WRC conditions for the Martha Mine Extended Project and the Project Martha conditions. There is now some urgency in getting this sorted out. The EMMA consent expires on 18 October this year, and if the condition is not changed before that date, any subsequent updating of the trustee appointment provisions will require a change to the Hauraki District Plan. Additional Land

The EMMA consent (condition 3.31 132) and the existing Trust Deed currently require that at completion of the closure of the site the Trust will take title to the land comprising TSF 1A and 2, the water treatment plant, and part of the land comprising the Martha pit and surrounds. These areas are to be monitored and managed in perpetuity in a stable, self-sustaining rehabilitated state and are to provide the general public with recreational or leisure time activities. For these purposes the Trust will be settled with a sufficient capital sum. Oceana Gold is investigating options to extend the life of the mine. Some of those options involve additional land that, if included in future mine development, will also require in-perpetuity monitoring and management and which will logically also form part of the land available for recreational and leisure time activities for the general public upon completion of closure. Logically, such additional land should also be transferred to the Trust so that the whole post-closure site can be managed in an integrated way to achieve the best outcomes for the public. Oceana Gold needs to understand whether the Trust will accept such additional land to be held for the same charitable purposes as the original trust land, and for that purpose seeks an opportunity to meet with the trustees

2 The same condition exists in condition 10.13 of Schedule 1 to the WRC consents for the Martha Mine Extended Project and condition 41 of Schedule 1 of the Project Martha consents (being the common conditions for both HDC and WRC).



to explain its development plans and to provide such information as the trustees may require to enable them to confirm (or not) that the Trust will take on additional land. Activating the Trust

Clause 4 of the Deed of Trust of the Martha Trust precludes the exercise of the trustees’ functions and powers until either the mine site is closed in accordance with its resource consents or a further capital sum is settled upon the Trust. To allow the trustees to consider these matters appropriately some costs will necessarily be incurred. To this end, Oceana Gold intends to meet the reasonable costs that will be incurred by the Trust in relation to these matters. To activate the Trust, Oceana Gold has transferred a provisional sum of $50,000 to HDC for the purposes of settling an additional capital sum into the Trust. While the settling of this capital sum will ‘activate’ the Trust, Oceana Gold does not anticipate the Trust will be required to undertake significant ongoing work at this time. Mine closure is not anticipated for some years, and until that happens, the land is transferred to the Trust, and the Capitalisation Sum provided for in the EMMA and other consents (and in subsequent consents that may be granted in relation to additional land) is settled, there will be little for the Trust to do, and the Trust’s ongoing operating costs will be small. Nevertheless, Oceana Gold accepts that some costs will be unavoidable on an ongoing basis. Oceana Gold will meet those reasonable costs and welcomes your view about an appropriate funding mechanism for this. We look further to hearing from you on these matters. Yours sincerely OCEANA GOLD (NEW ZEALAND) LTD

Bernie O’Leary General Manager – Waihi Operations



of 9

Decision Report


From: Transportation Manager


File reference: Document: M2584155 Appendix A: Capital Works Programme Appendix B: Roading Financial Measures

Portfolio holder: Councillor Adams


Subject: Transportation Report April 2019

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received, and THAT the Council approves/does not approve the request from the owner of 3 Buchanan

Street, Paeroa to remove three trees from the property, and THAT the Council selects whether a Non-subsidised District or a Non-subsidised Paeroa Ward

funded budget is to be used for this work to be done, if the decision is made to remove the

trees, and THAT the Council approves the design and undertaking of hard engineering works related to

the Ngatea Streetscape Project to align with the remedial works to be undertaken by NZTA,

and THAT the Council works closely with the community to develop concept plans before

undertaking the Streetscape component of the works.

1 Introduction

This report provides the latest information on the Hauraki District Council’s Transportation

activities for the period ending 30 April 2019. A resolution is requested from Council with regards to a request from a Rate Payer to remove

trees from a private property. An update on the Ngatea Streetscape project is given and a resolution is requested with

regards to the continuation of the project.


of 9

2 Discussion

2.1 Operational Activities

2.1.1 Key Operational Achievements

A summary of operational maintenance work and activities done during the month of April

2019 is given below: The Roading Team worked together with the Roading Maintenance Contractor to source

suitable unsealed road metals and to prepare trial sections. Finding suitable materials

for maintaining the unsealed road network has been an ongoing problem in the last few

years. The issue is being addressed by arranging for various blends of materials from

quarries in the vicinity to be tested and trialled. There are 20 culverts (less than 600mm in diameter) currently being replaced on the

network. Repairs were done to the superstructure of the Mangawhero Rd bridge following damage

caused by a truck. Preparation for the repairs to the Kaihere Rd Bridge No. 1 deck is underway. The bridge

is currently under temporary traffic management with the damaged section being

covered with a steel plate. Powerpole replacements in Kaiaua is currently being planned with the timeline for the

installation approximately 2-3 months away. High trim of trees on Crown Hill Rd and Old Waitawheta Rd was completed. Annual remark of roadmarkings are 95% completed. Annual round of pest plant spraying along road reserves are completed.

As part of the Asset Management Plan Improvement actions a review was conducted of the

Land Transport Asset Management Practices. The final report is still awaited but in general it

was confirmed that the Asset Management Maturity Index still ranks at “Intermediate” as per

the HDC Asset Management Policy. The following unsealed roads are programmed for heavy maintenance and remetalling in the

next two months. Dickey Flat Rd Fairview Rd Mckinney Rd Phillips Road Pouarua Rd South Princes St (Waikino) Pukewera Rd South Rd Thorn Rd (North)

2.1.2 Comments on Expenditure Financial Year to date

Revenue Grants from NZTA are lower than budget as a result of lower than anticipated capital spending. Expenditure Overspending in Pavement Maintenance is due to early completion of pre-seal repairs one year

in advance of reseals and the upcoming heavy maintenance programme on unsealed roads in

autumn. This is offset by delays in Bridge Maintenance programme and lower than expected

expenditure in Minor Safety Projects. Footpath Maintenance will likely end behind schedule

this financial year.


of 9

Capital Expenditure Roading capital programme for pavement rehabilitation is underspent this year as construction

will only be done in 2019/20. Minor Improvement programme delivery has been delayed due

to lack of resources.

2.2 Capital Projects

2.2.1 Key Capital Project Achievements

Table 1 below shows the progress on the main capital projects scheduled for the 2018 / 19

financial year. Table 1: Main Capital Projects – 2018/19

Budget, Programs and Projects Progress

% complete

Comments / explanations (if off

track)

Reseals – 2018/19 100% Completed

Reseals – 2019/20 90%

Work on the 2019/20 pre-seal

repairs was completed in February

2019. Reseal designs received in

April. Tender document to be

completed in May and Tender to be

advertised in June.

Pavement Rehabilitation – 2018/19

and 2019/20 50%

Designs are completed. Engineering

cost estimates are below budget.

Tender documentation being

finalised. Design projects for 2020/20 to be

confirmed following a review of the

FWP

LED Streetlight Renewals 100% Project completed

Minor Improvements (2018-19) Selected

35%

Off-track.

Some projects

will be

designed in this

financial year

to be

implemented in

2019/20

Selected Projects to date: Rahu Rd Scour Design

(Resiliency). Completed. Deam Rd Scour (Resiliency).

On hold pending resources. Waharau bridge abutment

protection (resiliency) –

construction to commence in

June. Miller Ave School Pedestrian

Safety Improvements.

Completed. Waihi East Primary School

Safety Improvements – on

hold pending resources. Ainslie street speed humps to

be done with the K+C project Station Rd/SH25 intersection

pedestrian crossing design

commenced.


of 9


% complete


track)

Gilmour Rd Traffic Calming –

Traffic calming measures

implemented. Gilmour Rd Heavy Vehicle

Prohibition signs to be

installed in June 2019. Waitete Rd footpath between

Kimberley and Rata Streets

design progressing. Paeroa College Footpath design

commenced. Liaison with

NZTA and land owner to

commence. Network wide crash analysis –

top 11 roads identified and

scope of safety projects

being discussed with

preferred consultant. Negotiations commenced with

external Project Manager to

drive Minor Improvements

Implementation in the next

two years.

Ward Projects 2018/19 35%

Toomey street footpath

renewal and improvements –

Completed. Ainslie street K+C –

Construction completed.

Signs and roadmarking to be

completed. Kerepehi Town Rd Footpath

Renewal design completed.

Engineer’s Estimate is

approximately 80% higher

than budget estimate due to

driveway issues which has to

be rectified. Further review

of design and budgets

required. Paeroa Ward projects agreed

with Ward. Tech Services commenced

work on preparing a three

year FWP. Roading Financial

Contributions will be

reconciled and taken into

consideration.

Hopai West Bridge Repair 95% Construction completed. PS3

received. Awaiting PS4.

Mahuta Rd North Underslip 50%

Detail Design drawings and

Engineer’s Estimate received.


of 9


% complete


track)

Cost Estimate Breakdown: Historic costs: $27000 Project Management and Design:

$44000 Supervision: $15000 Construction (Engineer’s Estimate):

$330000 Land take: $25000 Total = $441000

Land Take Negotiations progressing.

A Decision Report with final costs on

land take and Project Management

included will be presented to Council

in June for approval before going

out on Tender in June.

East Coast Rd Slip (Auckland

Transport) 95%

Auckland Transport has indicated

that the retaining structures are

completed. Stabilisation and sealing of the road

surface will be completed in May. The Project is still tracking within

budget. Progress Key:

..... = Off track / behind schedule / over budget

..... = Rescheduled

..... = Off track but will be back on track soon

..... = On track

... . = Completed

2.2.2 Key Capital Projects Planned for May 2019

The work scheduled for May 2019 is shown in Table 2 below.

The capital programme for the financial year is shown in Appendix A attached. Table 2: Capital Work Programme for May 2019

Project Ward Comments

Pavement Rehabilitation – 2018/19 District Tender documentation to be

prepared for tendering in June 2019. Minor Improvements (2018-19) District Project designs to continue. Mahuta Rd North Plains Land take negotiations to continue. Waharau Bridge Scour Repairs Plains Construction to commence.

Ward projects District

Construction to complete on Ainslie

street. Waihi Ward FWP to be done. Plains ward Kerepehi Town Rd

Footpath Renewal project to be

procured.


of 9

2.2.3 Key Issues and Risks

The following major risks associated with the capital programme have been identified. Table 3 – Capital Programme Risks

Issue or Risk Budget

implications Mitigation Measures

Delivery of Capital programme due

to lack of resources High Negotiations with external Project

Manager underway.

3 Request to remove trees on private property

A request was received from the owner of 3 Buchanan Street, Paeroa, for Council to remove

three trees planted along the street facing boundary of the section. The trees are not located

in the road reserve but are on the property itself. There is currently no fence between the

road reserve and the section. The owner cited the following reasons why Council should be removing the trees:

Council planted the trees more than 10 years ago when the sewerage lines in this area

were renewed. The trees were planted on the property to stop the roots from damaging the sewer line.

The owner claims that they had no say in where the trees were planted. Approximately two years ago Council pruned the trees when it encroached on nearby

powerlines. Council removed trees in front of a neighbour’s property approximately 3 years ago. The trees are currently encroaching on the sewerlines as well as powerlines.

Of the above statements we are only able to verify the following:

Council’s utility teams are not aware of any damage to the sewer line in front of the

property. There is a palm tree encroaching onto powerlines feeding into the property. The palm

tree is however not one of the trees that is requested to be removed. The trees are currently in excess of 5 metres high. Due to the requirement for Temporary

Traffic Management and stump grinding the removal is likely to be costly. Based on

comparison with other similar project the cost is expected to be between $15,000 to $25,000.

The expense will not be subsidised by NZTA. Council is hereby requested to decide whether the trees should be removed.

4 Ngatea Streetscape

NZTA have indicated that they will not undertake the remedial works on SH2 through Ngatea

until at least October 2019. Aside from the works they are required to undertake to the

trafficked lanes there is additional works that require to be undertaken. These works are

generally outside of the possible streetscape works, however are included within the overall

project. These works include: 1. Vertical realignment of kerbline. The existing kerbline has settled in some locations and

now sits below the sumps causing ponding during rain events. Other sections of kerb

are damaged to the point of requiring renewal.


of 9

2. On-street carparking area. The seal and general geometric shape of the carparking area

has deteriorated and requires remedial works. It would be prudent to finalise the engineering design and be in a position to undertake these

works at the same time as NZTA undertake the remedial work of the carriageway as this will

allow for correct shaping of the entire road cross-section. Design work is already underway for

the realignment of the kerbline. While this work has been included in the overall streetscape project, it is effectively enabling

works or hard engineering and not “beautification” or actual streetscape component of the

works. The streetscape component will require public consultation. It is recommended that the Council approve the enabling or hard engineering works and that

the works be planned to align with the remedial works to be undertaken by NZTA.

5 Conclusion and Recommendation

In conclusion it is noted that all major projects are progressing. It is hereby recommended: THAT the report be received, and THAT the Council approves/does not approve the request from the owner of 3 Buchanan

Street, Paeroa to remove three trees from the property, and THAT the Council selects whether a Non-Subsidised District or a Non-subsidised Paeroa Ward

funded budget is to be used for this work to be done, if the decision is made to remove the

trees, and THAT the Council approves the design and undertaking of hard engineering works related to

the Ngatea Streetscape Project to align with the remedial works to be undertaken by NZTA,

and THAT the Council works closely with the community to develop concept plans before

undertaking the Streetscape component of the works. Lukas de Haast TRANSPORTATION MANAGER


8

Appendix A

Capital Works Programme

Project July

2018

Aug

2018

Sep

2018

Oct

2018

Nov

2018

Dec

2018

Jan

2019

Feb

2019

March

2019

April

2019

May

2019

June

2019

Reseal Contract xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

Pavement Rehabilitation designs and tender xxxx xx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

Minor Improvements Individual projects progressing

Ward projects Individual projects progressing

LED Streetlight Renewals xxxx xxxx xxxx Xxxx xxxx

Rahu Rd Embankment Failure xxxx xxxx xxxx

Hopai West Bridge Repair xxxx xxxx xxxx Xxxx

Waharau Bridge Scour Repairs xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx


9

Appendix B:

Roading Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019

Operating Revenue (excluding Rates & Capital funding from NZTA) Operating Expenditure Capital Expenditure




$1,849,000 $3,629,000 $1,625,000

0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200

Administration

Amenity Maintenance

Non-Subsidised Works

Other Subsidised

Pavement Maintenance

Professional Services

Public Transport

Thousands



RevenueGrants from NZTA are lower than budget as a result of lower than anticipated capital spending.

ExpenditureOverspending in Pavement Maintenance is due to early completion of pre-seal repairs one year in advance of reseals and the upcoming heavy maintenance programme on unsealed roads in autumn. This is offset by delays in Bridge Maintenance programme and lower than expected expenditure in Minor Safety Projects. Footpath Maintenance which sits under other subsidised works will likely end behind schedule this financial year.

Capital ExpenditureRoading capital programme for pavement rehabilitation is behind schedule. Following the Council acceptance of the rehab strategy, this position will be revisited once the options have been finalised.

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000

Roading

Thousands

Capital Expenditure



of 4

Decision Report


From: Transportation Manager

Date: Thursday, 9 May 2019

File reference: Document: 2581406 Appendix A: Final Memorandum of Understanding with NZTA -M2582632

Portfolio holder: Councillor Adams


Subject: Transport Decision Report – NZTA MOU

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received, and THAT Council endorses the Memorandum of Agreement with NZTA as attached in Appendix

A of this Report. THAT Authority to act as signatory to this Memorandum of Agreement is delegated to the

Group Manager – Engineering Services.

1 Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with regards

to the cooperation with New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA), on ongoing maintenance and

defining responsibilities on State Highways in the Hauraki District. The MOU is presented to

Council for approval and to delegate authority of signatory to the Engineering Group Manager. The matter or suggested decision does not involve a new activity, service, programme,

project, expenditure or other deliverable.

2 Background

There are approximately 150km of State Highway in the Hauraki District which is

administrated and maintained by NZTA through a Network Outcomes Contract (NOC) with

Higgins Contractors. These State Highways are SH2, SH26, SH27 and two sections of SH25. Interaction between Hauraki District Council and NZTA occurs mainly at intersections of local

district roads with State Highways and where State Highways sections are located within urban


of 4

areas. In these areas the HDC and NZTA often has to work together in order to achieve the

best outcome for the general road user and the Hauraki District community. The purpose of the MOU is to clearly define and assign the areas of responsibility on State

Highways and to facilitate the process of ongoing maintenance and management of the

corridors. Consultation between NZTA and HDC on the MOU has been ongoing for a number of years and

up to now the understanding of responsibilities has been based on a previous MOU dated

2001, which was based on the NZTA funding rules and the NZTA State Highway Control

Manual.

3 Issue and options

In the last year the MOU has been finalised by a group containing representatives of NZTA,

Matamata-Piako District Council, Thames-Coromandel District Council and Hauraki District

Council. The current draft MOU is in line with overarching funding rules and operational

guidelines, whilst allowing for exceptions, as well as delegations to HDC. The main theme throughout the MOU, as is the case with the funding rules, is that NZTA is

typically responsible for the functionality of the roads in terms of providing for mobility,

whereas amenity value is to be provided for by the local authority. In rural areas (speed limit higher than 70km/h) NZTA takes responsibility for the entire road

corridor, whereas in urban areas (less than 70km/h speed limit) the split in responsibility lies

at the back of the kerb. Everything on State Highways in urban areas, between the back of

kerb lines are generally maintained by NZTA and between back of kerb line and boundary lines

are maintained by HDC. The only exception to this general principle is that the cleaning and

inspection of urban stormwater catchpits between the kerb lines is the responsibility of HDC. It is noted that, following signature of the MOU, certain Delegation Agreements can be put in

place if required. It is noted that a Delegation Agreement to the Council to administrate

relevant activities, such as no stopping and parking restrictions in urban area might be

required. This could include issues such as abandoned vehicles and sale of vehicles in urban

berm areas. The finalized draft MOU can be found attached in Appendix A to this report. The main

exception to the general terms of the MOU is that decorative streetlights along the Paeroa and

Waihi main streets are to be maintained by HDC. All of the above has been general practice in recent years and is now being formalized with the

MOU.

4 New deliverable

The Local Government Act 2002 now requires that all local government deliverables (whether

it be an activity, service, project, programme, grant or involve any other form of expenditure)

must align to the purpose of local government as outlined in Section 10 of the Local

Government Act. For the Council’s information, the decision is not new.


of 4


This decision does not trigger the Significance and Engagement Policy Assessment Tool and

therefore is not considered significant under the Significance and Engagement Policy 2017. The level of engagement considered appropriate for this matter, at this point in time, is to

inform (i.e. one-way communication disseminating information) the general public of the

decision by allowing access to the report.


The MOU is in line with the current funding rules and therefore will have no impact on current

budgets.

7 Recommendation

The Council should make its decision on which option to choose based on that option being the

most cost effective, and good quality option for the Hauraki District (s10 of the Local

Government Act 2002). It is recommended: THAT the report be received, and THAT Council endorses the Memorandum of Agreement with NZTA as attached in Appendix A

of this Report. THAT Authority to act as signatory to this Memorandum of Agreement is delegated to the

Group Manager – Engineering Services. Lukas de Haast Transportation Manager


of 4

Appendix A:


State Highway Corridor Maintenance

Agreement

between

The New Zealand Transport Agency

and

Hauraki District Council

May 2019


STATE HIGHWAY CORRIDOR MAINTENANCE CORRIDOR AGREEMENT

between

the NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY

and


Signed for and on behalf of }

The NEW ZEALAND TRANSPORT AGENCY by }

Pete Connors }

Transport Systems Manager

Authorised Signatory } ………………………………………………………………………………

in the presence of:

Witness’ Signature ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Name …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Occupation………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Address ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Signed for and on behalf of }

HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL by }

}

Adrian de Laborde

Group Manager - Engineering Services

Engineering Services }

Authorised Signatory } ………………………………………………………………………………

in the presence of:

Name …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Occupation………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Address ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………


DOCUMENT REVISION CONTROL RECORD

Created By The NZ Transport Agency (Waikato Region)

Date Created September 2018 Date Issued May 2019

Maintained By The NZ Transport Agency (Waikato Region)

Version Modified

By

Modifications Made Date

Modified

Status

1 K Tao -

The NZ

Transport

Agency

1. Added note regarding the NZ Transport Agency’s

Planning and Investment Knowledge Base

2. Urban area stormwater asset maintenance

including Indicative Asset Maintenance Diagram

18 07 18 Draft

2 S Fendall –

The NZ

Transport

Agency

1. Restructuring to minimise confusion around

section purposes / double ups.

2. Culled too detailed content from newly-named

Purpose.

3. Added some basic definitions; Responsible,

funding, funding assistance

18 07 18 Draft

3 K Tao -

The NZ

Transport

Agency

1. Removed clause re Maintenance Zone Maps

2. Added Schedule I Other Known Agreements

26 09 18 Draft

4 K Tao -

The NZ

Transport

Agency

Changes made following consultation with Hauraki,

Thames Coromandel and Matamata-Piako District

Councils in December 2018

30 01 19 Draft

5 K Tao -

The NZ

Transport

Agency

Changes made following further consultation with

Hauraki, Thames Coromandel and Matamata-Piako

District Councils in March 2019

03 05 19 Final

Draft

6 K Tao -

The NZ

Transport

Agency

Changed from Memorandum of Understanding to

Agreement

09 05 19 Final


CONTENTS

1 Purpose ..................................................................................................................... 1

2 Definitions ................................................................................................................. 2

3 Agreement ................................................................................................................. 3

3.1 Scope of Agreement ............................................................................................... 3

3.2 Term of Agreement ................................................................................................ 3

3.3 Administration of the Agreement ........................................................................... 4

3.4 Amendments to the Agreement .............................................................................. 4

3.5 Changes to the State Highway Road Extents ........................................................... 4

4 Extent of Maintenance Activities ................................................................................. 4

5 Roles and Responsibilities .......................................................................................... 4

6 Corridor Access.......................................................................................................... 5

6.1 The Council Working on the State Highway ............................................................ 5

6.1.1. Exceptions for Corridor Access Request (CAR) Applications ................................ 5

6.1.2. Generic Temporary Traffic Management Plans to Work on the State Highway ...... 6

6.2 The Transport Agency Working on the Council Local Networks .............................. 6

6.3 Traffic Management ............................................................................................... 6

6.4 Completed Works Inspection within Urban Areas ................................................... 6

7 Detours ..................................................................................................................... 7

8 Data Management ...................................................................................................... 7

9 Delegated Agreements and Bylaws .............................................................................. 8

10 Liaison and Communication ....................................................................................... 8

10.1 Meetings ................................................................................................................ 8

10.2 Consultation ........................................................................................................... 8

10.3 Key Contacts .......................................................................................................... 9

SCHEDULE A - HAURAKI DISTRICT BOUNDARY MAP ........................................................... 10

SCHEDULE B - STATE HIGHWAY NETWORK LOCATIONS...................................................... 11

SCHEDULE C - STATE HIGHWAY URBAN AREAS .................................................................. 12

SCHEDULE D - EXCEPTIONS TO STANDARD MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES ..................... 13

SCHEDULE E - MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES BY ACTIVITY AND BY PARTY ..................... 16

SCHEDULE F - TYPICAL MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY DIAGRAMS .................................... 31

SCHEDULE G - KEY CONTACTS ......................................................................................... 32

SCHEDULE H – NOC BOUNDARIES ..................................................................................... 34

SCHEDULE I – OTHER KNOWN AGREEMENTS ...................................................................... 35


SH Maintenance Agreement between the NZ Transport Agency and Hauraki District Council May 19 | Page | 1

1 PURPOSE

This State Highway Corridor Maintenance Agreement (the Agreement) clarifies the

responsibility for maintenance on all state highways within the Hauraki District boundary. It is

prepared based on the policies and principles, including user pays, set out in the NZ Transport

Agency’s Planning and Investment Knowledge Base which provides an over-arching guide for

all investment from the National Land Transport Fund in land transport. All road controlling

organisations are required to follow the guidelines in planning, developing and managing

activities for which they seek funding assistance.

The Agreement, the process for developing it, and its ongoing operation, are intended to build

and strengthen relationship between the NZ Transport Agency (the Transport Agency) and the

Hauraki District Council (the Council).

As parties to this agreement, all parties commit to acting co-operatively and collaboratively to

identify opportunities to optimise outcomes and benefits for users of the transport system.



2 DEFINITIONS

The following definitions are used within this document:

WORDING DESCRIPTION

The (maintenance)

Contractor

The company engaged directly by the Transport Agency to

provide professional services and physical works construction.

The company is delegated to carry out maintenance activities

outlined in Schedule E.

Responsible Unless stated otherwise, it includes funding/resources,

organisation and implementation. This does not preclude

funding assistance.

Funding Assistance The ability for a council to claim NLTF funding for a portion of

the costs associated with transport activities, through the

Transport Investment Online system.

Maintenance Includes operational activities related to preserving and keeping

the roadway, roadside, road structures in a safe and serviceable

condition. It includes repair, power supply, communications

supply, and renewal, simple replacement of existing assets.

Asset improvements are considered capital works which is

excluded from “Maintenance”.

Rural Area An area within a permanent speed limit greater than 70 km/hr.

Urban Area An area within a permanent speed limit of less than and equals

to 70 km/hr.

Maintenance Contract

Manager (MCM)

The Transport Agency’s personnel responsible for managing

maintenance contract activities on the Transport Agency’s road

network.

Bridge Consultant Specialist consultant employed by or contracted to the

Transport Agency offering professional expertise and advice on

bridges and structures maintenance and upgrade.

Traffic Management

Coordinator (TMC) A person, or position, in an organisation that has the delegated

authority from a road controlling authority (RCA) to approve

traffic management plans (TMPs), coordinate temporary traffic

management (TTM) and, where appropriate for local roads, to

delegate power to approve TMPs to others.

Traffic Management

Plan (TMP) A TMP is a site-specific or generic plan that covers the design,

implementation, maintenance and removal of temporary traffic

management (TTM) measures while work or activity is carried

out in the road corridor (road, footpath or berm).

Network Outcomes

Contract (NOC) A form of a contract which the Transport Agency has with a

contractor to provide maintenance for the state highway road

network.



WORDING DESCRIPTION

Corridor Access

Request (CAR)

Corridor Access Request is a control mechanism used by the

Transport Agency to manage activities on or affect state

highway corridors.

Network Manager (NM) The Transport Agency’s personnel responsible for managing

maintenance and operation of the Transport Agency’s highway

network at a Regional level.

Emergency Procedures

and Preparedness Plan

(EPPP)

The plan to outline the steps to be taken to prepare for and

respond to an emergency affecting the safety and wellbeing of

the public.

RAMM Road Assessment and Maintenance Management system

3 AGREEMENT

3.1 Scope of Agreement

This Agreement does not override any of the statutory duties or responsibilities imposed by

legislation on any party. It does not cover any other requirements or statutory provisions as

outlined in the Land Transport Management Amendment Act 2008 in respect of funding or

reporting for Local Roading managed by the Council. Rather it is an agreement as to processes

and behaviours the parties will exhibit as they jointly seek deliver integrated transport

outcomes for users of the transport network in Hauraki District.

This Agreement excludes capital improvements. If any new assets are to be constructed by

either party, then negotiations will occur on a case by case basis. The relevant schedules in

this Agreement will be updated as necessary.

This Agreement conforms with current policy (see the Transport Agency’s Planning &

Investment Knowledge Base (PIKB)); and supersedes any previous Memorandum of

Understanding between the Transport Agency and the Council effective from the signing of

this document by both parties.

A list of other known agreements between the Transport Agency and the Council is included

in Schedule I.

3.2 Term of Agreement

The term of this Agreement is ongoing. A formal review will be held at an interval of at least

once every five years, or as mutually agreed by both the Transport Agency and the Council in

order to reflect significant changes in current and best practice and/or any policy changes.

The Agreement will remain in effect until it is terminated by either party.



3.3 Administration of the Agreement

This Agreement shall be administered as a controlled document by the Transport Agency.

3.4 Amendments to the Agreement

Amendments to this Agreement may be necessary due to changes in legislation, policy, best

practice and capital asset improvements. Other changes shall be made by mutual agreement.

Amendments shall be agreed at liaison meetings except in cases of urgency when agreements

may be made at a special meeting or by an exchange of correspondence, endorsed by the

appropriate and authorised persons in the Transport Agency and the Council.

3.5 Changes to the State Highway Road Extents

Following changes to the network, such as the construction of realignments or revocation and

handover of state highway from the Transport Agency to the Council, both parties agree to

work together to reflect the changes into this Agreement within three months from the date

of the Defects Liability Certificate or other agreed date. Where agreed, the Transport Agency

will develop and provide an “owner’s manual” for the new assets. Area of risk shall be identified

and documented as appropriate.

Where the Transport Agency plans to declare and / or revoke a state highway, the Transport

Agency will engage and work with the affected Council in accordance with the ‘Land Transport

Management Act’: Section 103, the ‘State Highway Control Manual’ and the ‘State Highway

Revocation: Policy and Guidance Note’.

4 EXTENT OF MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES

Schedule A of this Agreement includes a map of the Hauraki District. This map shows the

network management areas, more than one of which may fall within the District. In this case,

the District sits across Auckland Motorway Alliance Network and East Waikato NOC. The

Transport Agency shall ensure a consistent approach across the two areas on all maintenance

activities covered by this document. A NOC boundary map is attached as Schedule H.

The state highways covered by this Agreement are listed in Schedule B of this document.

The schedule of urban areas is shown in Schedule C of this document.

5 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Schedule E includes details on the various maintenance items and respective responsibilities.

This is intended to match PIKB as closely as possible at the time of writing. Though PIKB is the

formal basis for these responsibilities, it does not cover all possible outcomes; some

interpretations have been made for clarity.



Where there are specific exceptions to PIKB and these are included as Schedule D. These

exceptions may be district wide or location specific.

In determining responsibilities, the hierarchy of documents is as follows, from highest to least;

i. Schedule D – Exceptions to Standard Maintenance Responsibilities

ii. The Planning and Investment Knowledge Base website

iii. Schedule E – Maintenance Responsibilities by Activity

iv. Schedule F - Typical Maintenance Responsibility Diagrams

Schedule D enlists maintenance responsibilities which are excluded from the standard scope

and supported by specific delegated authority agreements between the NZ Transport Agency

and the Council. These agreements override the general rules outlined in this document.

6 CORRIDOR ACCESS

6.1 The Council Working on the State Highway

When the Council is planning to carry out an activity within the state highway road reserve

(boundary to boundary) or affect the state highway operations, a CAR application and an

accompanying TMP is required. A 10-day minimum notice is to be allowed for processing the

consent by the Transport Agency unless the works is deemed to be for emergency purposes.

In this case the Transport Agency shall be notified as soon as practical thereafter.

The Council’s contractor is to advise the Transport Agency prior to carrying out any planned

works, with prior approved TMP.

6.1.1 Exceptions for Corridor Access Request (CAR) Applications

The only exceptions for not requiring an application for CAR prior to the proposed activity is

if it is classified as emergency work.

Emergency work is works that are urgently required to remedy or avoid imminent danger to

public safety or safe and efficient flow of traffic that has been created by an unexpected event

including but not limited to the following:

Power faults;

Signal faults;

Utility faults;

Crashes; and

Damage caused by storm and weather events and natural disasters.

The appropriate staff with the Transport Agency and TMC shall be notified at the earliest

convenience when emergency work is to be carried out by the Council.



The respective service provider will notify the TMC and other appropriate personnel from the

Transport Agency about these issues, if not prior to, at least within 24 hours following the

event.

6.1.2 Generic Temporary Traffic Management Plans to Work on the State Highway

Generic temporary traffic management plans or standing approval to work on the state

highway will be required for, but not limited to, the following activities:

• Pavement repair;

• Reseal;

• Footpath repair;

• Linemarking;

• Road furniture cleaning;

• Sign repair and cleaning;

• Gardening;

• Street sweeping;

• Mowing;

• Tree trimming;

• Graffiti removal;

• Litter removal;

• Street light maintenance; and

• Asset inspections.

Generic temporary traffic management plans must be approved by the Transport Agency and

will be valid for a 12-month period. For sites with limited sight distance and / or other safety

concerns, a site-specific TMP should be used.

Notification of commencement of an activity with a pre-approved generic TMP is to be

provided to the TMC within no less than 48 hours prior to the planned activity (Note that a

temporary speed limit can only be approved for a six-month deployment but may be approved

for longer if a new application is made to the Transport Agency for an extension).

6.2 The Transport Agency Working on the Council Local Networks

When the Transport Agency is planning to work within a local road reserve or affect local road

operations, an application for road corridor access accompanied by a TMP must be made for

Council’s approval not less than 10 days prior to the work progressing unless the works is

deemed to be for emergency purposes. In this case the Council shall be notified as soon as

practical thereafter.

The Transport Agency’s contractor is to advise the Council prior to carrying out any planned

works, with prior approved TMP.

6.3 Traffic Management

For all activities, the Code of Practice for Temporary Traffic Management (CoPTTM) most up-

to-date version is to be complied with for temporary traffic management.

6.4 Completed Works Inspection within Urban Areas

The TMC shall consult with the relevant representative from the Council when preparing the

Completed Works Inspection, as part of the CAR process, where the works completed:

Are within an urban area;

Are beyond the back of kerb and channel or edge of seal;



Affected the ground between the roadway and road boundary; and

Is within an area that the Council is responsible for ongoing maintenance.

Consultation can be achieved through:

The TMC and/or the Transport Agency’s Network Manager shall notify the Council

representative of the location of works and seeking feedback regarding reinstatement, or

The TMC and/or the Transport Agency’s Network Manager and a Council representative

meeting onsite and agreeing on the standard of reinstatement.

It is the responsibility of the NM to report substandard reinstatement to the Service Provider

who completed the works and for preparing the Completed Works Inspection report.

7 DETOURS

Detours will not be permitted on local roads other than those routes specifically agreed

through development of the Transport Agency's Emergency Procedures and Preparedness Plan

(EPPP), or by prior negotiation with the Council.

The Transport Agency maintains the EPPP that includes a series of detour maps applicable for

every section of state highway. The Council shall advise the Transport Agency regarding

weight restricted structures. During the updating of these maps the Council will be consulted

with. Any changes will be mutually agreed by both parties.

The Transport Agency shall liaise with the Council regarding temporary by-pass routes on

local roads as a result of restricted structural capacity on state highways or long-term

closures. Temporary by-pass routes are to be administrated by the Transport Agency and

approved by the Council who may wish to recover maintenance costs from the Transport

Agency where accelerated deterioration is observed as a result of the additional traffic using

the routes. This will be treated by the Transport Agency on a case by case basis.

Vehicles operating under Overweight, High Productivity Motor Vehicle Permits are not

permitted to use detours unless prior approval is given by the Council.

8 DATA MANAGEMENT

If any work is carried out by the Council within the state highway road reserve that affects the

information contained within the Transport Agency’s RAMM Database, all relevant update

forms and information is to be submitted to the Transport Agency within one month of

physical works completion. If the data is not received, then the Transport Agency has the right

to collect the information and invoice the Council for work required to acquire the information.

When the Transport Agency’s work affects local roads RAMM data, all relevant update forms



and information is to be submitted to the Council within one month of physical works

completion. If the data is not received, then the Council has the right to collect the information

and invoice the Transport Agency for work required to acquire the information.

9 DELEGATED AGREEMENTS AND BYLAWS

The delegation agreement is separate to the Agreement. A copy of this document shall be

included as an appendix in Schedule I. The Transport Agency is responsible for setting and

gazetting of any restrictions. Any cost associated with administrating the delegated activities

shall be funded by the Transport Agency.

The Council must consult the Transport Agency on their Traffic By-law in urban highways.

10 LIAISON AND COMMUNICATION

10.1 Meetings

The Transport Agency and the Council shall meet on a regular basis (at least quarterly and/or

as required) to discuss common issues and share forward work programmes in order to fully

inform both parties. Typically, the Transport Agency’s representatives, such as Network

Manager, Maintenance Contract Manager and NOC, shall attend the meetings to cover subject

matters associated with road maintenance matters and any impact on council assets.

Prior to undertake any programmed works, the NOC shall provide sufficient notification and

adequate details to the Council. Where appropriate, joint site inspections shall be carried out

prior to commencement and completion of the work to ensure any affected council assets are

identified and returned to good condition.

The Transport Agency shall administrate the meetings to ensure minutes are kept to document

roles and responsibilities for actions identified.

10.2 Consultation

Any programmed state highway work which affect road users and general public such as asset

renewal and replacement shall be discussed with both parties and a

communication/consultation plan shall be developed and agreed prior to the works

commencing.

The Transport Agency will consult with the Council and/or relevant stakeholders, regarding

planned asset renewal and replacement works during the draft programme phase.

The Transport Agency shall, directly or through NOC, coordinate with the Council on all non-

cyclical works within urban areas or near community facilities such as schools, halls or tourist

attractions. This is in recognition of the value of local activities that Council represents,



including economic performance, property access, utility services, parking and ability to cross

the highway.

10.3 Key Contacts

Typically, the Council shall communicate with the Transport Agency through the NOC MCM.

For reference, Schedule G includes other current contacts appropriate for this Agreement.


SH Maintenance Agreement between the NZ Transport Agency and Hauraki District Council May 19 | Page 10

SCHEDULE A - HAURAKI DISTRICT BOUNDARY MAP



SCHEDULE B - STATE HIGHWAY NETWORK LOCATIONS

Hauraki District – East Waikato NMA

STATE HIGHWAY LOCATION

SH2 RP 32/0.00 to 32/2.15 Waikato / Hauraki Boundary to SH2/SH25 roundabout to

SH2 RP 33/0.00 to 33/0.14 SH2/SH25 roundabout

SH2 RP 34/0.00 to 34/3.28 SH2/SH25 roundabout to SH27

SH2 RP 37/0.00 to 37/10.71 SH27 to Pipiroa Road

SH2 RP 48/0.00 to 48/12.87 Pipiroa Road to Hauraki Road

SH2 RP 61/0.00 to 61/11.08 Hauraki Road to SH26

SH2 RP 72/0.00 to 72/0.17 SH2/SH26 shared section

SH2 RP 73/0.00 to 73/20.47 SH26 intersection to SH25 intersection

SH2 RP 93/0.00 to 93/7.18 SH25 to Hauraki / West Bay of Plenty Boundary

SH25 RP 00/0.00 to 00/12.20 SH2/SH25 Roundabout to Pipiroa Road

SH25 RP 12/0.00 to 12/10.44 Pipiroa Road to Kopu Bridge

SH25 RP 22/0.00 to 22/0.31 Kopu Bridge to Centre of Kopu Bridge

SH25 RP 217/0.00 to 217/8.02 Otahu River Bridge to Whiritoa Stream Bridge

SH25 RP 226/0.00 to 226/16.14 Whiritoa Stream Bridge to SH2 intersection

SH26 RP 60/0.00 to 60/8.93 Matamata-Piako/Hauraki Boundary to SH2 intersection

SH26 RP 70/0.00 to 70/10.27 SH2 intersection to Hikutaia River Bridge

SH27 RP 00/0.00 to 00/15.74 SH2 intersection to Route Station 16 (culvert)

SH27 RP 16/0.00 to 16/5.49 Route Station 16 (culvert) to Pouruiri Stream Bridge



SCHEDULE C - STATE HIGHWAY URBAN AREAS

Hauraki District – East Waikato NMA

TOWN LOCATION

POSTED

SPEED LIMIT

(KM/HR)

Ngatea

SH2 RP 37/10.22 to 37/10.68 (480m west of Kohunui Street to

Kohunui Street 70

Ngatea

SH2 RP 37/10.68 to SH2 RP 48/0.98 (Kohunui Street to east end

of Piako River Bridge) 50

Ngatea

SH2 RP 48/0.98 to RP 48/1.49 (Piako River Bridge to speed limit

signs for 70km/h 70

Paeroa

SH2 RP 61/8.91 to RP 73/0.68 (Opukeko Road to gated speed

limit sign for 100km/h) 50

Paeroa

SH26 RP 60/8.08 to RP 70/1.93 (Approx. 150m south of Paeroa

College to Alpha Road) 50

Waihi

SH2 RP 73/19.00 to RP 73/19.98 (Approx. 70m southwest of

Orchard Road to approx.70m east of Barber Street) 70

Waihi

SH2 RP 73/19.98 to RP 93/0.92 (approx.70m east of Barber Street

to north of Heath Road) 50

Waihi

SH25 RP 226/13.87 to RP 226/14.32 (Approx. 90m east of

Gladstone Road to approx. 40m north of Richmal Street) 70

Waihi

SH25 RP 226/14.32 RP 226/16.14 (Approx. 40m north of Richmal

Street to SH2 / Rosemont Road) 50

Waitakaruru

SH25 RP 0/5.59 to RP 0/7.06 (Approx. 60m south of Front

Miranda Road to approx. 250m east of Duffin Road) 70

Hikutaia

SH26 RP 70/10.12 to RP 80/1.40 (Approx. 100m south of Alley

Memorial Road to approx. 50m north of Corbett Road) 70



SCHEDULE D - EXCEPTIONS TO STANDARD MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES

ITEM DESCRIPTION

Non-

standard

Streetlights

The following streetlights are to be maintained by the Council due to their nonstandard

or decorative designs.

Waihi

Light

ID

Decorative

Features / Type

Pole

ID

Pole

Number

Location House Address

7772 Flat & double 5078 S0606 295 SEDDON ST (SH 2)

5992 Flat & single 4110 S1759 26 6 ROSEMONT RD (SH 2) (ROSEMONT RD (SH 2))





4117 Flat & double 4117 S1393 147 ROSEMONT RD (SH 2) (ROSEMONT RD (SH 2))


4932 Flat & double 4691 13 ROSEMONT RD (SH 2) (Clarks Pharmacy)

4933 Flat & double 4691 13 ROSEMONT RD (SH 2) (Clarks Pharmacy)

4944 Flat & double 4695 S1756 150 44 ROSEMONT RD (SH 2)


6968 Flat & double 5078 S0606 295 SEDDON ST (SH 2)








Paeroa

Light

ID

Decorative

Features /

Type

Pole

ID

Pole

Number

Location House Address

6472 Pole top &

single

5036 S2226 369 BELMONT RD (SH 2)

8009 Arm & curve 3159 S1912 216 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Shell Shop)

4667 Arm & curve 3161 S1913 305 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (TV Mowers & Chainsaws)

6302 Arm, curve

& single

3162 S1918 336 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Countdown)

4669 Arm, curve

& single

3165 S1914 400 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Pizza Pasta)

7051 Arm, curve

& single

3169 S1915 446 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Furniture Court)

7939 Arm, curve

& single

3172 S1916 477 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (ADVANCE INSURANCE)

7320 Arm, curve

& single

3174 S1917 519 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Cafe)



6676 Arm & curve 4589 S1911 157 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Paeroa Hotel)

6251 Arm & curve 4595 S1919 270 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Little Black Dog)

7852 Arm & curve 4604 S1930 377 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (O/S Library)

7910 Arm & curve 4605 S1931 435 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Opposite Hill St)

7938 Arm & curve 4613 S1934 547 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Butcher)

6274 Arm & curve 4618 S1933 512 43 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Chances)

5384 Arm & curve 4619 S1991 122 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Cosy Kitchen)

7293 Arm & curve 4620 S1992 151 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (The Gallery)

8719 Arm & curve 4696 S1926 17 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Peaches and Cream)

4949 Arm & curve 4697 S1928 181 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Unichem Pharmacy)

7062 Arm & curve 4698 S1979 270 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Gold Diggers)

7810 Arm & curve 4699 S1983 271 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Coin Save)

4952 Arm & curve 4700 S1984 307 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Criterion Dairy)

6321 Arm & curve 4701 S1985 334 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Criterion Tavern car park)

7787 Arm & curve 4702 S1986 359 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Pasco car yard)

4955 Arm & curve 4703 S1987 382 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Pasco Motors)

6333 Arm & curve 4707 S1993 210 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Fathers Tavern)

7494 Arm & curve 4711 S2000 537 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (O/S toilet by L&P bottle)

5393 Arm & curve 4866 S2179 38 92 - 0 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Post office reserve)

6741 Arm & curve 4867 S2172 56 92 - 0 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (Post Office)

6473 Pole top &

single

5037 S1212 449 34 BELMONT RD (SH 2)

8665 Curve &

single

5038 S2228 584 68 BELMONT RD (SH 2)

8590 Pole top &

single

5039 S1124 266 NORMANBY RD (SH 2)

7865 Pole top &

single

4882 S1940 368 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Crn Corbett St O/S Council

Office)

5779 Pole top &

single

3163 S1310 363 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (BELMONT RD - Crn Corbett St)

8587 Pole top &

single

3170 S1165 450 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Furniture Court)

3651 Pole top &

single

3651 S1121 60 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (North Crn Normanby Rd)

7159 Pole top &

single

3797 S2173 55 NORMANBY RD (SH 2) (By ped crossing OS Post Office)

4729 Pole top &

single

4602 S1927 441 BELMONT RD (SH 2) (Heat & Pool)

7759 Pole top &

single

4708 S1995 238 NORMANBY RD (SH 2)

The Transport Agency is responsible for the cost of power and will accept invoices for

electricity and bulb replacements.

The Transport Agency will cooperate with the Council in recovering costs from crash

damage.

Kopu

Bridge

Underpass

The Transport Agency is responsible for maintaining the structural integrity of the

underpass, approach ramps and barriers and maintaining the pipe work and non-return

valves that drain the underpass.



The Council is responsible for cleaning, repainting and graffiti control including

provision of a clean water supply for cleaning and cleaning out the catchpit drains in

the floor of the underpass.

Gantry None Identified

Others Nil


The SH Maintenance Agreement between the NZ Transport Agency and Hauraki District Council May 19 | Page 16

SCHEDULE E - MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITIES BY ACTIVITY AND BY PARTY

This schedule includes a summary of the understood maintenance responsibilities at time of writing.

Regarding intersections, the relevant PIKB section can be found under this link;

https://nzta.govt.nz/planning-and-investment/planning-and-investment-knowledge-base/activity-classes-and-work-categories/road-improvements-

other-road-related-funding-policies-guidance/local-road-connections-with-state-highways/

It states;

The maintenance of the carriageway of a local road, intersecting at grade with a state highway, for a distance of 10 metres from the limit line position or

to the end of seal, whichever is the lesser, shall be a state highway charge. This maintenance includes:

• pavement maintenance

• maintenance of regulatory signs associated with the intersection

• maintenance of pavement marking related to traffic control of the intersection where these are appropriate, and

• maintenance of raised traffic islands related to the traffic control of the intersection.

As they use the term ‘the intersection’ the sections with added emphasis are interpreted to be in effect for components that exist for the functionality of

the intersection beyond the stated 10m limit. In addition to the stated items, this is interpreted to include (hard limits are provided as an absolute

maximum);

Maintenance of traffic signals and other Active Traffic Control devices for the intersection (no distance limit)

Maintenance of regulatory signs associated with the intersection e.g. Chevrons

Street lighting associated with the intersection

Maintenance of pavement marking related to traffic control of the intersection where these are appropriate

Maintenance of barriers, sight rails and delineation if the associated hazard is within state highway corridor and the majority (i.e. greater than 80%) of the

length is on the state highway

Maintenance of raised traffic islands related to the traffic control of the intersection.

For the carriageway and associated assets, slip lanes and ramps within the highway corridor are interpreted to be the responsibility of the Transport Agency.


https://nzta.govt.nz/planning-and-investment/planning-and-investment-knowledge-base/activity-classes-and-work-categories/road-improvements-other-road-related-funding-policies-guidance/local-road-connections-with-state-highways/

https://nzta.govt.nz/planning-and-investment/planning-and-investment-knowledge-base/activity-classes-and-work-categories/road-improvements-other-road-related-funding-policies-guidance/local-road-connections-with-state-highways/


The roadmarking at intersections: typically, any markings associated with intersection control such as give way triangle and the STOP up to the limit line,

is the responsibility of the Transport Agency.

ITEM THE TRANSPORT AGENCY’S RESPONSIBILITY THE COUNCIL’S RESPONSIBILITY

Abandoned Vehicles Removal of all abandoned vehicles in both rural and urban areas

via NOC in accordance with the Transport Agency’s State Highway

Control Manual (the SHCM).

To contact NOC for any abandoned vehicles in urban or rural

areas. For urban areas, to act according to delegated

agreement as appropriate.

Advertising Signs Advertising signs within the rural state highway road reserve are

controlled through the Transport Agency’s Signs on State

Highways Bylaw 2010.

Note that the bylaw does not apply to areas within a 50km/hr

speed restriction unless the local authority has adopted a bylaw

which deals specifically with this issue.

To process resource consent applications associated with

advertising signs within the district and to administer

advertising signs in urban areas with a posted speed limit of

50km/h in consultation with the Transport Agency.

Anti-glaring

Screening Fence

There is no anti-glaring screening fence in Hauraki District area. NA

Bridges All functions relating to state highway bridges. Referred to the Transport Agency.

Cycleways Cycleways between the kerbs. Cycleways outside the kerbed area, including Hauraki Rail

Trail, or as otherwise agreed between the Transport Agency

and Council and listed in the Exception Schedule D.

Footpaths If affected by any programmed or emergency state highway

maintenance works, NOC will maintain crossing points, including

The routine maintenance of footpaths on both rural and urban

state highways unless listed in Schedule D.




pram crossings and other kerb drop-downs, for the duration of

the works and reinstate following the completion of the works.

Central Medians,

Splitter Islands &

Roundabouts

The Transport Agency is responsible for the maintenance of

throat, splitter islands, median islands or roundabouts at rural

state highway and local road intersections. Note this does not

include the maintenance of the surrounding road pavement.

Where throat islands, splitter islands, median islands or

roundabouts are within the limits of the Transport Agency’s

maintenance zones in urban areas (≤ 70 km/h), the following

criteria shall apply to islands (kerbed or otherwise);

• Maintenance of hard surfacing including pedestrian ramps is the

responsibility of the Transport Agency.

• Maintenance of the kerb.

• Maintenance of street furniture i.e. pedestrian fencing is the

responsibility of the Transport Agency if it is safety related.

Any litter or vegetation management associated with islands in

urban areas unless listed in Schedule D.

Ice Control Administration of ice control issues on all urban and rural state

highways, including pavement gritting and de-icing.

Referred to the Transport Agency.

Licences to Occupy

Road Reserve

Administration and approvals on all state highways regarding the

occupation of a road reserve for grazing and all other uses.

Regard shall be had to the requirements of the Council’s District

Plan.


Marine Structures NA To maintain and manage boat ramps and marine structures

consented by the Council. Responsibilities extend to




adjoining land which is used in association with boat ramps

(e.g. fishing competition and parking).

Noise Screening

Fence

There is no noise screening fence in Hauraki District Council area. NA

Overweight Permits To issue overweight permits for loads travelling on all state

highways, in consultation with Council where the permit holder

requires access to local roads.

NA

Parking/ Traffic

Bylaws

Approval, installation or amendment of non-stopping and

clearways in consultation with the Council as appropriate.

Approval of parking locations and layouts on urban state

highways, or other localised activity related new or revised

parking layouts.

Delegation of authority will be given, by means of a Delegation

Agreement, to the Council to administrate relevant activities, such

as no stopping and parking restrictions in urban area. No

stopping and parking restrictions in rural areas are managed by

the Transport Agency.

Consultation with the Transport Agency over amendments to

the Council bylaws on urban state highways.

Determining the parking time limits and any other conditions

relevant to the Council bylaw(s) and enforcement of the

bylaws as stated in the delegation agreement.

The Council is responsible for enforcing the no stopping and

parking restrictions on the state highway network through the

urban areas within the state highway network defined within

this document.

Pavement

Maintenance and

Reseals

Pavement maintenance and reseals on all state highways. It

includes sealed pull-over areas, parking areas, side roads,

previously sealed access ways and pram crossings (kerb drop-

down) in accordance with Section 3.1 and Schedule F of this

document.

In urban areas, the pavement area is between the lips of kerbs.

Refer to Service Covers / Pits for Council’s responsibility.




If the maintenance activity involves changing pavement levels, any

affected Council services, including pipes and covers shall be

adjusted and remedied by the NOC.

Pavement Marking

All pavement markings on rural state highways including but not

limited to intersection control, the solid centreline on side roads

intersecting state highways, fire hydrant symbols and no-

stopping lines.

Routine and ongoing maintenance of pavement markings on

urban state highways from kerb to kerb.___ __

In urban areas, the Transport Agency shall reinstate pavement

marking after pavement maintenance, reseal or other renewal

works. This includes but not limited to parking bays, taxi stands,

loading zones and bus bays if they existed previously.

Road markings associated with intersection traffic control is, in

principle, the Transport Agency’s responsibility.

The Council is responsible for routine inspection to ensure

the asset functionality and any needs for upgrade and

maintenance are identified and communicated to the

Transport Agency.

Road markings associated with intersection traffic control

affected by the Council’s maintenance works such as reseal, is

to be reinstated as defined in relevant standards and

specifications.

Any changes proposed by the local authority to road markings

on urban state highways after pavement maintenance, reseal

or other renewal works, will need to be discussed and planned

prior to pavement works commencing. The cost of these

changes shall be borne by the local authority or an

arrangement agreed by both parties.

Pedestrian crossings

including Kea

crossings

Pedestrian crossings and Kea crossings, including pedestrian

refuges, lighting, tactile paver, pram crossings and Belisha

beacons as appropriate. The cost of power is the Transport

Agency’s responsibility.

Minor maintenance e.g. bulb and light cover replacement may

be charged back to the Transport Agency by agreement.

The Council will maintain the pole, drop down arm and the

attached flag or sign at Kea crossings.

Pedestrian

Underpasses

Being the structure owner, the Transport Agency is responsible

for all structural maintenance such as component replacement

and renewals.

Minor non-structural maintenance, including routine

monitoring, inspection and litter and graffiti removal, light

bulb and light cover replacement.




Regarding drainage, the Transport Agency is responsible for

pump replacement and renewal if it is installed primarily for

maintaining the integrity of the structure.

Drainage routine maintenance, including cleaning is the

Council’s responsibility. If the pumps are installed to provide

for pedestrian travels only, then the Council is responsible for

the replacement and renewal.

Privately Constructed

Facilities

Approval and administration of all privately constructed facilities

on all state highways. This includes culverts installed at private

accessways.


Retaining Walls Maintenance of retaining walls for rural state highways, including

the maintenance of retaining walls which support the state

highway, unless otherwise agreed.

In urban areas, the Transport Agency shall maintain retaining

walls which were constructed primarily to provide for state

highway operations.

For retaining structures that clearly documented as being

constructed primarily for Council’s assets or activities such as

footpath and land use, the Transport Agency will contribute to

asset renewals on a case-by-case basis if associated structural

failures are likely to affect state highway operations.

Maintenance of retaining walls in urban areas where they have

been constructed to support or protect footpaths or support

properties above the state highway, where a footpath has

been built at the foot of the wall.

Decorative walls or walls where the Council or the local public

have added plantings (which damage the walls) are

maintained by the Council.

For retaining walls which fall outside the above-mentioned

scenarios, Schedule D shall be used to identify the relevant

parties and their scopes of responsibility as mutually agreed

between the Council and the Transport Agency.

Reticulated Services

on Bridges

Any new installations and upgrade shall be approved by the

Transport Agency in accordance with the SHCM. Any cost

associated with the installation, upgrade and maintenance of

reticulated services on state highway bridges shall be the

responsibility of the asset owner.

To liaise with the Bridge Consultant to determine if the

activity is compliant with relevant requirements outlined in

the Transport Agency’s Structure and Safety Policy Manuals

and SHCM.

To obtain the Transport Agency’s approval for installations

and / or upgrades of Council assets.




For existing services, the Transport Agency will notify the asset

owner and / or service providers if defects are observed during

bridge inspection.

Installations on state highway bridges shall be at the risk of

the Council.

Road Closures for

Events

The administration of road closures for sporting or community

events, in consultation with the Council.

Provide comments regarding road closure applications made

by the event organiser and advise the applicant to obtain the

Transport Agency’s approval via CAR system.

Sale of Vehicles Sale of vehicles within the state highway reserve is controlled

through the Transport Agency’s Bylaw of Prohibiting the Sale of

Vehicles on State Highways 1999/14 and will be enforced by the

Transport Agency.

The Council shall refer to any sale of vehicles within the state

highway to the Transport Agency for appropriate action.

School Zones The provision and maintenance of School Zone signs.

Sign operation is managed by the schools.

With prior agreement with the Transport Agency, the Council

may maintain School Zone signs and recover the costs from

the Transport Agency.

Service Covers/ Pits Raising and/or reinstating manholes and service covers/pits due

to pavement rehabilitation or resealing work.

Remedying faults to manholes and service covers/pits if the fault

is a result of highway maintenance or resurfacing works.

The maintenance of Council’s service covers, manhole covers

and immediate surroundings. Maintenance extends to

rectifying settlement around the service covers.

Private utility covers are maintained by contractors engaged

by relevant service providers.

Signage (Rural) All signage within the highway road reserve according to the

Transport Agency’s Manual of Standard Traffic Signs and

Pavement Markings. Any alterations to the existing signage must

be approved by the Transport Agency. The types of signs include:

• Regulatory signs;

• Permanent warning signs;

In principle, side road name blades in rural areas of state

highways shall be maintained by the Council. Nonetheless,

the Council may wish to negotiate with the Transport Agency

and use NOC to provide the service.

Similarly, general interest signs on state highways including

Marae and churches are to be maintained by the Council.




• Directional information and guide signs;

• Motorist services signs;

• Heavy vehicle engine braking signs;

• Tourist signs;

• Road safety billboards;

• General information signs; and

• All white on green ADS signs are to be within 200m of the state

highway intersection.

On the other hand, some advanced state highway intersection

warning signs on local roads are, in principle, to be

maintained by the Transport Agency.

It is recognised that the agreement shall be based on both

parties’ exercise “give and take” in their areas of

responsibility and support for improved efficiency and

productivity of the road network.

Signage (Urban) As per above. In urban areas, Council is responsible for parking signs, bus

stop signs, taxi stand signs, private advertising signs

(bylaws), loading zone signs and side road name blades.

Intelligent Transport

Systems (ITS)

Operating, maintaining and renewal of:

• Electronic Speed Advisory Warning (SAW) signs;

• Electronic Variable Message (VMS) Signs;

• Manual Road Condition signs (if installed);

• Rural Intersection Advance Warning Signs (RIAWS);

• Electronic School Zone signs; and

• Highway operational monitoring cameras.

Operating, maintaining and renewal of public safety cameras,

if installed by the Council, in urban areas.

Stock Control The Transport Agency is, in general, responsible for stock control

activities on state highways. This includes both wandering stock

removal and stock droving.

Managing wandering stock on state highways upon notification.

The Transport Agency will endeavour to return loose stock to the

owner.

The Council is not responsible for stock control issues on the

state highway. Nonetheless, if wondering stock is observed

within urban areas, the Transport Agency may request animal

control assistance from the Council.




Stock droving and crossings is managed through an approval of

the relevant TMC with appropriate site traffic management plan.

The TMC is to respond to the applicant and / or the Council’s

request within three working days.

The NOC may wish to engage qualified and or experienced

Council staff to assist in stock removal, especially in urban areas.

This can be arranged through the Contractor’s procurement

process.

The Council and the Transport Agency shall work in a co-

ordinated manner to ensure stock droving and stock crossing are

managed safely and any adverse impact on other road users are

minimised.

The Council shall support the Transport Agency in dealing

with stock droving activity by assisting the applicant to obtain

TMC’s approval and issuing a permit.

Stock Underpass Administration regarding the approval of location, design,

construction and maintenance of stock underpasses.

Maintenance of the structure and access ways shall be in

accordance with the stock underpass permit issued.

The Council is responsible for managing the building consent

process for stock underpass and a PS4 Producer Statement

issued by Council Design engineer shall be available as part

of the consent records.

Stormwater Drainage For rural state highways, the Transport Agency is to maintain

culverts (including inlet, outlet structures and connection leads),

and watercourses within, besides, or across the state highway road

reserve - except irrigation, land drainage and stock water race

culverts. It includes maintenance of the kerb and channel, dish

channels, sumps, catchpits, swale drains, surface water channels

and drainage ditches.

For land drains that are used for multiple purposes including

being road drainage facilities, then funding assistance for

The Council is not responsible for rural state highway

stormwater drainage associated with state highways.

The relevant local or regional authority is responsible for the

maintenance of land drains, even though land drains may be

situated within the road reserve, their maintenance is the

responsibility of the relevant drainage authority if it is not

associated with state highway stormwater discharge.




maintenance work category may be approved by the Transport

Agency on the basis of the proportion of the catchment areas.

In urban areas, the Transport Agency will maintain and renew, but

not clean, drainage inlets/outlets as well as the associated

structures, catchpit leads until they discharge into a watercourse

or council reticulation system, drainage ditches associated with the

state highway carriageway.

The Transport Agency is to maintain culverts (which drain water

from one side of the state highway to the other) where they do not

connect into a Council drainage system.

Note: The Transport Agency recognises that there are

inconsistencies between the current funding policy and practices.

This matter has been escalated to national level for discussion.

For urban state highways, the Council is responsible for

routine inspection and cleaning of kerbed water channels,

sumps and cesspits (30 percent of total cost is funded as

outlined under 113 routine drainage maintenance in the

Knowledge Base refer link) to ensure the asset functionality

and any needs for upgrade and replacement are identified

and communicated to the Transport Agency.

For areas beyond the back of kerb and channel, the Council is

responsible for the maintenance of all Council storm water

systems which predominately collect runoff from outside of

the state highway road reserve.

Where there is no kerb and channel, the Council shall

maintain the areas beyond one meter from the top of surface

water channels and/or drainage ditches’ back slopes.

Street Cleaning &

Litter

Within rural areas, the Transport Agency is to remove litter and

detritus, including crash debris, within road boundaries including

pavement surfaces, kerb and channel, lined and unlined surface

water channels and sumps.

Within urban areas, the Transport Agency is responsible for the

costs of crash clean-up and debris and intersection sweeping, as

per WC 121: Environmental Maintenance. The Transport Agency’s

NOC may collaborate with the Council on the best way to deliver

these services.

In urban areas, The Council is responsible for litter issues

associated with waste collection and illegal dumping within

the road reserve. The Council is also responsible for litter

within street parking areas which is inaccessible to the NOC

during normal working hours.

Note that as per PIKB Work Category 113: Drainage

Maintenance, the Transport Agency’s policy is that funding

assistance will be provided for 30 percent of the total cost of

cleaning channels, sumps and cesspits in urban areas, as an


https://www.nzta.govt.nz/planning-and-investment/planning-and-investment-knowledge-base/activity-classes-and-work-categories/road-maintenance/work-category-113-routine-drainage-maintenance/



approximation of the benefit to the road and its users, as

shown below;

• Approved organisations shall only show the 30 percent of

the total expenditure that is eligible for funding assistance

in their transport programmes.

• The 30 percent component of the total cost of cleaning on

state highways in urban areas is to be funded within the

state highway maintenance programme. Refer image to

the left.

Street Furniture The maintenance of guardrails, sight rails, edge marker posts and

raised pavement markers.

Picnic furniture, where it has been installed in state highway rest

areas.

Co-operate with the Council to recoup the costs of crash damage

to street furniture.

The maintenance of roadside public toilets, local service bus

shelters, taxi stands, rubbish bins and benches installed by

the Council shall be maintained by the Council.

Street Lighting

(including pedestrian

crossing lights and

Belisha beacons)

All state highway lighting including the lighting for pedestrian

crossing facilities.

The Transport Agency does not typically accept the maintenance

of nonstandard or ornamental lighting in the highway corridor.

The identified lights are documented in Schedule D.

Minor maintenance e.g. bulb and light cover replacement may

be charged back to the Transport Agency by agreement.

See Schedule D for the decorative lights maintained by

Council.

For decorative lights, the Transport Agency will contribute to

the equivalent of an Oclyte column and standard LED

luminaire.




At intersections in urban areas, lighting columns within 10m from

the limit line or splitter island are the responsibility of the

Transport Agency.

At intersections in rural areas, lighting columns associated with

the intersection are the responsibility of the Transport Agency.

Traffic Counting

Loops

Maintenance and operation of the traffic counting devices buried

beneath the road surface.

NA

Traffic Signals NA For new and upgraded traffic signals, including SCATs, that

are incorporated under this Agreement, the Council will be

the Traffic Signal Representative. The Council is to provide

the Transport Agency, upon request, with ‘Operational

Performance’ reports, to confirm if the delegation is being

effectively managed.

Tree Trimming In rural areas, the Transport Agency is responsible for ensuring

trees are trimmed to provide a safe passage for vehicles in

accordance with the SHCM.

In urban areas, if there is unacceptable safety risk, such as

unstable trees potentially falling within a live lane, the Transport

Agency will work closely with the tree owner to resolve the issue.

In mutually agreed circumstances, the Transport Agency will

provide site temporary traffic management to enable Council

arborists to undertake tree trimming of memorial trees within

road reserve.

Tree trimming within the urban state highway behind the kerb

may be completed under a cost sharing arrangement (site

temporary traffic management is provided by the Transport

Agency and 50/50 of the arborists’ cost) between the Council

and the Transport Agency if it poses a hazard to or impedes

use of the state highway. Such arrangements shall be made

on a case-by-case basis.

It should be noted that tree trimming for aesthetic or any

other reasons within the state highway road corridor in urban

area is considered outside the scope of this agreement.

Turn Around Bays There are no turn around bays in Hauraki District area. NA




Unofficial Trading Within urban and rural state highways, unofficial trading is

administered by the Transport Agency in accordance with the

SHCM.

The Transport Agency expects applicants to demonstrate that the

Council has been consulted and supports the proposed trading.

Refer trader requests within urban areas to the Transport

Agency.

The Council shall notify the Transport Agency regarding any

unofficial trading within or affecting state highway corridor.

Utility Services

(Water, wastewater &

Stormwater)

Within rural areas, the approval of new services in the state

highway reserve. Refer to the Utilities Access Act 2010.

All road openings shall be inspected for finished standard before

the end of the maintenance period in accordance with The

National Code of Practice for Utilities’ Access to Transport

Corridors.

Services affected by the Transport Agency’s pavement works shall

be discussed with the Council prior to commencement of the

work.

In principle, the Transport Agency will be responsible for

adjustment or reposition of the levels of the same asset and is not

responsible for Council’s asset replacement, renewal or disposal.

Within urban areas, the Council is to seek approval from the

Transport Agency, via the NOC for new services in the state

highway reserve and for maintenance of existing services in

the carriageway. Approval is to be obtained before work is

commenced, except in emergencies.

Following the principles stated in clause 6.1. and 10.1. of this

Agreement, for programmed work, the Council is to notify the

Transport Agency, via the NOC prior to work commencing. In

the event of emergency, notify the Transport Agency via the

NOC as soon as practicable after commencing repair work but

no later than the next working day.

All reinstatement work within the state highway road reserve

will be to the Transport Agency’s standards.

All service openings within the carriageway shall be inspected

by the Transport Agency for finished standard before the end

of the maintenance period in accordance with The National

Code of Practice for Utilities’ Access to Transport Corridors.

Vegetation Control Weed spraying and landscape maintenance in the rural areas

including within the state highway corridor outside urban areas.

Maintenance of garden plots and other landscaped surfacing

on median strips, traffic islands, kerb bulges and footpaths in

urban areas.




(weed spraying and

landscape

maintenance)

The rural standard is applicable to verges including batter slopes

and drainage channels, rest areas, median strips, roundabouts

and traffic islands with sealed surfaces.

Weed control of hardscaped surfaces, (e.g. weed control of paved

surfaces) in urban areas. The urban standard is applicable to

median strips and traffic islands with paved surfaces and drainage

channels and landscaped areas.

The Transport Agency shall approve all plantings within the

highway reserve. Generally, in order to maintain adequate

sigh distances at intersections, the Transport Agency will

approve maximum height of plantings of approximately 500-

600mm and a maximum height of 300mm on median islands.

Vegetation Control

(Roadside Mowing)

For rural state highways, the Transport Agency is responsible for

mowing in accordance with the SHCM and meeting the minimum

NOC standards. In particular:

• Verge mowing to a minimum of 3m from the edge of seal on

straights and the outside of curves, and to a minimum of 5m

on the inside of curves;

• Mowing for sight visibility at intersections and bends;

• Mowing of Rest Areas;

• Mowing of the area between slip lane and through lane; and

• Up to 0.5m behind the edge marker posts.

At six-monthly intervals for selected sites, the Transport Agency

will undertake boundary to boundary mowing for amenity

purposes, brush weed control, fire hazard reduction and for

refuse collection purposes.

Any urban areas which require mowing by the Transport Agency

will be listed in Schedule D as expectations.

Within rural areas, the Council is responsible for all other

mowing outside the Transport Agency’s responsibility where

Council requires a specific level of service.

Within urban areas, the Council is responsible for roadside

mowing of all grassed area including median strips, traffic

islands and kerb bulges.

Any urban areas which require mowing by the Transport

Agency will be listed in Schedule D as expectations.




Vehicle Crossings

(driveways/

accessways)

Approval of new rural vehicle crossings (including location and

design).

Where work such as pavement rehabilitation or resealing affects

the adjacent crossing the existing area of sealed vehicle crossing

may be reinstalled up to the state highway boundary or fence line

(whichever is closer to the state highway) only if the crossing was

constructed in accordance with the Transport Agency’s

requirements.

Refer all rural highway enquiries to the Transport Agency.

Administration of new urban vehicle crossings.

To assure that urban crossings are designed and constructed

with minimum adverse effects on state highways, Council will

forward copies of any such application to the Transport

Agency for approval.

The construction of new vehicle crossings and the upgrading

of existing crossings shall be carried out to meet the

Council’s standards.



SCHEDULE F - TYPICAL MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILITY DIAGRAMS



SCHEDULE G - KEY CONTACTS

1. The NZ Transport Agency, Hamilton

Level 1, Deloitte Building

24 Anzac Parade

PO Box 973

Waikato Mail Centre

Hamilton 3240 | NZ

Tel: 07 958 7200

Here below are staff members at the time of this AGREEMENT was prepared. For up to date

contacts, please contact the number above or NOC.

Aditya Mitta - Network Manager

DDI +64 7 958 7958 / M +64 21 0228 8866

E [email protected]

Sunny Zhang - Senior Network Manager

DDI +64 7 958 7256 / M +64 21 683 893

E [email protected]

Vikus Joubert - Maintenance Contracts Manager (East Waikato)

Skype +64 7 981 2327 / M +64 27 702 1824

E [email protected]

Liam Ryan – Journey Manager (Waikato Region)

DDI +64 7 958 7955 / M +64 27 836 4252

E [email protected]

Karen Boyt / Manager System Management - Waikato

System Design and Delivery

DDI +64 7 958 7264 / M +64 21 833 300

E [email protected]


mailto:[email protected]






2. The NZ Transport Agency Maintenance Contractor for East Waikato

Higgins Group

Level 1 Collier House

52 Highbrook Drive

East Tamaki

Auckland 2013

East Waikato NOC

23 Anderson Street

Morrinsville 3300

Mike Manion / Contract Manager

T: 09 273 7300 / M: +64 27 703 1939

E: [email protected]

Ben Buttimore/ Network Manager

T: 09 273 7300 / M: +64 27 442 4208


TO BE CONFIRMED/ Traffic Management Coordinator

T: 09 273 7300 / M: +64 27 676 8879


3. Hauraki District Council

1 William Street

Paeroa 3600

PO Box 17 Paeroa 3640 | NZ

Lukas de Haast/ Transportation Manager

DDI +64 7 862 5071 / M +64 21 447 732


Adrian de Laborde / Group Manager - Engineering Services

DDI: (07) 862 5018 | M: +64 21 432 403


Joel Hogan / Transport Team Leader

DDI: 078625019 | M: +64 21 759 261


4. Auckland Motorway Alliance

In relation to State Highways bordering Auckland region, the Council shall contact

Auckland Motorway Alliance through the MCM of East Waikato NOC.









SCHEDULE H – NOC BOUNDARIES



SCHEDULE I – OTHER KNOWN AGREEMENTS

TITLE DESCRIPTION RELEVANT DATES CURRENT

STATUS

Delegations

Agreement

<Blah Blah> In Effect From; 1/1/2010

Latest Revision; 1/1/2012

Active


of 19

Decision Report


From: Water Services Manager

Date: 3 May 2019

File reference:

Document: 2579289 Appendix A: Capital Reporting Appendix B – Financial report for Water Supply Appendix C – Financial report for Waste water Appendix D – Financial report for Storm water Appendix E – Draft Paeroa Water Supply Take Consent

Portfolio holder: Councillor Harris


Subject: Water Services - Monthly Activity Report for April 2019

Recommendation:


That $10,000 be made available to start the consenting process for the Kerepehi Industrial subdivision stormwater consent.

Summary

This report summarises performance and issues in the Water Services work area. The body of the report refers to the April works.

WATER SUPPLY

Operations Notebook

Waikino reservoir had troubles filling due to a hard to find water break underneath a Toetoe bush in Waikino.

Paeroa WTP – was shut down due to unexplained high turbidity in the Waitawheta River. Investigations upstream of the intake found earthworks happening in the river bed at Dickies Flat. The impact of the works was


of 19

discussed with the Waikato Regional Council (WRC) to prevent a recurrence of such an event.

Servicing of Breathing Apparatus sets, blowers and membranes were completed.

The level sensor at the very bottom of the Quarry stopped working. Other level monitoring options are being considered.

The Quarry storage is less than 30% and production at the Waitakaruru plant has been reduced. The Waitakaruru plant will be kept active until the new reservoirs are connected.

The Ohinemuri River levels have recovered slightly. The water restrictions in Waihi have been lifted because the demand is below the consent limit.

Kerepehi Reservoirs The new reservoirs are complete and is ready to be filled up and tested. C&M will be doing the pipework to connect the new reservoirs. The work will be done in two separate shutdowns to reduce the risk and shutdown times. The first shutdown will happen in the last week of May and the final connection in June. In both instances Council will not be able to provide water to the Plains network from the Kerepehi plant. Work will therefore be done at night. The Waitakaruru plant will still feed the network and should be able to supply the night time demand. A reduced pressure is expected. The public will be informed of the shutdown and will be notified that they will have limited supply for 4-6 hours on both nights.

Once the new reservoirs are in operation will the existing reservoir be taken out of commission for cleaning and inspection. The reservoir was supposed to have been inspected and maintained after 10 years but due to this being the only reservoir could this not have been done. It is suspected that it has a leak and might require maintenance. The inspections will confirm what maintenance is required and when it is required. Paeroa Water Take Consent The consent to take water in the Waitawheta Stream for Paeroa expires in June 2019. An application has been prepared and submitted to the WRC. Attached in Appendix E is a copy of the draft consent. It should be noted that these are still draft conditions and therefore not public knowledge. The conditions are generally acceptable but there are a number of matters staff raised with the WRC. Below a list of those matters and comments:

Conditions 6 and 7 require that there is a 15% reduction in the maximum daily water take volume in low flow conditions. This approach is accepted but we have queried why it is necessary to have a reduction in take triggered by low flows at two locations—one at Ohinemuri River’s Karangakake gauge and the other at the Te Aroha gauge on the Waihou River. We have suggested that the


of 19

trigger should be the Karangahake gauge on the Ohinemuri River. In this regard we note that the Waihi Water Supply take consent (AUTH 130392) issued in May 2014 also includes a low flow reduction condition but that is triggered by flows at one gauging station only (Frendrups on the Ohimemuri River). We have the mechanism for notification of low flows.

Condition 10 regarding the logging and telemetering of take volume data is accepted but currently the Council’s recording system will

require work to enable data to be forwarded to the WRC as a daily report. We have requested that the operational date for such a system be extended out by an additional 6 months to 1 May 2020. This will allow the HDC a little more time to make the necessary changes and linkages to the WRC recording system.

Condition 13 requires that the Water Management Plan be reviewed and updated by 30 April 2020 and then every 3 years after that. While the review by 30 April 2020 is appropriate, we do not agree that 3 yearly reviews after that are necessary. We have requested that the ongoing reviews be undertaken every 5 years in accordance with the Waihi consent.

Condition 15 provides for the opportunity for the WRC to initiate a

review of the consent conditions. While a) and b) of the condition are acceptable, we are concerned to see the inclusion of c) which provides the opportunity for the WRC to review the appropriateness of the volume and the rate of the take and if necessary to address any “inappropriateness” by reducing the rate and/or volume of the take. It is unclear how “inappropriateness” is to be considered and

the condition is very open in this regard. We consider that such a condition is inappropriate for a consent to take water for a municipal water supply. Takes for such water supplies are afforded a significant measure of priority in the Waikato Regional Plan and this condition appears to contradict that priority. This water take is the sole source of raw water for the integrated Paeroa Water Scheme that has seen us give up a number of rural supplies thereby reducing the overall consented take by 3,000m3/day and thus we have request that condition 15 c) be deleted.

May/June Planned Works

Waitakaruru bores to have pumps removed and boreholes sealed Water Safety Plan for Paeroa and Kerepehi needs to be finalised Winter maintenance to start


of 19

WASTEWATER

Operations Notebook

A tomo over a trunk wastewater sewer has occurred at the rear of #56 Grey Street [Fond Foods]. The pipe was excavated and found to have collapsed in on itself. Repairs have been done. This pipe is strategically very important in the Paeroa network. A camera survey of the rest of this line as well as the other large outfall in the area will be done to confirm the useful life of these pipes. These two pipes are 450mm diameter vitrified clay pipes and were installed in about 1930. Replacement pump quotes for the small Ramarama SSPS pump and larger and more advanced Paeroa septage have been received. Adequate funding for this work has been provided in the capital budget. We are trialling a new pump at the septage pump station. This pump is a new technology Flygt Concertor pump with an advancement on the N-Impeller motor drive system that self-diagnoses and clears blockages though its 10-pole motor that can reverse its own flows. The thick septage flows usually block the current pump about 3 times per week, so the additional approximately $2,000 cost of this new range of pumps can be easily be recouped at the rate of an estimated $250/week usually incurred for blockage clearing costs by C&M. The Concertor Pump and controls are offered on a trial basis and can be returned at no cost if it is found to block. The septage facility is the greatest blockage prone station within HDC and an excellent place to trial this new technology pump unit. The Kerepehi WWTP Pond #2 Wetland beds were maintained. Kerepehi WWTP sensors calibrated. New motor installed at the Ngatea WWTP on the pond aerator. Victoria St [Waihi] SSPS Pump #1 issues resolved / repaired. Pump 2 reflux valve blockage repaired. Rising main air valve leaked onto farm Franklin Rd. Minor liquid loss with few solids lost to ground, cleaned and disinfected and topsoil remediation to scour point. Waihi WWTP starting to see large amounts [est. 10 litres per day] of GAP40 gravel onto screens, indicating possible sewer collapse/tomo somewhere in Waihi reticulation. No location found or reported as of 8 May 2019. Small temporary aerator has been installed at Waihi WWTP into Pond #1. Council had a dry weather overflow at Waimarei SSPS [Paeroa] over weekend of 27-29 April. A number of wastewater treatment plant consent exceedances were recorded in April 2019: Waihi: TKN [Total Nitrogen] 2 April 2019– 22g/m3 [Limit 10].

Waihi Plant has high sludge levels in Pond #1 and unknown in Pond #2. Sludge volume reduction required to increase hydraulic retention time of ponds, to significantly improve discharge quality.


of 19

Ngatea: TSS [Total Suspended Solids] 9 April 2019 – 98g/m3 [Limit 70] This failure result continues from algal growth from this hot dry summer but is now reducing to near compliance with colder weather now occurring.

Ngatea: E-Coli – 9 April 2019 - 54,000cfu/100mL [Limit 13,850] Ngatea Plant has issue with gravel beds being contaminated over last few years with silt from underlying subgrade, beds no longer functional and affecting plant performance. Slag beds need rehabilitation to lift the overall performance of the plant discharge quality. Aerator on pond #1, now repaired, was out of action for most of month due to motor failure. Should improve with aeration now occurring.

Turua: TSS [Total Suspended Solids] 9 April 2019 – 220g/m3 [Limit 70] This failure result from peaking algal growth from this hot dry summer but is now reducing to near compliance with colder weather now occurring.


Waitakaruru WWTP - Repair of base and structural ribs in 1 treatment pod due imminently. Cost $4,900, LTP budget available $16,000

Waihi WWTP – Send aerator cage for major repair of broken aerator shaft on pond #1 aerator unit [currently removed]. Estimate $6000 to repair, LTP budget available $11,000.

Reinstate Paeroa Septage receiving facility with trial pump. Continue to review sewer pump station control levels and reduce where

required to reduce chance of wet wipe blockages across all major pump stations that have blockage issues. [Arney, Victoria, Norwood and Waimarei SSPS stations done successfully].

Taylors Ave overflow #19 Taylor Ave modify site to overflow within boundary of HDC lot, if it overflows this winter, as per WRC discussions.

General repairs and maintenance at WWTP’s around sensor renewal and calibration, vulnerable wiring and similar housekeeping issues.

Trial new technology Flygt [Xylem] pump in Paeroa septage. Repeated SCADA comms dropping out issue Waihi WWTP to be resolved. Continue Pump renewal replacement pump analysis and quotations. Expect

that the capitol works budget for District Wide Sewer Pump Renewals [LTP budget $74,555] budget still available will be required for the spate of pumps that have expired in the recent past, and likely replacement pump station cabinet renewals [LTP budget $47,500] that would add to the telemetered stations may be undertaken at some stations with new pumps.

Expect that the capitol works budget for District Wide Reactive Renewals Plant [LTP budget $32,700] will have some costs for treatment plant sensor renewals for failed sensors – costs tba.


of 19

STORMWATER

Operations Notebook

Paeroa Various service requests about drain/cesspit maintenance for winter. Waihi Weirs have been removed from stream at no. 9 Walmsley Rd, owner

has been good to work with to reinstate the stream. Many planning and building consent enquires. Drain inlet and drain cleaning Banks Reserve completed, along with removal of a restricting DN225 culvert. Road chip removal from drain behind Waihi RSA undertaken. Catch-pit installed in overland flow path at #35 Raratuna St, Turua. Kerepehi Industrial Subdivision Consent It was brought to staff’s attention recently that Council do not have a consent for stormwater discharge at the Kerepehi Industrial subdivision. It is therefore required that Council apply for a retrospective consent. It is estimated that the consent application process will cost in the order of $10,000. This excludes any specialist studies or additional works. At this stage is it not clear if any studies would be required. The existing stormwater system does not provide any treatment and there is a substantial risk that future consent conditions will demand treatment. No budget provision has been made for this expense. It is recommended that $10,000 be made available to start the consenting process. Council should consider whether this is a stormwater expense that should be carried by the bigger community or an expense that should be claimed from the Property Fund. During the consenting process will it be possible to provide more detail of future costs and that will be communicated to Council for approval.


Consent compliance reports Receive Design and seek quotes for drain retaining wall replacement –

beside drive of 33 Arney St Paeroa [design is due from Pinnacle Civil] Seek landowner consents for stormwater bubble up catch-pit lead

connection at 475 Hauraki Rd / 14 Waihou St, Turua. Continue to review “Council” drains that should be on the GIS system in

Waihi then Paeroa – keep marking up plans to show additional significant drains and overland flow paths and known localised minor ponding areas that will be recommended to be added to GIS.

Review culvert flap gate costs to protect Turua town Drain from board drain backwater/backflow.


of 19

Walker St [Waihi] storm water scour remediation gabion design by walkway bridge and sewer pipe bridge area.

Financial Report

The operational budgets for the three waters are tracking as expected and small savings is foreseen at this stage. The major projects are progressing well and within budget. Savings are expected in the operational capital projects due to less breakages.

Recommendations It is recommended that $10,000 be made available to start the consenting process for the Kerepehi Industrial subdivision stormwater consent. Council should give direction where this activity should be funded from. EJ Wentzel WATER SERVICES MANAGER


of 19

APPENDIX A:

Budget Timeframe Risk Overall Status % CompleteActual Spent

(YTD) ($,000)

Fore Cost at

Completion

($,000)

Over/Under Budget Comments

Plains Water Storage (Kerepehi Reservoirs) ● ● ● ● 85 $1,930 $3,195 on track

Reservoir construction complete. C&M currently

installing pipework on the reservoir site. Shutdown TBC

to comission existing tanks. Reliant pencilled in for first

week of May for return to site.

Karangahake WW ● ● ● ● 80 LTD 716 $800 under

Was to be completed by 28/02/2019 , pump station

delivery and completion of pipeline outstanding. Pump

station delivery date not available from supplier or C&M.

No work on pipeline for past 6 weeks. Reinstatement of

trenches not accepted by NZTA. Rework is required. New

SSSP for pipe over Crown Hill bridge has been provided

by specialist contractor, but rejecte3d by HDC. Variation

to MBIE agreement was done with completion date of 30

April and completion repoprt date of 31st May 2019.

Kaimanawa Water ● ● ● ● 25 $225 $4,485 on track

Technical Services have finalised design for urban pipe

work. Awaiting signed copies of drawings . Reservoir

location finalised. 250mm pipe has all been delivered to

site. Finalising contract for remainder of 280mm pipe.

Full geotech report including earthworks and track to be

supplied by HD Geo. Also looking into Komata bridge

crossing with BECA and NZTA

Water Outlook / Centralised Control Centre ● ● ● ● 30 NA

Matthew and Connan to discuss quote re CCTV on Friday.

SD-WAN proof of concept successful (for redundancy and

resilience). Next step: Jason Mills to compile Business

Case and pricing.

Key Projects


of 19

APPENDIX B:

Water Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019


-Favourable YTD $20,000 Favourable YTD $187,000 Unfavourable YTD $(486,000)

YTD budget $0 YTD budget $3,423,000 YTD Forecast $4,141,000Full year budget $0 Full year budget $6,977,000 Full year budget (Original) $2,197,000


$20,000 $3,236,000 $4,627,000

0 500 1,000 1,500

Fixed Costs

Headworks

Major Maintenance

Other

Pumpstations

Reticulation

Treatment

Thousands



Revenue

Rates income excluded from this report.

Expenditure

We are seeing favourable variances across a number of components of this activity. Resource shortages mean that it is unlikely that we will have the opportunity to utilise the budget this financial year.

Capital Expenditure

Capital expenditure is tracking slightly in front of the capital works programme approved by Council in December as a number of large projects enter the construction phase.

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000

Water

Thousands

Capital Expenditure



of 19

APPENDIX C

Wastewater Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019


-Favourable YTD $1,000 Favourable YTD $200,000 Favourable YTD $1,413,000

YTD budget $242,000 YTD budget $1,762,000 YTD Forecast $2,001,000Full year budget $291,000 Full year budget $3,259,000 Full year budget (Original) $1,577,000


$243,000 $1,562,000 $588,000

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

Fixed Costs

Major Maintenance

Other

Pumpstations

Reticulation

Treatment

Thousands



Revenue

Expenditure

We are seeing favourable variances across a number of components of this activity with the exception of reticulation. More breaks, jetting and buchan removals than usual across most of the network.

Reticulation Energy costs $107k over budget due to estimate readings by supply company as reported to council. This is ofset by various savings in operating costs.

Capital Expenditure

Capital expenditure is tracking below the revised capital works programme approved by Council in December 2018.

The Karangahake to Paeroa wastewater line together with the Paeroa pipe renewal project have a major influence on performance in relation to budget.

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

Wastewater

Thousands

Capital Expenditure



of 19

APPENDIX D

Storm Water Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019


-Favourable YTD $0 Favourable YTD $27,000 Favourable YTD $167,000

YTD budget $0 YTD budget $427,000 YTD Forecast $375,000Full year budget $0 Full year budget $821,000 Full year budget (Original) $125,000

Full year forecast $0 Full year forecast $794,000 Full year forecast $450,000

$0 $400,000 $208,000

0 50 100 150

Floodgates

Maintenance/Fencing/Culverts

Mechanical Cleaning

Other

Pumps

Vegetation Control

Thousands



Revenue

ExpenditureA number of small savings, but no significant variances to report on.

Capital Expenditure

Capital expenditure is tracking below the revised capital works programme approved by Council in December.

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

Stormwater

Thousands

Capital Expenditure



of 19

APPENDIX E

DRAFT RESOURCE CONSENT

CERTIFICATE

Resource Consent:

AUTH140228.01.01

File Number:

60 26 07A

Pursuant to the Resource Management Act 1991, the Regional Council hereby grants consent to:

Hauraki District Council - Paeroa Office

PO Box 434

Waikato Mail Centre

Hamilton 3240

(hereinafter referred to as the Consent Holder)

Consent Type:

Water Permit

Consent Subtype:

Surface water take

Activity authorised:

Take up to 6867 cubic metres per day of water from Waitawheta

River for Paeroa Public water supply

Location:

Paeroa Water Supply, SH 2, Paeroa

Map reference:

NZTM 1840904 E 5854651 N

Consent duration:

This consent will commence on the date of decision notification and

expire on 31 December 2048.

Subject to the conditions overleaf:


of 19

General

1. The activity authorised by this resource consent shall be undertaken in general accordance

with the following application documentation:

"Lower Waitawheta Intake, Assessment of Environmental Effects” (Recorded as

document number 13585770 on the Waikato Regional Councils document recording

system);

and as identified in the resource consent conditions below which shall prevail in the event of

any inconsistency between the aforementioned documentation and the conditions.

2. The consent holder shall be responsible for all sub-contracted operations related to the

exercise of this consent, and must ensure sub-contractors are made aware of the conditions

of this consent.

3. The consent holder shall pay to the Waikato Regional Council any administrative charge fixed

in accordance with section 36 of the Resource Management Act 1991, or any charge

prescribed in accordance with regulations made under section 360 of the Resource

Management Act 1991.

Abstraction Limits

4. The maximum net take volume in any 24 hour period shall not exceed 6,867 cubic metres.

5. The maximum instantaneous take shall not exceed 79 litres per second.

Low Flow Restrictions

6. When the Ohinemuri River 7–day rolling average flow at the monitoring site denoted

Karangahake (Waikato Regional Council site number 619.16, map reference NZTM 1840302

E 5855651 N), as determined by the Waikato Regional Council, is less than 1.382 cubic metres

per second for ten or more consecutive days, the net take volume in any two-day period must

not exceed 11,674 cubic metres.

7. When the Waihou River 7–day rolling average flow at the monitoring site denoted Te Aroha

– ADCP (Waikato Regional Council Site Number 1122.34, Map Reference NZTM 1839127 E

5841042 N), as determined by the Waikato Regional Council, is less than 18.214 cubic metres

per second for ten or more consecutive days, the net take volume in any two-day period must

not exceed 11,674 cubic metres.

Recording and Reporting

8. A water measuring system shall quantify water taken from the take location on a cumulative

basis. The system shall have a reliable calibration to water flow and shall be maintained to

an accuracy of +/- 5%.


of 19

9. Verification of the water measuring system's accuracy shall be undertaken by the consent

holder:

a) at the written request of the Waikato Regional Council;

b) at a frequency of no less than five yearly; and

c) to the satisfaction of the Waikato Regional Council.

Evidence documenting verification shall be forwarded to the Waikato Regional Council

within one month of the verification being completed.

10. By 1 November 2019 the consent holder must record with a tamper-proof data logger

continuous 15 minute values of take volume (in units of cubic metres). The data must be

reported by the consent holder via a telemetry system developed after liaison with the

Waikato Regional Council to ensure that the telemetry system is compatible with Waikato

Regional Council telemetry system standards and data protocols. The data must be reported

once daily to the Waikato Regional Council and there must be 96 values per daily report.

When no water is being taken the data must specify the take volume as zero.

11. Prior to the implementation of electronic recording required by condition 8, the consent

holder shall provide to the Waikato Regional Council, reports detailing total daily water take

and maximum daily take rate data on a monthly basis.

Water Management Plan

12. The consent holder shall carry out its water supply operations in general accordance with the

Water Demand Management Plan entitled "Paeroa Water Supply Water Management Plan"

dated 13 December 2019 (Recorded as document number 13585770 on the Waikato Regional

Council document recording system) or any subsequent updated version of this document as

provided for by condition 13 of this consent.

In the event of any conflict between the Water Management Plan (and any subsequent

updated plan) and the conditions of this consent, then the conditions shall prevail.

13. The Water Management Plan shall be reviewed, updated as necessary and submitted to

Waikato Regional Council for approval (in a certifying capacity) by the 30 April 2020, and

every three years thereafter.

Approval by the Waikato Regional Council of any updated Water Conservation and

Demand Management Plan shall be limited to an assessment of whether:

a) The plan complies with the information requirements of Part 8.1.2.2 (Water

Management Plans) of the Waikato Regional Plan; and

b) The plan is consistent with the conditions of this consent.


of 19

Cultural

14. The consent holder shall by 30 April 2020, and in consultation with relevant iwi, establish a

protocol to be followed in the event that a person dies in the waters of the Waitawheta River

upstream of the water intake structure. The protocol shall be detailed in the Water Demand

Management Plan required by condition 12.

Review

15. The Waikato Regional Council may, sat any time in 2024, 2029, 2034, 2039 or 2044, serve

notice on the consent holder under section 128 (1) of the Resource Management Act 1991, of

its intention to review the conditions of this resource consent for the following purposes:

a) To review the effectiveness of the conditions of this resource consent in avoiding or

mitigating any adverse effects from the exercise of the resource consent and if

necessary to avoid, remedy or mitigate such effects by way of further or amended

conditions; or

b) To review the adequacy of and the necessity for monitoring undertaken by the consent

holder; or

c) To review the appropriateness of any rate and/or volume specified within this consent

and, if necessary, to address any inappropriateness of any rate and/or volume by way

of reducing any take rate and/or take volume.

Advice Note: Costs associated with any review of the conditions of this resource consent will

be recovered from the consent holder in accordance with the provisions of section 36 of the

Resource Management Act 1991.

In terms of s116 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this consent commences on the date of

notification of consent decision.


of 19

RESOURCE CONSENT

CERTIFICATE

Resource Consent:

AUTH140228.02.01

File Number:

60 26 07A

Pursuant to the Resource Management Act 1991, the Regional Council hereby grants consent to:

Hauraki District Council - Paeroa Office

PO Box 434

Waikato Mail Centre

Hamilton 3240

(hereinafter referred to as the Consent Holder)

Consent Type:

Land Use Consent

Consent Subtype:

Bed - disturbance

Activity authorised:

Maintain a water supply intake & associated pipework in the bed of

Waitewheta & Ohinemuri Rivers

Location:

Paeroa Water Supply, SH 2, Paeroa

Map reference:

NZTM 1840904 E 5854651 N

Consent duration:

This consent will commence on the date of decision notification and

expire on 31 December 2048.

Subject to the conditions overleaf:


of 19


of 19

General

1. The activity authorised by this resource consent shall be undertaken in general accordance

with the following application documentation:

"Lower Waitawheta Intake, Assessment of Environmental Effects” (Recorded as document

number 13585770 on the Waikato Regional Councils document recording system);

and as identified in the resource consent conditions below which shall prevail in the event of

any inconsistency between the aforementioned documentation and the conditions.

2. The consent holder shall be responsible for all sub-contracted operations related to the

exercise of this consent, and must ensure sub-contractors are made aware of the conditions

of this consent.

3. The consent holder shall pay to the Waikato Regional Council any administrative charge fixed

in accordance with section 36 of the Resource Management Act 1991, or any charge

prescribed in accordance with regulations made under section 360 of the Resource

Management Act 1991.

Structure

4. The intake structure shall be screened with a mesh size not exceeding of 1.5 millimetres in

aperture.

5. The intake velocity at the intake structure screen shall not exceed 0.3 metres per second.

6. Screen sparging/clearance shall not result in any conspicuous plume of suspended material,

or conspicuous change to river water colour or clarity.

Review

7. The Waikato Regional Council may, sat any time in 2024, 2029, 2034, 2039 or 2044, serve

notice on the consent holder under section 128 (1) of the Resource Management Act 1991, of

its intention to review the conditions of this resource consent for the following purposes:

a) To review the effectiveness of the conditions of this resource consent in avoiding or

mitigating any adverse effects from the exercise of the resource consent and if

necessary to avoid, remedy or mitigate such effects by way of further or amended

conditions; or

b) To review the adequacy of and the necessity for monitoring undertaken by the consent

holder.

Advice Note: Costs associated with any review of the conditions of this resource consent will

be recovered from the consent holder in accordance with the provisions of section 36 of the

Resource Management Act 1991.


of 19

In terms of s116 of the Resource Management Act 1991, this consent commences on the date of

notification of consent granting.


Information Report

To:

Mayor and Councillors

From: Infrastructure Systems and Planning Manager

Date: Wednesday 15 May 2019

File reference: M 2581190 Appendix A: Drains sprayed by the end of April Appendix B: Drains mechanically cleaned by the end of April Appendix C: Financials

Portfolio holder: Councillor Phillip Buckthought


Subject: District Drainage Activity Report

to 30 April 2019

Recommendation:


Summary

This report summarises the Land Drainage Activity for the period ending 30 April 2019.

Operations Notebook

694.70km of drains have been sprayed (Appendix A) in this financial year and 22km (Appendix B) of drains have been machine cleaned. Although late, the machine cleaning is getting underway and a programme is in place to ensure we complete the required work.

Minor maintenance has been undertaken in all districts. Gorse was sprayed on the Indian stopbank Routine floodgate and pump station inspections have been completed. Floodgates and culverts have been checked and cleared as required. No man-hours were spent on pump screen cleaning during this reporting month.

Capital Works

The capital works consist of assessing and raising stopbanks and refurbishing pumps and pump screens. Stopbanks:

Progress with this has been hindered by the requirement for a resource consent. Physical works of these projects will be put on hold while we transition through the financial year and winter conditions. All the required resource consents would have been acquired and contractors engaged to embark on the work as soon as the construction season starts again.

Pumps: Work on the Rawerawe pumpstations has been completed. This completes the work on the pumpstations for this year.


As mentioned in the last report, the Hopai West pumpstation will require maintenance on its outlet manifold next year. Muggeridge Pumpstation Update:

Overall: Work has now commenced on site with the completion of the earth bunds and imported material from a nearby site. RUD did a preliminary inspection of the environmental controls at a site meeting on 2/5, and their recommendation of mulching of the exposed areas of the bund is underway. Excavation of the main canal commenced on 06/05. The design change to the pump outlet structure has been agreed and another minor change around the pump benching has. The design contract value has been increased and this additional cost is included in the line item for design in the Feb 19 reforecast. Tender documentation for the PS and culvert is underway. Time: The contractor has issued a programme which indicates they can complete the project by the end of June. The uncertainty is the weather and how much this slows down progress. The fall-back position is to complete stopbanks in the next construction season (late 2019). Budget: Total Council approved budget upper limit: $6,000,000.

Spend to date: $1,071,583.22 Scope: No change to project scope in this reporting period

Financial Comment (Appendix C) The budget for the energy for pumpstations was severely depleted in the first half of the financial year with the heavy rains. This budget will carry that overspend through to the end of the financial year. There is a strong probability that both the budget and the distance for Mechanical Cleaning of the drains will not be met this season. The primary reason given for this was/is the unavailability of machines throughout the year. This is being investigated and will not happen again as the contractors will be booked early on in the year. That concludes this report. Steve de Laborde INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS AND PLANNING MANAGER


Appendix A: Drains sprayed by the end of April Map will be supplied


Appendix B: Drains mechanically cleaned by the end of April

Drain No Drain Name Area Length M/CA03 Hot Springs 1 1000

a71 Phillips Rd 3 350

a53 Rawe Rawe R/Side Sth 3 500

b25 Hill 6 920

a78 Yeager 1 1000

a75 Not Identified 3 800

b41 Maukoro Outlet 6 700

b41 Maukoro Outlet 6 2520

C19 Torr 1 150

C09 orongo-ferry 1 2625

d42 Tomlinson 5 300

c57 Price 3 100

Drains MC in April

B69 Puhunga Rd West Side 3 3170

A04 Hill-Henderson 1 1765

A06 Not Identified 1 2310

A56 Appletree 2 850

D30 Handley 4 900

O05 link 2 610

O04 stocks 2 1200

Total 22 km


Appendix C: Financials

Land Drainage Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019


-Favourable YTD $0 Unfavourable YTD $(115,000) Favourable YTD $581,000

YTD budget $0 YTD budget $672,000 YTD Forecast $639,000Full year budget $0 Full year budget $1,040,000 Full year budget (Original) $457,000

Full year forecast $0 Full year forecast $1,155,000 Full year forecast $767,000

$0 $787,000 $58,000

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350

Floodgates

Maintenance/Fencing/Culverts

Mechanical Cleaning

Other

Pumps

Vegetation Control

Thousands




ExpenditureHighest average rainfall in Oct, Nov & Dec since 1974, resulted in diesel pumps running more than anticipated in our budgets. It is likely that this budget will be exceeded by $150k if we experience normal autumn / winter rainfall.

Mechanical cleaning is ahead of budget and with programmed works in May/June is predicted to exceed budget at the end of the year by $20,000

Capital ExpenditureCapital expenditure is tracking below the revised capital works programme approved by Council in December. The required surveying along with the attainment of appropriate resource consents are nearing completion to enable the construction phase to be completed early in the 2019/20 financial year.

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

Land Drainage

Thousands

Capital Expenditure



of 8

Decision Report


From: Group Manager: Engineering Services

Date: Monday, 29 April 2019

File reference: Document: 2580194 Appendix A: Map of the Taramaire Drainage District Appendix B: Minutes of the last meeting Appendix C: Delegations Manual (Section 9.7)

Portfolio holder: Mayor Tregidga, Councillor Phillip Buckthought


Subject: Establishment of Taramaire Drainage District Committee

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received, and THAT the Council establish the Taramaire Drainage District Committee, and THAT the Taramaire Drainage District Committee comprise 2 elected representatives, 1

alternative representative and 1 Councillor with an alternate, and THAT Section 9.7 of the Delegations Manual be amended to include the Taramaire Drainage

District Committee.

1 Purpose

The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval for the formation of the Taramaire Drainage

District (TDD) Committee as an official Council Committee as they are defined in the Delegations

Manual. The matter or suggested decision does not involve a new activity, service, programme, project,

expenditure or other deliverable.

2 Background

The TDD was formerly rated by the Franklin District Council (FDC) on the basis of a land area

classification established by the Franklin County Council (FCC), possibly in the 1960s or 70s’.

The local farmers had an agreement with the FDC, where the Council held an account for their

rates that served as a “kitty”. The farmers would do any work required, send in the invoices

and the Council would pay for any services or materials as required out of the kitty.


of 8

When the Kaiaua area was inherited by HDC, the rating system changed and the TDD and the

assets were treated like the other drainage districts with respect to the finances and asset

management, however, not the operations; that was still “self-managed” by the farmers.

3 Issue and options

During a recent TDD asset inspection on the drains, stopbanks and floodgates, it became

apparent that little or no maintenance had been done for several years. Compounding this,

health and safety rules have made it onerous for farmers to willingly work on Council assets. The TDD has stopbanks along the Taramaire Stream. While these stopbanks restrict most tides,

their design is more about conveying the stormwater run-off from the hills to the sea without

inundating the flat land in-between rather than a sea defence. The sea inundation event that

occurred on 5 January 2018, and the subsequent drainage as flood waters struggled to recede,

brought to light the true state of the drainage system. Working within the rules that govern Council assets and Council Asset & Financial models,

members of the TDD are now seeking Council approval to become a Drainage Committee with

delegations as set in the Delegations Manual. The proposed changes to the Delegations Manual

are shown in Appendix C. At a full meeting of the members of the TDD on 2 April 2019, the members passed a resolution

to seek the formalisation if the TDD and establishment of a TDD Committee. The committee will

be represented by 2 members and an alternative member. The establishment will require the

members of the TDD to vote on the committee members. Council will facilitate the establishment

of this committee. Council staff support this decision and recommend to Council that the Taramaire Drainage

District Committee be formed according to the democratic procedures.


This decision does not trigger the Significance and Engagement Policy Assessment Tool and

therefore, is not considered significant under the Significance and Engagement Policy 2017. The level of engagement considered appropriate for this matter, at this point in time, is to involve

(i.e. a participatory process to identify aspirations prior to decision-making) the local farmers

who wish to formalize the committee.


There are no budget implications.

6 Recommendation

The Council should make its decision on which option to choose based on that option being the

most cost effective, and good quality option for the Hauraki District (s10 of the Local

Government Act 2002). The following recommendations are made:

1. THAT the Council establish the Taramaire Drainage District Committee, and


of 8

2. THAT the Taramaire Drainage District Committee comprise 2 elected representatives, 1

alternative representative and 1 Councillor with an alternate, and 3. THAT the Delegations Manual be amended to include the Taramaire Drainage District

Committee. Adrian de Laborde

Group Manager: Engineering Services


of 8

Appendix A:


of 8

Appendix B

Minutes of Taramaire Drainage Committee Meeting.

Held at 545 East Coast Rd., Kaiaua on Tuesday 2 April 2019.

Meeting opened 10.10am

Present:

Bruce Levers, Councillors Don Swales and Phillip Buckthought, John Gasson, Steve Crooymans, Gary Dalton, Andrew

Davis, Matt Davis, Cliff Roberts, Cliff Chisholm, Steve de Laborde.

1. Apologies

Hamish Handcock, Gareth Levers.

2. Declaration of late items.

Nil.

3. Minutes of Previous Meeting:

True and accurate record for September 29th, 2018

Moved; Andrew Davis/ John Gasson.

Matters arising from Previous Minutes.

There were no matters arising from the previous minutes.

4. Formalisation of TDD Committee.

Steve de Laborde and Phillip Buckthought explained the process and reasoning behind the committee looking to

formalize the Taramaire Drainage District (TDD) and Committee with Hauraki District Council (HDC).

Andrew Davis made a request to bring forward item 8 for discussion. If there was agreement to Andrews proposal to

consider separating the TDD into a North and South side, this may influence the outcome of item 4. Andrew believed

that the South side , him in particular, pay more rates than the North side. There was a lot of discussion around the

rating system and it’s fairness. Also discussed was the TDD assets and whether replacement of culverts in Board

drains was the landowners or TDD responsibility.

Steve de Laborde commented that it would not be in Councils best interests to run two entities ( North and South) as

this was a small catchment area and would double up the administration workload for Council.

Following the above discussion, there was general consensus to formalize the Taramaire Drainage District

Committee.

Resolution: The current members agree to formalise the Taramaire Drainage District

Committee.

Moved; Steve Crooymans/ John Gasson.

5. Asset Verification and Valuation:

Steve de Laborde and Bruce Levers drove around the assets the previous week and did an informal assessment of the

Assets. More work is to be done on the above.

6. TDD Drainage activity Report:


of 8

Steve de Laborde discussed the financials. It was noted the date was reading Financial report for 30th June 2017 and

should have read 2018. Those financials were correct for 2018.

There was discussion about the Depreciation schedule. It will be good to have an explanation at the next meeting

about how the depreciation schedule works.

The opening balance for TDD as at 01/07/2018 financial year is $33,267.00

7. Infrastructure: Floodgates.

There was discussion about the recently installed Floodgate by Andrew Davis and whose responsibility it was to pay.

The overall view was that as the floodgate structures on the Northern side are assets of the TDD, then this floodgate

structure should also become an assett of the TDD.

Andrew also commented that there needed to be another floodgate further up the main channel.

Reference was made to the wish list in the previous meeting and that this should be on the agenda for the next

meeting to prioritise and action a forward work plan to ensure the assets are at least maintained.

8. Discussion: Andrew Davis’s proposal.

This was brought forward and discussed with item 4.

9. Members feedback.

Bruce - Reiterated that with the more formal structure of the committee, all work related issues within the board

drains must be notified and cleared with Council. We can’t just go and fix or build something.

Don - This is a positive step forward to improving the overall system.

All other members expressed they were looking forward to the change and were in agreement with it.

Meeting closed. 11.50 am

Next meeting: to be confirmed.


of 8

Appendix C –Changes to the Delegations Manual

9.7 Drainage Committees

These are advisory Committees only with no decision-making powers.

9.7.1 Western Plains Drainage Committee

Membership

One Councillor (with an alternate) and representation as scheduled

from each of the following Drainage Areas within the Drainage

District: A representative (or alternative) of Waitakaruru/Miranda A representative (or alternative) of Pipiroa Two representatives (or alternatives) of

Rawerawe/Ngatea/Pahunga A representative (or alternative) of Kaihere/Torehape Two representative (or alternative) of Patetonga/Mangawhero A representative (or alternative) of Pouarua/Maukoro

Meeting

frequency The first Thursday in the month commencing at 10.30am

9.7.2 Eastern Plains Drainage Committee

Membership


from each of the following Drainage Areas with the Drainage District: A representative (or alternative) of Kopuarahi/Orongo A representative (or alternative) of Horahia Two representatives (or alternative) of Wharepoa Two representatives (or alternatives) of Awaiti Two representatives (or alternatives) of Netherton

Meeting

frequency The first Thursday in each month bi-monthly commencing at 1.30pm

9.7.3 Paeroa Rural Drainage Committee

Membership


from each of the following Drainage Areas with the Drainage District: A representative (or alternative) of Komata North A representative (or alternative) of Opukeko Two representatives (or alternative) of Tirohia/Rotokohu

Meeting

frequency The first Thursday in April and October commencing at 1.30pm.

9.7.4 Taramaire Rural Drainage Committee

Membership


from each of the following Drainage Areas with the Drainage District: Two representatives (or alternative) of Taramaire

Meeting

frequency The first Thursday in April and October commencing at 3.30pm.


of 8

9.7.5 Delegations for all Drainage Committees

The Council delegates to the Drainage Committees the following powers, duties and

responsibilities:

To make recommendations to the Council on all matters relating to Land Drainage within

their respective Districts. The Western and Eastern Drainage Committees can also make recommendations to

Council on urban stormwater matters within their respective Districts. To make recommendations on Council’s operational and capital estimates for Council’s

Draft Long term Plan and Draft Annual Plans. To provide input to Land Drainage asset planning matters and Land Drainage rating

reviews in their respective areas. To generally oversee and monitor the Council’s annual work programmes within the

nominated areas; and to assist as necessary or as appropriate in the implementation of

approved programmes. To facilitate the flow of information between ratepayers and staff.

-Committees, Forums and Working Parties


of 7

Information Report


From: Infrastructure Systems & Planning Manager


File reference: Document: M 2581347 Appendix A: Solid Waste Financial Measures

Portfolio holder: Councillor Duncan Smeaton


Subject: Solid Waste - Monthly Activity Report – April 2019

Recommendation:


1 Summary

This report summarises performance and issues in the Solid Waste work area. The body of the

report refers to April works.

2 General

Waste Minimisation Working Party: This working party has recently been formed and

consists of the following members: Councillors Duncan Smeaton (Chair), Anne-Marie Spicer, Paul

Milner and Mayor John Tregidga. The party will meet regularly to decide on waste minimisation initiatives to implement, firstly in-

house and then the broader community. Staff will work to implement the initiatives and will

bring progress reports to Council separately to this report. Re-Use Centre: An Memorandum of Understanding between HDC, SEL & the Re-use Centre is

in the final stages of being drafted. The members of the group are preparing their application

to the Waste Minimisation Fund.


of 7

3 HDC Monthly Request for Service (RFS) Totals

4 Transport Tonnages:

Tonnage transported from the Paeroa & Waihi transfer stations to the landfill at Tirohia.

A decrease in waste is always welcome.


of 7

5 Diversion

The figures below show the percentage of waste diverted from the landfill for April, primarily

through recycling, i.e. 51.7% of the waste picked up from the kerbside went to the landfill.

Overall, in April, 26.7% of all solid waste was diverted from Landfill. We have noticed that

diversion at the kerb is always better than the RTSs. Waste Minimisation Targets

On the following page are the graphs representing the waste stream going to landfill, compared

to the targets set for 2022 in the Waste Minimisation Plan. Also shown and compared are the volumes of refuse and recycling generated from the various

sources, namely: Kerbside collection, Paeroa RTS and Waihi RTS. The calculations for the graphs were based on the following information:

Rated properties: 6,800 (rated for solid waste)

Kerbside Population: 17,000 (assuming 2.5 people/property)

District Population: 19,950 (Strat Planning, 1 Jul 2018)


of 7

HDC Waste Summary 2018/2019

2022 Targets Kerbside 2022 Target Total 2022 Target

(kg/Prsn/Yr) 74.0 316.0

Jul 6.8 6.2 19.3 26.3

Aug 7.8 6.2 23.3 26.3

Sep 6.2 6.2 24.5 26.3

Oct 6.4 6.2 25.7 26.3

Nov 7.6 6.2 25.8 26.3

Dec 7.3 6.2 27.9 26.3

Jan 6.0 6.2 25.8 26.3

Feb 7.8 6.2 24.0 26.3

Mar 7.1 6.2 25.4 26.3

Apr 6.8 6.2 20.2 26.3

May 6.2 26.3

Jun 6.2 26.3

Diversion: Refuse (t) Re-cycling (t) Total (t)

Jul 384.8 126.5 511.4

Aug 465.0 126.2 591.2

Sep 488.9 120.9 609.7

Oct 512.4 132.7 645.0

Nov 524.8 137.0 661.7

Dec 557.5 172.8 730.3

Jan 514.5 124.6 639.1

Feb 478.2 153.7 631.9

Mar 507.0 146.0 653.0

Apr 402.8 146.7 549.5

May

Jun

Recycling: Kerbside Paeroa RTS Waihi RTS Total (t)

Jul 102.4 - 24.1 126.5

Aug 105.3 7.4 13.6 126.2

Sep 90.6 9.1 21.2 120.9

Oct 106.3 7.2 19.2 132.7

Nov 102.0 6.7 28.3 137.0

Dec 113.1 25.2 34.5 172.8

Jan 82.8 10.6 31.2 124.6

Feb 116.4 9.6 27.7 153.7

Mar 112.5 15.1 18.5 146.0

Apr 110.2 11.3 25.2 146.7

May

Jun

Refuse: Kerbside Paeroa RTS Waihi RTS Total (t)

Jul 114.8 169.3 100.7 384.8

Aug 132.1 222.7 110.3 465.0

Sep 105.2 229.6 154.1 488.9

Oct 109.5 250.8 152.0 512.4

Nov 128.9 259.2 127.2 515.2

Dec 123.9 250.3 183.3 557.5

Jan 102.8 249.1 162.6 514.5

Feb 132.1 232.9 113.1 478.2

Mar 120.2 251.3 135.5 507.0

Apr 115.6 139.8 147.4 402.8

May

Jun

-

1.0

2.0

3.0

4.0

5.0

6.0

7.0

8.0

9.0

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun

Kg

per

Per

son

per

Mo

nth

Kerbside WMMP Landfill Comparison74kg/person/year (6.2kg/month)

2022 Target Kerbside

-

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0


Kg

per

Per

son

per

Mo

nth

Total WMMP Landfill Comparison316kg/person/year (26.3kg/month)

2022 Target Total

-

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0


Ton

s (t

)

Recycling

Kerbside Paeroa RTS Waihi RTS Total (t)

-

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0


Ton

s (t

)

Refuse

Kerbside Paeroa RTS Waihi RTS Total (t)

-

100.0

200.0

300.0

400.0

500.0

600.0

700.0

800.0


Ton

s (t

)

DiversionRefuse vs Recycling

Refuse (t) Re-cycling (t) Total (t)


of 7

6 Contractor Managers Comments

Kerbside Collections were again delayed in Paeroa town centre. The contractor was previously instructed

to ensure timing of collections in the commercial business area are carried out as per the agreed

time between 9.30 and 10.30am. Unfortunately, the problem occurred the following fortnight

and the contactor advised that it was due to the high volume of product placed out on kerbside. RTS Issues with drainage continued to be a problem at Paeroa RTS. New staff here were concerned

about flooding as it could get worse when it heads into winter. The contractor was instructed to

make contact with Hydrotech to assess the pipe and provide an update on the condition of the

pipe in case work is needed to upgrade the system. Both staff are working well and the site is

slowly improving but still needs a lot of work particularly with loose litter and landscaping. The

pit barrier is damaged and has been for a couple of weeks. The contractor was advised to get

this fixed as soon as possible.

7 Financial Comment:

There will be an overspend in the budget around transport and delivery of waste to the landfill

as volumes have increased. Additionally, tThe ETS levy of 14%$14/ton came into effect on 1 January 2019. In addition to

this we will be required to pay CPI costs increases for the contract. , while measures have been

taken to absorb this cost, there will still be on This will mean that there is a likely additional

overspend of between $8090,000 - $90100,000 above what is forecast. In future the increased

fees and charges will offset this operational cost increase. That concludes this report Steve de Laborde Infrastructure Systems & Planning Manager


of 7

APPENDIX A

Solid Waste Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019



YTD budget $79,000 YTD budget $458,000 YTD Forecast $0Full year budget $83,000 Full year budget $666,000 Full year budget (Original) $0

Full year forecast $85,000 Full year forecast $744,000 Full year forecast $0

$81,000 $536,000 $0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Closed Tip Sites

Refuse Collection

Solid Waste Other

Transfer Stations

Thousands



Revenue

Favourable variance relates to government subsidy from MFE associated based on tonnage placed in landfill.

Expenditure

There has been a reduction in the kerbside collection being delivered directly to the landfill due to operational hours of both separate contractors. As a result kerbside collection is being taken to the RTS and then from the RTS to the landfill. This has resulted in a reduced cost in Refuse Collection and a corresponding increase in the Transfer Stations.

There has also been an increase in the volumes collected at both the RTS and the kerbside resulting in higher volumes to the landfill. Additionally an increase in the ETS fee / ton of $14 effective 1 January 2019 is included in the costs of both. This is an approximately $6-&k per month increase. CPI increases to the contract rates are yet be finalised but will further adversely impact on the variance to budget.In addition we have undertaken an external audit of the solid waste activity the costs of which are reflected in the RTS expenditure.

Capital Expenditure

No Capital expenditure planned.0 0 0 0 0 0

Solid Waste

Thousands

Capital Expenditure



of 7

Solid Waste Financial MeasuresKey Indicators for the 10 months ending 30 April 2019



YTD budget $79,000 YTD budget $470,000 YTD Forecast $0Full year budget $83,000 Full year budget $666,000 Full year budget (Original) $0

Full year forecast $85,000 Full year forecast $732,000 Full year forecast $0

$81,000 $536,000 $0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Closed Tip Sites

Refuse Collection

Solid Waste Other

Transfer Stations

Thousands



Revenue

Favourable variance relates to government subsidy from MFE associated based on tonnage placed in landfill.

Expenditure

There has been a reduction in the kerbside collection being delivered directly to the landfill due to operational hours of both separate contractors. As a result kerbside collection is being taken to the RTS and then from the RTS to the landfill. This has resulted in a reduced cost in Refuse Collection and a corresponding increase in the Transfer Stations.

There has also been an increase in the volumes collected at both the RTS and the kerbside resulting in higher volumes to the landfill. Additionally an increase in the ETS fee / ton of $14 effective 1 January 2019 is included in the costs of both. This is an approximately $6-&k per month increase. CPI increases to the contract rates are yet be finalised but will further adversely impact on the variance to budget.In addition we have undertaken an external audit of the solid waste activity the costs of which are reflected in the RTS expenditure.

Capital Expenditure

No Capital expenditure planned.0 0 0 0 0 0

Solid Waste

Thousands

Capital Expenditure



Public Excluded Committee Business


(pages 407-410 have been removed)