A G E N D A - Hauraki District...C Daley, Cr R Harris, Cr G R Leonard, Cr M McLean, Cr P A Milner,...

A G E N D A

COUNCIL MEETING

Wednesday, 27 June 2018, 9.00am in the Council Chambers, 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 26-06-18 Doc. Ref: 2400011

COUNCIL AGENDA

Wednesday, 27 June 2018 – 9.00am Council Chamber, Council Office, William Street, Paeroa 9.00am: Presenter: Janelle Tana Subject: Mayor’s Rangatahi/Tuia 10.00am: Presenter: Tracey Adams/District Schools Community of Learning Students Subject: ‘Pride in Paeroa’ Presentation

Order of Business Pages

1. Apologies

2. Declarations of Late Items

3. Declarations of Interest

4. Confirmation of Council Minutes - 06-06-18 (2393138)

5

5. Receipt and adoption - Hearings and Judicial Committee Minutes - 09-04-18 (2364210)

14

6. Confirmation and adoption - 2018-28 Long Term Plan Draft Minutes Hearings and Deliberations 2018 (2388486)

7. 2018-28 Long Term Plan Adoption Report (2399094)

18

71

8. Adoption of Rates and Borrowing Resolutions (2399323) 78 Appendix A - 2018 -19 Rates Resolution (2399324)

82

9. 2018-19 Fees and Charges Adoption (2398896) 102 Appendix A - 1819 Fees and Charges Schedule (2398899)

105

10. Community Wireless Trust Project (2399131) 135

11. Planning and Environmental Services Report - May 2018 (2399094) 140

12. Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy and Priority Buildings (2399132) 152

13. Transport Report - June 2018 (2399709) 157

14. 2018 Representation Review Initial Proposal 2018 (2399710) 164

15. CEO Monthly Report - June 2018 (2399148) 174

16. Council Financial Report May 2018 (2399359) 238

17. CCTV Activity Report (2399331) 256 Appendix A - Closed Circuit Television Policy (2399332)

261

2 Council Agenda 26-06-18 Doc. Ref: 2400011

18. Water Services Report - May 2018 (2399093) 268

19. Discussion Paper 3 - Waters Review (2399056) (reference documents included under separate cover)

272

20. Solid Waste Report - May 2018 (2399098) 286

21. Drainage District Report to May 2018 (2399095) 289

22. 2017-18 Third Quarter NFPT Results Report (2399008) 291

1 Council Minutes – 06-06-18 Doc Ref: 2393138

HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, WILLIAM STREET, PAEROA ON WEDNESDAY, 6 JUNE 2018 COMMENCING AT 9.00 AM

APOLOGIES RESOLVED THAT the apology for the lateness of Cr A Rattray be received and sustained. C18/288 Swales/Smeaton CARRIED LATE ITEMS There were no late items. DECLARATIONS OF INTERESTS There were no declarations. Cr Rattray attended the meeting at 9.05am. CONFIRMATION OF COUNCIL MINUTES – (26-04-18) (2370231) The Mayor presented the minutes. RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Hauraki District Council held on Wednesday, 26 April 2018 are confirmed and are a true and correct record. C18/289 Adams/McLean CARRIED

PRESENT J P Tregidga (His Worship the Mayor – in the Chair 9.00am-1.50pm), Cr D A Adams (Deputy Mayor – in the Chair 1.50pm-2.13pm), Cr P D Buckthought, Cr C Daley, Cr R Harris, Cr G R Leonard, Cr M McLean, Cr P A Milner, Cr A Rattray (from 9.05am), Cr D Smeaton, Cr A M Spicer, 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), P Thom (Group Manager - Planning & Environmental Services), S B Fabish (Group Manager - Community Services), M Buttimore (Strategic Planning Projects Manager), R Bierre (Manager – Regulatory Services), S Baker (Finance Manager), Ms N Murphy (Policy Analyst), Ms M van Steenburgen (District Planner), G Thomsen (Transportation Manager), E J Wentzel (Water Services Manager), S de Laborde (Manager, Planning and Infrastructure Systems) and Ms C Black (Council Secretary)

Council Agenda - 27-06-18


RECEIPT AND ADOPTION OF AUDIT AND RISK COMMITTEE MINUTES – (17-04-18) (2367073) The Mayor presented the minutes. RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Audit & Risk Committee held on Tuesday, 17 April 2018 are received and the recommendations contained therein be adopted. C18/290 Tregidga/Adams CARRIED PROPOSED REZONING PLAN CHANGE (2390784) The District Planner presented a report which provided the recommendations of the District Plan Committee on the areas to be investigated further (including consultation) for possible inclusion in a proposed plan change to rezone additional land for residential, low density residential and industrial zoned land in close proximity to Waihi. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/291 Tregidga/Swales CARRIED RESOLVED THAT Council allows the detailed investigation work, and consultation required to confirm the suitability of the areas, shown on the attached map, for inclusion in a formal Proposed Plan Change to be undertaken, and further that it subsequently allows for the confirmed areas to be progressed through the formal Proposed Plan Change process under Schedule 1 to the Resource Management Act 1991. C18/292 Adams/Rattray CARRIED RENEWAL OF BOND - WASTE MANAGEMENT LTD (2389522) The Manager Regulatory Services presented a report which explained the requirements under Section 53.1 of the consent to operate the landfill operation at Tirohia. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/293 Milner/Spicer CARRIED The consent holder, Waste Management NZ Ltd (as the new owner) must provide and maintain in favour of the Waikato Regional Council and Hauraki District Council, a bond to ensure compliance of conditions of consent. Negotiations between Waste Management NZ Ltd, the Waikato Regional Council and Hauraki District



Council have been underway since November 2017.The existing bond quantum is $3,419,314, provided by ANZ NZ Ltd. The proposed new bond has been set at $5,484,907.00. RESOLVED THAT the Tirohia landfill bond for the sum of $5,484,907.00, provided by the consent holder, Waste Management NZ Ltd, to guarantee compliance, including capping and aftercare costs be approved. C18/294 Milner/Leonard CARRIED CEO MONTHLY REPORT - MAY 2018 (2390753) The Chief Executive presented his monthly report for the month of May 2018. The report covered current staff changes within the organisation. He advised of the upcoming LGNZ Conference to be held in Christchurch on 15-17 July 2018 of which the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Councillors Harris and Buckthought will be attending. Cr Rattray will also be attending the conference but in his role as the Zone 2 representative of the Young Elected members Committee. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/295 Tregidga/Leonard CARRIED COUNCIL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE PERIOD TO 30 APRIL 2018 (2391428) COUNCIL FINANCIAL REPORT (INCLUDING EXPLANATIONS) (2392780) The Group Manager – Corporate Services presented the financial results of Council activities for the 10 months to 30 April 2018 and spoke on variance explanations which were pre-circulated to the members prior to the meeting. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/296 Adams/Harris CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 10.50am. The meeting reconvened at 11.10am.

PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES REPORT - APRIL 2018 (2390563) The Planning and Environmental Services Manager and Strategic Planning Projects Manager presented the monthly planning and regulatory report covering the month of April 2018. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/297 Tregidga/Milner CARRIED



UPDATE ON WAIKATO PLAN LEADERSHIP GROUP MEETING (2387112) The Policy Analyst presented a report which advised of the activities of the Waikato Plan Leadership Group inclusive of the minutes of the group’s meeting held on 16 April 2018. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/298 Adams/Milner CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 12.15pm The meeting reconvened at 12.50am TRANSPORT COUNCIL REPORT - APRIL 2018 (2391689) The Transport Manager presented the monthly report on transport activity covering the month of April 2018. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/299 Adams/Buckthought CARRIED WATER SERVICES REPORT TO COUNCIL - APRIL 2018 (2391204) The Water Services Manager presented the monthly report on water activity covering the month of April 2018. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/300 Harris/Buckthought CARRIED Wet Wipe Campaign The Nelson City Council has requested Council to support them in a targeted campaign aimed at reducing the harmful effects of wet wipe products on our wastewater systems and the environment. Sewer pipes and sewer pumps are being blocked by wet wipe type products and are an ongoing problem around the world.

RESOLVED THAT Council support the Nelson City Council Wet Wipe campaign. C18/301 Spicer/Harris CARRIED



SOLID WASTE REPORT TO COUNCIL - APRIL 2018 (2391575) The Infrastructure Systems & Planning Manager presented the monthly solid waste activity report covering the month of May 2018 which summarised performance and issues identified in the Solid Waste work area. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/302 Smeaton/McLean CARRIED DRAINAGE DISTRICT REPORT - APRIL 2018 (2391522)

The Infrastructure Systems & Planning Manager presented the monthly District Drainage activity report for the period to 31 May 2018. RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/303 Thorp/Swales CARRIED RECEIPT AND ADOPTION OF WESTERN PLAINS DRAINAGE DISTRICT COMMITTEE MINUTES (27-04-18) (2384734) RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the Western Plains Drainage District Committee meeting held on 27 April 2018 be received and the recommendations therein adopted. C18/304 Buckthought/Swales CARRIED RECEIPT AND ADOPTION OF EASTERN PLAINS DRAINAGE DISTRICT COMMITTEE MINUTES (27-04-18) (2384733) RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the Eastern Plains Drainage District Committee meeting held on 27 April 2018 be received and the recommendations therein adopted. C18/305 Buckthought/Thorp CARRIED

The Mayor vacated the chair and left the meeting at 1.50pm

The Deputy Mayor, Cr Adams assumed the chair at 1.50pm.

REMEDIAL WORKS FOR HAURAKI RAIL TRAIL DAMAGE (2392809) The Group Manager – Engineering Services presented a report which informed Council of the current situation with the Hauraki Rail Trail track between the Hot Springs Canal and the East Coast Road Bridge and to inform the Council on the options for funding the repair work.



RESOLVED THAT the report be received. C18/306 Adams/Harris CARRIED RESOLVED THAT the Council note the initial cost of $26,000 for emergency rehabilitation works undertaken to remediate the Hauraki Rail Trail, and THAT the Council note the $200,000 estimated cost of rehabilitation of the Hauraki Rail Trail between the Hot Springs Canal and the East Coast Road Bridge, and THAT HDC, in conjunction with the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust, apply for full funding for the repair works from the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment, and THAT staff prepare a further report on the potential costs and implications of raising the stopbank to 3 metres, and THAT staff provide direction on which budget this funding would come from. C18/307 Thorp/Swales CARRIED



Matters to be taken with the Public Excluded

RESOLVED THAT 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

Electricity Retail Procurement for the period 01-07-18 to 30-06-19

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.

C18/308 Swales/Milner CARRIED



RESOLVED THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting and that the business in committee discussed be confirmed. C18/311 Milner/McLean CARRIED The meeting closed at 2.13pm. CONFIRMED J P Tregidga Mayor 27 June 2018

Council Agenda - 27-06-18 Page 13

1 Hearings & Judicial Committee Minutes - 09-04-18 (2364210)

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, 9 APRIL 2018 COMMENCING AT 9.05AM

PRESENT Cr P A Milner (Chairperson), G R Leonard (Deputy Chairperson) IN ATTENDANCE Messrs P Thom (Planning & Environmental Services), Mr M Sexton (Dog

Control Officer), Ms M Evans (Dog Control Officer) and Ms C Black (Council Secretary)

APOLOGIES RESOLVED THAT the apology of Cr A Spicer be received and sustained. HJC18/03 Milner/Leonard CARRIED LATE ITEMS There were no late items. DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The were no declarations. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF MEETING HELD 19-02-18 (2347794) RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the Hearings and Judicial Committee meeting held on Monday, 19 February 2018 be taken as read and confirmed. HJC18/04 Milner/Leonard CARRIED CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF MEETING HELD 18-12-17 (2315314) RESOLVED THAT the minutes of the Hearings and Judicial Committee meeting held on Monday, 18 December 2017 be taken as read and confirmed. HJC18/05 Milner/Leonard CARRIED



The Chairperson opened the hearing at 9.25am. In attendance: Ms Rachel Hall (Appellant) and support person. Rachel Hall - State of Evidence Ms Hall stated that she is the owner of two ex-racing grey hounds Holly and Quirk residing at 26 Princes Street, Waihi. She stated that her dogs are of good nature but they are ex racing dogs and admitted they are dogs that are trained to chase an animal like target. Ms Hall stated on the day of the incident, her dogs were at home. A neighbouring cat came onto her property over the fence. She admitted that her dogs had attacked the neighbour’s cat when on her property and that she had returned the cats body to the owner and spoke with them. It was a very unfortunate incident but emphasised the point that the dogs were on her property when the incident occurred and were no threat to the public. The dogs are secured on the section as the property is fully fenced. Ms Hall disputed the menacing classification and referred to the wording in the Dog Control Act Section 52A (2) b ‘Control of Dog on Owners property’. She quoted the wording in this section of the Act that; The owner of a dog must, ensure that either -

(a) The dog is under control of a person, or (b) The dog is confined within the land or premises in such a manner that it cannot freely leave

the land or premises.

Ms Hall stated her interpretation of Section 52A (2) b of the Dog Control Act was that as the dogs were secured on her property, that they have committed no offence and that it was the cat that was at fault by roaming onto her property. Dog Control Officers - Statement of Evidence Mr Sexton presented his report on the incident. There is a neighbour directly next door to Ms Hall’s property. The dogs are housed in the confines of the property of which they reside with Ms Hall. Mr Sexton stated that Ms Hall has an exemplary record as a dog owner. She has had dogs residing at a different address previously. This cat may have been coming to this property before this Ms Hall moved to the property and did not realise the dogs were there. Cr Leonard referred to the article published on Stuff.co.nz (attached) which reported on incidences of cats roaming onto properties being attacked by retired greyhounds on the greyhound owner’s property, being a similar situation to Ms Hall’s and asked Mr Sexton if he had any comment to make on this article. Mr Sexton responded that greyhounds have been trained to chase an animal but these dogs and the dogs in the article have now been domesticated.



In relation to an attack occurring on a dog owners own property, Cr Leonard asked for more clarification of this situation and how it is interpreted under the Act. Mr Sexton explained Section 52A of the Dog Control Act. He stated that it does not matter if the attack happens on the dog owner’s property. Under the Act, if harm is caused to a human, or animal by the behaviour of a dog, whether or not it is on its own property or other property, this is deemed as a ‘dog not under control ‘and can be therefore be classified as Menacing or the more serious classification of Dangerous. As the offence happened on the dog owner’s property in this instance, the lesser classification of menacing has been applied. The hearing adjourned at 9.50am to allow Ms Hall to prepare a right of reply. The meeting reconvened at 10.00am. Right of Reply Ms Hall spoke on the responsibility of the cat owner to ensure that cat is on the owner’s property as it is a dog owner’s responsibility. It is unfair that these dogs are euthanized instead of being rehomed. There needs to be more rules around adopting Greyhounds. She believed her dogs were safe within her own yard. Tethering of these dogs is unrealistic and inhumane as they do not sit easily and need to lie down in a certain way. Ms Hall stated she believed she was following the rule of law ensuring that her dogs were secured on the section as per the requirement under Section 52A of the Dog Control Act. These dogs would not attack. The cat roamed onto her property. Ms Hall stated she is happy to seek assistance with the training of her dogs to be cat friendly. Ms Hall stated the cost of the fine will cause a financial impact to her. She stated that she was remorseful for the child who lost her cat but her dogs were under control on her property as is the situation as stated in Section 52A of the Dog Control Act. Cr Leonard asked Ms Hall what the greater issue is for her, is it the level of the fine or that her dogs must be muzzled when off the property. Ms Hall responded that the fine is the major issue. Cr Milner suggested to Ms Hall that the dogs undertake training to improve the way they interact with other animals and that she consider tethering them on the section to avoid this situation occurring again in future. Cr Milner thanked Ms Hall and her support person for coming along to the hearing in support of the appeal. The Chairman closed the hearing at 10.07am and advised that Council’s decision was reserved until it had considered the evidence presented and all other relevant matters.



DECISION Ms R Hall, 26 Princes Street, Waihi RESOLVED THAT the Menacing Classification of Ms R Hall dogs, Holly and Quirk be upheld, and THAT the fines in relation to the two infringement notices for failure to keep dogs under control are rescinded. HJC18/06 Leonard/Milner CARRIED The meeting closed at 10.20am. CONFIRMED P A Milner Chairperson 13 June 2018


1 Doc #2388486

HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL MEETING

MINUTES OF A MEETING OF THE HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL HELD IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS, WILLIAM STREET, PAEROA ON 16,17,21 MAY 2018 HEARING OF FEEDBACK TO HAURAKI DISTRICT COUNCIL LONG TERM PLAN 2018-28 WEDNESDAY, 16 MAY 2018, 1.00PM

Present J P Tregidga (His Worship the Mayor – in the chair), 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 A M Spicer, and Cr D H Swales

In attendance L D Cavers (Chief Executive), A de Laborde (Group Manager - Engineering Services), D Peddie (Group Manager - Corporate Services), P Thom (Group Manager - Planning & Environmental Services), S B Fabish (Group Manager - Community Services and Development), K Quinn (Senior Strategic Planner), S Holmes (Strategic Policy Planner), T Casey (Strategic Planner), C Black (Council Secretary), M Coleman (Executive Officer).

Apologies

RESOLVED THAT the apologies of Councillors J Thorp and D Smeaton be received and sustained. C18/152 Milner/Leonard CARRIED

Speaker(s)

Respondent number (where feedback was made prior to the hearing1)

Topics raised

WEDNESDAY, MAY , COMMENCING AT PM Claire Crickett and Stu Husband (Waikato Regional Council)

180 • Waikato Regional Council and Hauraki District Council are working well collaboratively - flood protection cannot function successful unless in sync with land drainage network.

• Would be great to have a shared drainage plan.

• Most interested in the drainage budgets and how they are spent.

1 Some speakers provided feedback to the Council prior to the hearing. Where they did, their feedback respondent number is noted to enable reference to the Summary of Feedback report attached to the agenda.


2 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• Does not support the drainage scheme to be measured by complaints based measures.

• Agrees that central government needs to be brought into the discussion on the land drainage as the costs are becoming too high.

Sara-Ann Howell and Kerry Single (Go Waihi)

238 • Go Waihi does not support the Council reducing its funding. Go Waihi benefits the whole district and it is a good value service.

• Unclear on where information on HDC website is, and wording suggests the change has occurred rather than a proposed change.

• Go Waihi has money available to give back to community groups for their assistance with the town promotion events. Go Waihi raises its own money which it spends to make events happen.

• Funding agencies don’t work in line with projects that Go Waihi is trying to do, therefore applying for funding is difficult.

• The number of submissions received on this matter is quite high and these are majorly from the business community.

• If the funding is reduced, then some things the coordinator is currently doing will have to be stopped.

• Detailed reporting to the Council is not necessary and takes up time that the coordinator could be doing something else.

• Questioned why privately owned information centres are getting funding.

• Positive Paeroa and Go Waihi are doing similar things, yet Positive Paeroa are given more funding.

• The population of Waihi is rising quite considerably and we consider that this is in part due to Go Waihi. Go Waihi should be recognised as contributing to this increase in population.


3 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• Accumulated funds are held as holiday pay as the coordinator is unable to take holidays. They must also have funds available to fund certain events.

• Development of a budget for 18/19 is in progress, however it is dependent the Council’s funding commitment.

• Noted that Go Waihi would support the promotion of the business awards through their contacts.

• The town coordinator is contracted for 37.5 hours a week.

• No applications for other funding have been made in the last year.

Luke van Vliet and Grace Ngataua (Hauraki Plains College)

118 • A new library facility would be well utilised by the whole community, in particular youth.

• Students would have supervised access, and there would need to be protocols around student use particularly during school hours.

• Students would have supervised access, and there would need to be protocols around student use particularly during school hours.

• Within a decade or two 40% of jobs will disappear. A community space will provide for education for all.

• Most of the young people enjoy being with younger children and the older people, for example there is strong participation with ANZAC day services and coaching younger students.

• Students need more contact with diverse age groups.

• The community may need more information on what a multipurpose hub would look like, rather than just books.

• “Communities grow great when old men plant trees whose shade they will never sit under.”

Derek Aisable and Neil Gray (Haurakian Trust)

202 • Haurakian Trust was formed in 2004 to support financial and social wellbeing of


4 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

Hauraki Plains College and the local community.

• Supports a partnership for the following reasons:

o Enables additional funding to be raised by grants e.g. Lotteries

o Pooling of resources to increase value for money

o Quality facility for range of purposes at a single location

o Potential to service a broader range of community needs

o Strong social and community engagement through a multi-purpose facility

• Support a joint community space: o Based on extensive community

survey o Defining need for a flexible,

multi-purpose community space o A hub for the Plains community o Maximise resources available for

the best facility. o Future proofing beyond the next

decade o Support a new ‘look’ for the main

street • The Charitable Trust supports due

diligence in a process to consider funding, ownership and management

• Reiterate the importance of strategy and motivation.

• 7 trustees in total that sit around the table. They represent the ‘old boys’ network of the HPC (school leavers wanting to support the school).

Trevor Benns N/A • Ngatea library - support of the joint community space

• Defining the need for a joint community space – including community hub, internet facilities, exhibition space for local art and craft work, citizen’s advice bureau.


5 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• As part of their research into the facilities they visited the successful Te Kauwhata facility and it really struck them as being what was needed. Elderly look forward to seeing the young people.

• Discussion has been had with NZTA regarding the traffic management for the new site and they showed general support, and considered that some cost efficiencies could be made with the main street upgrade.

Dianne Drummond (Hauraki Rail Trail Trust)

203 • Thank you for the massive support offered by the Council.

• Need a clear strategy in place to ensure projects like landscaping and signage is firmed up and then funding requests can be targeted.

• Wanting to leverage some projects that the Council needs to do anyway which could be funded from outside funding, e.g. Crown Hill carpark.

• Signage strategy being done for story boards along the trail.

• Wharf Street development – bed boat and bike package is a great idea and the Trust fully supports that.

• Looking at development of a trail into Waihi onward (could be central government funding available with the right business case).

• Wants to highlight great work by HDC economic development team to assist people starting business.

John Budge 283 • Concerns regarding rate increases.

• Hand out circulated with calculations. • We spend a lot per head of population. • Debt forecast to go down over ten years

(65%). Rates being charged to reduce debt, and concerned that rates are only being charged to reduce debt.

• Suggests looking at other options to source revenue other than rates, and stop just upping the rates.


6 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• Mayor outlined drivers for debt, and our optimism in reducing that debt.

• Neighbouring councils forecasting rates increases of about 3%.

Dallas Fisher (Waikato Regional Economic Development Agency)

20 • Chair of establishment board of almost formed Waikato Regional Economic Development Agency.

• Seeking $20,000 for the agency from the Hauraki District Council – have also sought funding from other Councils and the business community.

• Staff of 10 people. Keith Austen 140 • Rates are paid by each area of

commercial activity. There are 6 shops that he needs to pay. $958.82 x 6 shops.

• Concerns with code 75 (Paeroa Community Comm/Ind Town). Concern that have to pay the rate for this code for every individual shop owned.

• Unfortunately, the rent levels are forced upon the speaker, as there aren’t enough businesses in Paeroa. Some rent prices are lower now than in 1986.

Jason Davis 71 • Invest in the future, as it will be small change in the future. It’s worth investing in our communities, therefore support is given to all of the projects.

Ian McIndoe N/A • Would like to see a cultural museum representing the artwork of Rei Hamon. Maori carving and cultural art. On the corner as you come over the bridge into Paeroa. Would need a wealthy donor.

• The Mayor noted it would need someone in the community to drive such a project. Suggests getting in touch with Creative NZ.

• Would like flax or cabbage trees planted against the stormwater drain (H stream).

The meeting adjourned at 4:55pm.


7 Doc #2388486

THURSDAY, 17 MAY 2018

The meeting reconvened at . am on May .

Present: J P Tregidga (His Worship the Mayor – in the chair), 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, and Cr D H Swales.

In attendance: L D Cavers (Chief Executive), A de Laborde (Group Manager - Engineering Services), D Peddie (Group Manager - Corporate Services), P Thom (Group Manager - Planning & Environmental Services), S B Fabish (Group Manager - Community Services and Development), K Quinn (Senior Strategic Planner), S Holmes (Strategic Policy Planner), T Casey (Strategic Planner), C Black (Council Secretary), M Coleman (Executive Officer).

Apologies

RESOLVED THAT the apologies of Councillor J Thorp be received and sustained. C18/153 Adams/Milner CARRIED

Declarations of Interest

• Councillor Leonard declared conflict of interest regarding the Ngatea library and Haurakian Trust submissions and discussions.

• Councillor Milner was noted to have an interest in Positive Paeroa as a member of the committee.

• Councillor Rattray was noted to have an interest in Go Waihi as a member of the committee.

Speaker(s)

Respondent number (where feedback was made prior to the hearing2)_

Topics raised

THURSDAY, MAY COMMENCING AT AM Christine Maddern 28 • Disappointed that the swimming pool

is closed for the winter – would like it available year round.

• Need more signage showing where the swimming pools are.

• Highlighted the benefits of low impact swimming.

2 Some speakers provided feedback to the Council prior to the hearing. Where they did, the feedback point is noted.


8 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• People staying over the weekend after cycling the Rail Trail aren’t aware of the pool being there for use.

• A pool in Thames is too far away, Paeroa pool would be used by Ngatea and Waihi people.

• Would be prepared to foot $50 per month extra on rates bill, however acknowledges that she does use the pool.

• Suggests solar heating and asks what the cost of that would be.

• Would prefer the swimming pool to be open rather than Wharf Street upgraded.

Stephanie Rowe N/A • There is a very loyal group of swimmers that come to swim in Paeroa. In support of Christine Maddern’s submission.

• Urges solar heating to be investigated.

• Can this be incorporated into Rail Trail marketing? Acknowledges the benefit of the community of the Rail Trail.

• If the public organised a give a little page for the cost of the pool cover, would the Council be open to that?

• Include a spa pool for those Rail Trail users.

• Mayor / Adams outlined extensive costs associated with upgrading to a year round facility.

Sara Chapman and Teresa Fitzgerald (Citizens Advice Bureau – Hauraki)

N/A • The Council has offered a room for a satellite service in Paeroa, however head office is concerned about the privacy of using a single room at the Council (if someone is distressed and there is a client in the room, it is not appropriate for them to wait in the public waiting area of the Council)


9 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• Volunteers need to do 6-week training course. All staff are volunteers.

• If the Council provided a suitable space (other than what has been offered) there would still be some issues due to funding and suitable trained volunteers.

• There is a need for a satellite as people in Paeroa may not be able to travel. Deprivation index shows there is a need for this kind of service.

• The Mayor would like to have a continued discussion in a less formal setting.

Norma Redshaw N/A • Most of the country is ageing. • Elderly find it harder to mow the

verge. • If we have to mow our berms then

does the berm become ours, and can we plant potatoes on it?

• The berm is hard to mow now due to the Council changing the type of grass – respondent currently mows the berm herself.

• Privet tree berries are the main source of food for our native birds currently. The native bush takes a long time to grow. Will this be taken into consideration when the privet is going to be eradicated?

• The Mayor noted that privet was not a pest.

Myrtle Johnson 261 • Speaker would like more maintenance

and improvements to the Pukerimu cemetery.

• Speaker would like to know what the maintenance and improvement programme is for 2018/19.

• Maritime Park is not accessible for people like the submitter, would like this to be improved.


10 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• Supports the Council providing a grant to Maritime Park for improvements.

Dave Utting 246 • Concerned that the $300,000 for the

forestation for wastewater has been lost. The Council has trialled the standard redwoods, and the gum will be replaced with redwood.

• Solid waste – refuse bags. Suggests putting in a plastic bin opposed to plastic bag (which the Council mustn’t make money from) which is a one off charge, and the cost for pickup and dumping is the same.

• The Mayor confirmed that this service is contracted out, and is user pays.

• Assuming that there is still some council responsibility for the maintenance of the tennis courts.

• Mayor questioned if as an incorporated society, as they can apply for funding as a trust.

• Councillor Spicer to work with the tennis club to come up with a plan.

Sarah Nathan (Creative Waikato) 115 • Suggest adopting the Waikato Arts

Navigator (this is a strategy in essence but it’s more than a strategy)

• If you adopt this for your arts decision making framework, Creative Waikato will come and work with staff and include things that are already happening in the District.

• This would not require additional funding at this stage.

• The Mayor gives his support in principle.


11 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

Richard Bonham 245 • Would like to ensure that there are enough resources for stormwater.

• Frequent flooding at his location – whether we believe in climate change or not we need to plan for the increase in sea levels and extraordinary events.

• You can’t run the stormwater system properly unless you can manage it.

• Need for long term planning which takes into account future increase in weather events as a result of climate change.

• Would like to have a plan on how to divert water and manage the flow of stormwater.

• Main reason for coming is to urge the resources to be coordinated, rather than so many organisations managing it – WRC, HDC, NZTA etc.

Matthew Cooper and Julie Stephenson (Sport Waikato)

153 • Identify the following opportunities – continued support for sports coordinator role.

• Would like to have proportional funding contribution to the Regional Sports Facilities Plan ($??)

• Seeking eventual adoption of the projects in the sports plan around mid-year.

• Aquatic facilities – agree with upgrades, renewals etc of the main swimming pools, and support the council keeping an eye on the developments in the potential for the facility in Thames.

Valda Laurich 247 • ‘We need to talk’ promoted quite a lot of discussion and compliments the Council on an easily readable document.

• Ngatea library – does not believe there is enthusiasm in the community for the new library. Seems to be apparent satisfaction with current facility by the Ngatea community.


12 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• Building can be renovated and extended to promote the existing facilities (option 2) o The current library is part of a

large recreational facility and quite a nice ambience to see that whole complex with the library, service centre, and community facilities in one area.

o Families incorporate a visit to the library when they use sports facilities in Hugh Hayward Domain.

o Walkway around Hugh Hayward Domain would also be another stopping point.

o Safe roomy and accessible site. o Lots of parking at front and rear,

and disabled carpark. o SH2 congestion is a problem and

believes this will not go away and it will accelerate.

o Safe journey for pupils after school.

o Appears well used from young children to older people.

o Disappointing that service centre maintenance seems to be lacking in the past few years. Damage from months ago is still there. Automatic doors would be great, and you could use the upstairs of the building if it was developed.

• Option 5 thoughts – three main issues are the site, the shared ownership, and the cost. o Access to the proposed site –

vehicle access would be very difficult and could be unsafe.

o Parking around that area seems to be at capacity, on the main street parking is mostly full. The new site is suggested to provide 10-12 carparks on site. When the college has an activity then


13 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

parking in the area is at a premium.

o Shared ownership – concerns on how this will work and whether it will cause issues.

Conall Buchanan 282 • The financial projections forecast in

the LTP are significantly and materially different from those presented to ratepayers a year ago.

• Concerns about the funding changes proposed, does not believe moving from uniform charge to capital value is is an equitable approach.

• Higher value does not correlate with higher demand in services. Why does the benefit of services apply more to those with higher value properties?

• Would like to see the data that backs up a statement like this - “Property value is the best tool available to reflect the ability to pay”

• Greater proportion of younger people coming through into the Hauraki Plains, innovative people are becoming more common. The funding change is a disincentive for people to bring knowledge and skills to our district.

• Suggest the number of high value properties would be no more than around 200. Individual cost to these property owners would result in $172,000 extra coming into the Council. In terms of the budget, this is not material in relation to expenses. This is spread out amongst all other ratepayers then this wouldn’t make much difference to other ratepayers.

• Supports the Federated Farmers submission –Council is not in a position to assess who is ablest to afford the rates.


14 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• Suggest that council efforts would be better focussed on somehow increasing income rather than reducing expenses for those lower income households.

Brett Otto and Jo Tilsley (Positive Paeroa)

278 • Thanks to the Council for previous funding contributions.

• Promoting is about relationships and Positive Paeroa does this in many different ways, example given of the trade motor show in Auckland.

• Applying for other funding is difficult as you have to be specific about what you are applying for and the money can only be used for that project.

• Thames has struggled and are trying to get a town promoter.

• If funds are reduced there will only be funds for wages, and a lot of time will be spent to find that extra money.

• Positive Paeroa has tried to be as transparent as possible. They understand there will be cuts however ask that the council does not reduce the funding – believe it’s too much of a reduction.

• There is more focus on promotion now rather than events. Understanding that things have changed and things will change.

• Funds retained for projects - $81,000 • 18/19 budget has not been completed. • No external funding applications have

been done in the last 12 months. • Town promoter is contracted for 40

hours per week.

Gill Leonard N/A • Has previously declared an interest in Ngatea Library and will not be making a decision. Would like to give personal submission on the Ngatea Library project and supports option 5.


15 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• Haurakian Trust has a tax free status to support school and the community, members are: principal, Plains ward representative, three elected from the community. This is set up on a term rotation.

• The Trust owns 11 Orchard Road. It purchased the Masonic Lodge which is now used as an arts centre for the college. The trust contributes funds to the College and all things that the Ministry of Education will not fund.

• In the past the college formed a working party (Trevor Benns leading) to put together a plan for the library. They identified the college is at capacity and the Ministry of Education will not contribute to extension.

• Drafted a plan that they thought the Council would be interested in. A survey on this got 678 replies.

• This design will not suit the Council, however does have 26 carparks in the initial plan.

• There is some perception that isn’t quite true. It has been stated that the future of the existing building is a hindrance to the community – yet not much research has been done in this. Respondent believes there is a huge future for this building – it has potential.

• Access is a concern for the respondent and this has been discussed with NZTA initially and will be worked through if this project is chosen as an upgrade.

• With the main street upgrade this area is where the focus will be (lends itself to being done together – this would need to be worked through).


16 Doc #2388486

Speaker(s)


Topics raised

• Ownership and management – the trust is separate to the school and will be able to manage changes at the college. The college does not own the property and the trust needs to promote itself properly.

• The nature of the Ngatea community is not just about older people, it has been promoted as a place for young people to come and live/work so the facilities need to cater for that.

The meeting adjourned at 4:38pm.

MONDAY, 21 MAY 2018

The meeting reconvened at 9.00am.

Present: J P Tregidga (His Worship the Mayor – in the chair), Cr D A Adams (Deputy Mayor – for item 9 only), 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.

In attendance: L D Cavers (Chief Executive), A de Laborde (Group Manager - Engineering Services), D Peddie (Group Manager - Corporate Services), P Thom (Group Manager - Planning & Environmental Services), S B Fabish (Group Manager - Community Services and Development), K Quinn (Senior Strategic Planner), T Casey (Strategic Planner), C Black (Council Secretary).

Apologies

RESOLVED THAT the apology of Councillor Adams be received and sustained. C18/154 Tregidga / Milner CARRIED


17 Doc #2388486

Informal hearing of feedback (2385483)

RESOLVED THAT the report be received, and THAT the verbal feedback given on the ‘We need to talk – Me kōrero ngātahi tātou’ consultation document, Revenue and Financing Policy, Resource Management and Cemeteries Fees and Charges and the Rates Remission and Postponement Policies consultation processes at this Council hearing be received. C18/155 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Consideration of feedback (2370962) Appendix A: Summary of feedback received and staff recommendations (2360477), Appendix B: Summary of responses to key consultation questions (2383787), Appendix C: Staff submission (2346636), Appendix D: Written feedback (circulated under separate cover)

In considering the feedback received, the Council decided whether it would make changes to the proposals contained in the ‘We need to talk’ consultation document and other concurrent statement of proposals. These decisions were made by proposal topics and subtopics. Where the resolution is that no changes be made, this means that the Council has decided that it will retain the plan and budget as proposed in the ‘We need to talk – Me kōrero ngātahi tātou’ consultation document and supporting information. The minutes should be read in conjunction with the Council agenda reports, including Appendix A: Summary of Feedback, and the consideration of feedback report. Some of the resolutions in these minutes make reference to the staff comments including reason for recommendation provided in that report.

RESOLVED

THAT the report be received, and THAT all verbal and written feedback on the following ‘We need to talk – Me kōrero ngātahi tātou’ proposals be received: 1. The 2018-28 long term plan consultation document. 2. The Revenue and Financing Policy statement of proposal. 3. The Rates Remission and Postponement Policies statement of proposal. 4. The cemeteries and resource management fees and charges changes statement of proposal, and THAT the six feedback items received after the consultation closing date be received, and THAT the Council receive the submission made by staff, and THAT the Council considers all feedback and make decisions on changes to the proposals, and THAT following the Council’s consideration of feedback, staff prepare the draft 2018-28 Long Term Plan to reflect the decisions made, for consideration by the Council at its meeting on 27 June 2018, and


18 Doc #2388486

THAT following the Council’s consideration of feedback, staff revise the draft Revenue and Financing Policy, Rates Remission and Postponement Policies and 2018 Schedule of Fees and Charges to reflect the decisions made, all of which will be considered for adoption by the Council at its meeting on 27 June 2018, and THAT staff reflect the relevant decisions in the activity and asset management plans as at 1 July 2018, and THAT the draft 2018-28 Long Term Plan reflecting the decisions made at this meeting, be submitted to Audit New Zealand for the purposes of auditing the Long Term Plan, and THAT the decisions made by the Council be communicated after the above items are adopted in June 2018, and THAT respondents and participants are thanked for their feedback in due course. THAT the meeting be reconvened on Monday, 21 May 2018 at 9.00am. C18/156 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Consideration of feedback and decisions The Council received the summary of the feedback received prepared by staff. It was noted that the number of people submitting in support of or opposition to a proposal is one but not the only factor that needs to be considered. The reasons provided by people are also important, including if new perspectives and considerations are raised. On balance, elected members noted that respondents were largely happy with the overall approach proposed in the consultation document and statement of proposals. Support was received for most of the individual proposals but not all. In considering this the Council noted that major changes to the plan was not appropriate. The Council worked through the various topics that feedback was received on with this in mind and considered whether projects and plans be removed, added or changed.

1. Overall strategy

Direction

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/157 Adams / Harris CARRIED

Borrowing and debt strategy


19 Doc #2388486

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/158 Milner / Rattray CARRIED

Infrastructure strategy

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/159 Tregidga / McLean CARRIED

Operational efficiency

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. • That the Council notes that it will continue its periodic reviews of the cost effectiveness of its

activities. C18/160 Smeaton / Daley CARRIED

Asset lives and depreciation assumptions (staff submission)

RESOLVED

THAT staff incorporate the depreciation assumptions in the asset management plans. C18/161 Adams / Milner CARRIED

2. Rates, expenditure and spending priorities

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made, and THAT the Group Manager Corporate Services contacts Lynton Campbell of the Kaiaua Citizens and Ratepayers Association to respond to his feedback. C18/162 Harris / Smeaton CARRIED


20 Doc #2388486

3. Funding policy approach

Key issue #3: affordability of rates

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made to the proposal (option 2).

• That LGNZ be approached to discuss rates affordability issues. A vote was taken by a show of hands. Councillors Swales and Buckthought voted against the motion. Councillors Adams, Leonard, Spicer, Harris, Smeaton, Rattray, Daley, McLean, Milner, and Tregidga voted in support of the motion. C18/163 Spicer / Milner CARRIED

User pays approach

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/164 Leonard / Rattray CARRIED

Other funding arrangements

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/165 Milner / Harris CARRIED

4. Libraries

Projects in your patch: Ngatea library and community space

It was identified that there could have been more information provided on the issue and proposal that would have resolved some of the public’s concerns raised through the feedback process. It identified that this information should be provided and discussed further with the public before making a decision on which option to pursue. In the interim, option five should be retained as the council’s preferred option until this further investigation is carried out.


21 Doc #2388486

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received. • That the Council further investigate option 5, in particular the concerns regarding the

governance structure, access/parking issues, and protection of Council’s investment in the project. Further community consultation will also be undertaken. If option 5 is not feasible, then option 2 would be further investigated. The future of the present building will also be taken into consideration.

C18/166 Tregidga / Spicer CARRIED Councillor Swales voted against the motion.

5. Streetscapes

Ngatea main street development

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and pursues option 2. • That the Council notes that it will communicate and consult on the Ngatea main street plan

before the project commences. C18/167 Harris / Buckthought CARRIED

Ngatea Main Street funding (staff submission)

Refer to the staff submission on this sub topic (2346636).

RESOLVED

THAT the Council ensures the final LTP documentation reflects the correct funding allocation. C18/168 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Wharf Street development

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/169 Milner / McLean CARRIED Noted: Councillor Swales voted against the motion.


22 Doc #2388486

Other streetscapes matters

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. • That the Paeroa, Waihi and Plains Ward Councillors will consider the suggestions made when

planning for the upgrading of facilities in the towns and villages in their Ward. • That Council continue to maintain the gardens on the main street and the regular pathway

and curb sweeping and cleaning. C18/170 Tregidga / Buckthought CARRIED

6. Sports fields and recreational reserves

Paeroa Domain Entrance and Gardens (Paeroa Ward)

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/171 Harris / Tregidga CARRIED Noted: Councillor Adams voted against the motion.

Marshall Street campervan carparks (Paeroa Ward)

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/172 Milner/Smeaton CARRIED

Hutchinson Reserve (Paeroa Ward)

Due to the current amount of use of the area, it is not considered a priority at this time. Given the Council’s current funding pressures, the Council does not consider this a good use of funding at this time.

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and that the Council removes the funding for this development. C18/173 Tregidga / Swales CARRIED


23 Doc #2388486

Karangahake Reserves (Paeroa Ward)

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. • That the Paeroa Ward councillors continue working on providing additional parking and public

toilets for the rail trail users, close to the Karangahake Hall. Funding for these projects is already provided for in the 2017/18 year.

C18/174 Adams / Leonard CARRIED

Other reserves in the Paeroa Ward

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. • That the Council notes it will be considering future plans for the district reserves through the

review of the Hauraki Reserve Management Plan in 2018. C18/175 Leonard / Milner CARRIED

Other reserve matters in the Waihi Ward

RESOLVED

• That the Council will review the signage at Gilmour Park, to ensure visitors are made aware of all the facilities including the new petanque area.

• That the Council notes it is reviewing its Hauraki Reserve Management Plan in 2018 which will identify future plans for each of its reserves. This will include reserves suitable for community fruit tree planting.

• That the Council notes it is planning on replacing a number of beach access ladders in 2018. • That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/176 Adams / Spicer CARRIED

Hugh Hayward Domain walk/cycleway (staff submission)

RESOLVED

That the Hugh Hayward Domain walk/cycleway budget of $20,000 in 2018/19 be added to the capital works schedule and that the operating budgets be revised as needed, to align with the proposal contained in the consultation document. C18/177 Adams / Milner CARRIED


24 Doc #2388486

Dudding Reserve developments (staff submission)


RESOLVED

That the Dudding Reserve development budget of $20,000 in 2018/19 be added to the capital works schedule to align with the consultation document proposal. C18/178 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Other sports fields matters

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received. • That staff work with the Whiritoa Tennis Club to clarify ownership of the facility, inspection

frequency and plans for the future resurfacing of the courts. • That the Council allocate $25,000 in 2019/20 towards Whiritoa tennis court resurfacing.

C18/179 McLean / Spicer CARRIED

Other reserve matters

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received. • That the Council provides the Whiritoa Voluntary Rural Fire Force with 3x 25,000 litre water

tanks and a grant of $5,000 in 2018/19 towards the purchase and delivery of 1 further 25,000 litre water tanks and fittings for 4 tanks (from the district water account).

• That the Whiritoa Voluntary Rural Fire Force are to install and commission the 4 tanks on sites agreed with by the Council.

• That the Council continue to work with community groups which are planting native vegetation alongside streams and rivers in the District to improve the water quality.

• That the Council notes it wishes to see the completion of the Miranda to Kaiaua cycleway before undertaking and funding any new cycleway.

• That the Paeroa Ward councillors consider the use of Mackaytown Domain as a site for campervans and HRT parking.

• That the Whiritoa Tennis Club be thanked for the feedback provided and be informed that the Council will work with the Whiritoa Tennis Club to look at options for the playing surface, costs and funding and present this back to the Council for consideration in the 2019/20 Annual Plan.

• That the Council seek further clarification on what 4WD clubs are requiring with regards to opening and maintaining 4WD tracks.

C18/180 Adams / Leonard CARRIED


25 Doc #2388486

Waihi campervan dump station upgrade (staff submission)

RESOLVED

That the Waihi campervan dump station upgrade budget of $30,000 in 2018/19 be removed from the capital works schedule to align to the proposal in the consultation document. C18/181 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Travellers reserves

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes it will be considering future plans for the District reserves through the review of the Hauraki Reserve Management Plan, in 2018.

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made.

C18/182 Tregidga / Rattray CARRIED

7. Playgrounds and skateparks

Railway Reserve skatepark (Paeroa Ward)

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received. • That the Council reallocate the funding from the skate park to Railway Reserve improvements,

which may include basketball court and parking, and reconsider the timing of the project in the 2019/20 Annual Plan process.

C18/183 Tregidga / Daley CARRIED

Victoria Park Playground (Waihi Ward)

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/184 Spicer / McLean CARRIED

Gilmore Park Playground (Waihi Ward)


26 Doc #2388486

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/185 Rattray / Adams CARRIED

8. Walkways

Turua walkway (Plains Ward)

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/186 Milner / Buckthought CARRIED

Turua walkway (staff submission)

RESOLVED

That the Turua walkway capital works budget be amended to $40,000 in 2018/19 to align with the proposal contained in the consultation document. C18/187 Leonard / Harris CARRIED

Olga Street walkway (Paeroa Ward)

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/188 Milner / McLean CARRIED

9. Swimming pools

Ngatea swimming pool

RESOLVED

• That the respondents be thanked for the feedback provided and they be informed that the Council considered installing an access ramp into the Ngatea pool, but the cost of this was too expensive. This will be addressed at the time of a major upgrade of the pool. In the mean time


27 Doc #2388486

staff will investigate alternative methods of entering the pool for patrons with accessible problems.

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/189 Milner / McLean CARRIED

Ngatea Pool upgrades (staff submission)


RESOLVED

That and operating budget of $7,500 be included in the long term plan for the various works to be additional for year 1 only at the Ngatea Pool. C18/190 Buckthought / McLean CARRIED

Ngatea Pool Cover system and Dive blocks relocation (staff submission)


RESOLVED

That a capital budget of $55,000 be included in the long term plan for the relocation of the Ngatea pool covers and dive blocks. C18/191 Tregidga / Spicer CARRIED

Paeroa swimming pool

The Council supports the sub-regional approach to providing access to a year-round pool and notes that the Thames-Coromandel District Council currently provides for this through its Thames swimming pool. The Council considers that it is not affordable to provide year-round access to a pool within the district, however sees merit in extending the existing season of one pool by, for example, one month. A recent trial of an extended season showed that this could be achieved with an additional budget of $35,000. More work will need to be done on determining where the season will be extended and for how long.

RESOLVED

• That the Council improve the signage and promotion of the pools. • That the Council notes the feedback received. • That the Council do not cover its existing pools, due to design and cost. • That the Council allocate an additional $35,000 to the swimming pool budget towards further

work to extend the swimming season. C18/192 Milner/Adams CARRIED


28 Doc #2388486

Paeroa Pool upgrades (staff submission)


RESOLVED

That an operating budget of $9,000 be included in the long term plan for the various works to be additional for year 1 only at the Paeroa Pool. C18/193 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Other swimming pool matters

RESOLVED

• That the Council continue to be supportive of Thames-Coromandel District Council's plan to create a sub-regional aquatic facility.

• That staff continue to look for opportunities to promote the Council's heated pools. • That the Council does not consider covering its existing pools, due to design and cost. • That the respondent 77.3 be informed that Paeroa pool has an accessibility ramp. • That the respondents be thanked for the feedback provided, and be informed that at the time

of upgrading the pool heating system, staff look at all forms of heating options available to look for efficiency and costs. At the time of upgrading the Ngatea pool heating system, electrical system proved to be the best.

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no (other) changes be made. C18/194 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Waihi Pool upgrades (staff submission)


RESOLVED

That the Council allocates $11,000 in the long term plan for the various works to be additional for year 1 only at the Waihi Pool. C18/195 Adams / Milner CARRIED


29 Doc #2388486

10. Berm mowing

Berm mowing in Waihi

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made, and THAT the communication of the decision gives clear information that all Waihi ward ratepayers were paying for the berms to be mowed, and that WINZ assistance may be available for low income earners unable to mow their own berm for health or disability reasons. C18/196 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Berm mowing in Paeroa

RESOLVED • That Council continues to mow the existing berms as identified by the Paeroa Ward. • That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/197 Adams / Milner CARRIED

11. Weed control The Council noted that no suitable alternative to glyphosate is available at this time. A spray register exists for those who do not want sprays near their property.

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and that the Council continue with the use of glyphosate based herbicides, but usage is monitored to ensure it is applied in an efficient manner to reduce spray drift onto areas other than what is being targeted. Staff will continue to look for alternatives. C18/198 Adams / Milner CARRIED


30 Doc #2388486

12. Public toilets

Kaiaua toilets

RESOLVED • That when developing the Kaiaua community plan, the Council will consider the relevant

feedback received on the 'we need to talk' proposals. • That the Council retain its long term plan proposal to work with the Kaiaua community area to

develop a community plan in 2018-19. • That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/199 Swales / Milner CARRIED

Note Freedom camping matters are addressed under the ‘freedom camping’ subtopic.

Other

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. • That respondents be thanked for the feedback provided and be informed that the Council

undertook a public toilet study three years ago to look at where public toilets are best positioned and to which standard. Since then the Council has opened up new public toilets in the Paeroa library, toilets on the Kopu to Kaiaua section of the rail trail and are investigating new toilets in the Karangahake Gorge area. Staff are also looking at increasing the level of service in two of the district toilets by installing better lighting systems.

• That staff continue to ensure that Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design audits are undertaken to look for improvements to prevent vandalism.

C18/200 Rattray/Milner CARRIED Councillor Smeaton voted against the motion.

13. Freedom camping

Freedom camping services

RESOLVED -

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. • That the Council notes it will continue to maintain existing and construct new public dump

station facilities to NZS 5465:2001 specifications and Council agrees to partner with NZMCA to


31 Doc #2388486

provide free/ low cost refuse facilities, and will work towards being a motorhome friendly district.

C18/201 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Freedom camping funding

The Council has no statutory ability to require a charge for freedom campers. The Council considers that freedom campers add economic value to the district through their spend in the area.

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/202 Milner / Adams CARRIED

14. Halls

Karangahake Hall

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes to funding be made at this time.• That the respondent be informed that the Paeroa Ward councillors are currently working on

providing additional parking and public toilets for the rail trail users, close to the Karangahake Hall.

C18/203 Milner / Adams CARRIED

Whiritoa Hall

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and that staff look at what options are available to improve the acoustics of the Whiritoa Emergency Centre.

C18/204 Milner / Adams CARRIED

Fees and charges

The Council notes that an increase in fees often results in the halls not being used and for that reason do not wish to increase hall fees.


32 Doc #2388486

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/205 Adams / Milner CARRIED

15. Events centres

Waihi Events Centre

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/206 Milner / Adams CARRIED

Paeroa events centres

Refer to the staff comments on this sub topic (2360477). The Waikato Regional Sports Facilities Plan identifies Te Aroha, Morrinsville and Thames as having a two court indoors multi use facility close to Paeroa. External funding providers tend to not support a funding application for a facility such as this unless supported within the Waikato Regional Sports Facilities Plan.

RESOLVED

• That the submitter be informed that the Waikato Regional Sports Facilities Plan has not identified Paeroa as requiring a covered indoor sports facility.

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/207 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Events centre – other

Refer to the staff comments on this sub topic (2360477). A new sports and events centre would come at a high cost which the Council does not currently consider to be affordable.

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/208 Adams / Milner CARRIED


33 Doc #2388486

16. Cemeteries

Paeroa Cemetery

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. • That the respondents be advised of the improvements being made to the cemetery in the near

future. • That a sign be provided which communicates that an extension will be undertaken in future. • That the Council will consult with the ratepayers and residents of Paeroa and the wider district

in regards to the concept plans for expansion of the Paeroa Pukerimu Cemetery. • That respondent #261 be provided with a written schedule containing more information on the

work to be undertaken at Pukerimu Cemetery in 2018/19. C18/209 Adams / Milner CARRIED

17. Pensioner housing The Council is waiting for further Government direction on its approach to partnering with local government on the provision of pensioner housing.

RESOLVED


18. Sports coordination

Sports plan

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes that Sport Waikato and Council staff are currently working on the Hauraki Sport Plan with a planned completion date about mid-2018. Priority projects are yet to be identified and approved by the Council.



34 Doc #2388486

District coordinator

RESOLVED

• That the Council thanks the submitter for their feedback and wish to acknowledge the great work that our district sport coordinator does in our sporting communities.

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/212 McLean / Daley CARRIED

19. Community growth

Economic development

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/213 Harris / Smeaton CARRIED

Town promotion – general

The Council discussed town promotional organisations, which include Positive Paeroa, Go Waihi and Positively Promoting the Plains. The Council noted that it has a responsibility to ensure ratepayer money is invested wisely and that there is value for money in what is achieved from the funding provided. Organisations the Council contributes significant funding to, including Destination Coromandel and the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust, are expected to meet agreed performance standards and it would be irresponsible of the Council to overlook how the funding it provides is being managed. The Council noted that no budget has been provided by the organisations in recent years, and funding has simply rolled over. The Council will reduce funding to all these organisations by 25% to lessen the load on ratepayers and encourage the exploration of other avenues of funding. The majority of Council funding will continue, and support will also be offered in other ways, such as providing independent advice around governance and alternative fundraising if this is needed. The Council will monitor the performance of all of its Town Promotional Organisations over a six-month period to ensure that appropriate financial management, accountability and governance oversight is being exercised with the communities’ funds. Full funding may be continued after six months, following the results of this assessment. Performance needs to be fairly measured using the same criteria applied to other organisations the Council provides funding to. The Council noted feedback received in regard to a district-wide coordinator and discussed that the employment of a district-wide coordinator is something else that could be considered.


35 Doc #2388486

RESOLVED

THAT the Council reduces funding by 25% for town promotional organisations initially for a six-month contract term. At the end of this term, the Council will consider continuing funding following review of performance. The Council will also consider the employment of a district coordinator. C18/214 Harris / Smeaton CARRIED Councillor McLean voted against the motion. Councillor Rattray abstained from discussion and voting.

Town promotion – Ngatea / Plains

Note: This matter was considered within the ‘town promotion - general’ subtopic. Decision made once for all matters relating to town promotions.

Town promotion – Paeroa


Town promotion – Waihi


20. Community initiatives

CCTV

Originally this CCTV was intended to be a preventative measure. Councillors Rattray and Spicer are looking into this issue and what can be done. The Waihi community fund could potentially be used to fund camera upgrades.

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received. • That no funding be added to the long term plan for this matter but that Waihi Ward Councillors

follow up on the state of the cameras and appropriate action. C18/215 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Fire services

Note: This matter was considered within the ‘other reserves matters’ subtopic.


36 Doc #2388486

Funding requests

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/216 McLean / Rattray CARRIED

Hauraki Rail Trail

RESOLVED

• That the Council continue to work closely with the Hauraki Rail Trail Charitable Trust to identify leverage funding of projects to benefit both residents and rail trail users. Staff will also work with the Trust to identify a safe and cost effective route from the Waihi Railway station to Seddon Street.

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/217 Rattray / McLean CARRIED

Maritime Park Funding

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and that no changes be made. C18/218 Leonard / Harris CARRIED

Positive ageing

RESOLVED

That the Council continues to grant $5,000 per annum from the District Discretionary Social Fund to Age Concern Thames for services within the Hauraki District and that no change be made to the draft long term plan budget. C18/219 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Sister cities

Note: This is a matter regarding expenditure priorities and was considered with the rates, expenditure and priorities sub topic.

21. Other Council property


37 Doc #2388486

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes that maintaining the Paeroa/Kerepehi intersection by the industrial subdivision is the responsibility of the New Zealand Transport Agency, but the Council will organise a tidy up.

• That the respondent #234 be advised that the emergency exit in the Ngatea Council building is not permanently locked from the inside, only the outside.

• That the Council notes the feedback on contracting out subdivisions and that no changes are made.


22. Land transport

Key issue #1: Maintaining our roads

The results to the question on increasing investment on maintaining local roads showed clear support for the Council’s proposal. The Group Manager Engineering Services noted that he had discussed the feedback concerning the two bridges at Waitakaruru with NZTA and will update the Council in his next monthly report.

RESOLVED

• That the submissions be noted and that option 2 be adopted (that the Council increases its operating budget for reseals and rebuilds by $625,000 every year).

• THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/221 Rattray / Smeaton CARRIED

Land transport - coastal inundation and climate change

The coastal inundation of roads and the simultaneous consideration of climate change and sea level rise with be considered by the Council as a broader long term issue in the future.

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/222 Buckthought / Harris CARRIED


38 Doc #2388486

Footpaths (general)

The Council supports the widening of some footpaths to enable the use of mobility scooters and kids on bikes as it is provided for in the Council’s Social Strategy. The Council is already making progress in identifying and installing wider footpaths where appropriate.

RESOLVED

• That the feedback from Dr Wall be supported. • That the feedback (222.2) be noted. • THAT the Council bring forward its proposed programme for widening footpaths. • THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no other changes be made. C18/223 Spicer / Daley CARRIED

Speed limits

The Council will be reviewing the suggestions received when reviewing its speed limits. Council staff have already started investigating where speed limits should be reduced. The Council discussed concerns regarding the volume of traffic in areas including on Hauraki Road, Turua.

RESOLVED

• THAT the feedback be noted and that staff investigate further and work with NZTA to address areas where further restrictions are identified as necessary.

C18/224 McLean / Spicer CARRIED

Ngatea roading

Providing a bypass in Ngatea is a matter for the New Zealand Transport Agency to consider. It is beyond the scope of the Council’s long term plan and is considered to be unaffordable for the Council.

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/225 Leonard / Harris CARRIED

Ngatea mainstreet footpaths

The Council will consider what it can do to improve footpaths when developing the main street upgrade plan. It notes however that options are constrained as the road is a state highway and managed by the New Zealand Transport Agency.


39 Doc #2388486

Turua roading

Council staff are investigating the area wide treatment of roads within Turua. It was noted that feedback #157.4 has been forwarded to staff as a request for service and will be followed up on.

RESOLVED

• That the feedback be noted and form part of the planning for an area wide treatment for the balance of Hauraki Road within the 50 km area.

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/227 Buckthought / Leonard CARRIED

Other Plains Ward roading

• Regarding feedback #143.10, there is a drainage issue at the location (Kaikahu Road) and staff will look at remediation works.

• Regarding feedback #143.2, there are minor works required at the location (McGowan Ave) and these will be programmed as there are also hazards for children.

• Regarding feedback #155.13, #157.2, #193.8 and #210.7, these are matters for the New Zealand Transport Agency to address and staff have forwarded these concerns.

• Regarding feedback #157.3 and #157.5, these traffic calming measures are already part of works planned for safety improvement.

• Regarding feedback #158.4, the request for a pedestrian crossing on Front Miranda Road outside the toilet will be investigated further and an appropriate measure implemented.

• Regarding feedback #199.1, staff advise that if roadside drains pose a risk to the road or pavement layers then they are cleaned. Not all roadside drains are cleaned.

• Regarding feedback #231.5 requesting the sealing of Hopai East Road, there is no plan to extend the seal in this area and the Council doesn’t have a programme to extend road sealing.

• Regarding feedback #82.1, there is a speed reduction recommendation sign at the big corner at Bush Road near Kerepehi, however staff will investigate and make improvements if required.

• Regarding feedback #268.14, staff will investigate the issue of cars speeding through the main street in Kerepehi and if needed will install the appropriate road safety measures.

RESOLVED

• THAT matters raised in feedback #143.10, 143.2, 157.3, 157.5, 158.4 and 82.1 be included in the Council’s improvement plan.

• THAT Council staff investigate the request in feedback #268.14 and programme road safety works if required.

• THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/228 Swales / Leonard CARRIED

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/226 Harris / Buckthought CARRIED


40 Doc #2388486

Paeroa Ward roading

• Regarding feedback #140.2, the concerns about the condition of Rahu Road will be addressed through the programme on maintaining unsealed roads.

• Regarding feedback #145.16 and #232.10 on delays at intersection of Station Road and State Highway 2, staff will look into this further.

• Regarding feedback #167.14 on sealing De Castro Street, all homes currently have access to a sealed road and it is not considered necessary to seal this section.

• Regarding feedback #60.11 on Rotokohu Road, staff note that it may require an area-wide roading treatment in future but this has not been programmed. The Council has not received an application for the wind farm.

• Regarding feedback #251.10 on Junction Road and Dearle Street footpaths (Paeroa), their upgrade will be considered when the Council prepares its footpath programmes.

• Regarding feedback #237.14, the Council will look at whether there is a shortage when it next reviews car parking availability.

An error in the summary of feedback document was noted. #232.10 should be corrected from Thomas Road to Thames Road.

RESOLVED

• THAT staff investigate the matters raised in feedback #140.2, 145.16, 232.10 and 251.10. • THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no other changes be made. C18/229 Milner / Daley CARRIED

Waihi Ward roading

The Council discussed the feasibility of a bypass road option in Waihi. It is a decision for the New Zealand Transport Agency, and would likely require funding by the Council.

RESOLVED

• THAT staff notify the relevant respondents of the current forwards works programme (if any) for Thorn Road.

• THAT staff investigate the matters raised in feedback points 195.2 (adding a footpath and wheelchair ramp on Swordfish Road), 26.5 (more kerb and channelling in Waihi East) and 75.3 (maintenance of footpaths) and place the works on forward works programmes if required.

• THAT the Council notes that the Seddon Street streetscape is part of a larger plan that must be considered for the top end of Seddon Street.

• THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no other changes be made. C18/230 Spicer / Smeaton CARRIED

State highways

The feedback relates to state highways and are matters for the New Zealand Transport Agency.


41 Doc #2388486

RESOLVED

• THAT the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) are notified of the feedback received. • THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/231 Leonard / Milner CARRIED

Land transport – other matters

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/232 Tregidga / Smeaton CARRIED

NZTA subsidy (staff submission)

RESOLVED

• THAT the values shown for subsidy income in the final long term plan financial forecasts be corrected.

• THAT the forecasting assumptions in the final long term plan and land transport asset management plan be amended.


23. Water supply

Quality, taste and odour

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/234 Milner / Leonard CARRIED

Other water supply matters

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/235 Leonard / Buckthought CARRIED


42 Doc #2388486

24. Wastewater

Wastewater capacity

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/236 Harris / Smeaton CARRIED

Wastewater – other

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/237 Harris / Buckthought CARRIED

25. Stormwater

Stormwater in Paeroa

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/238 Milner / McLean CARRIED

Stormwater in Turua

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/239 Harris / Smeaton CARRIED

Stormwater – other areas of the Hauraki Plains

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/240 Leonard / Buckthought CARRIED


43 Doc #2388486

Stormwater in Waihi

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/241 Spicer / Thorp CARRIED

Other stormwater

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/242 Buckthought / Smeaton CARRIED

Storm water catchment management plan (staff submission)

RESOLVED

That the stormwater catchment management plan budget of $107,794 in 2021/22 be removed from the capital works schedule and retained as an operating expenditure item. C18/243 Adams / Milner CARRIED

26. Land drainage

Land drainage in Kaiaua

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/244 Leonard / Swales CARRIED

Other land drainage

The Council considered the request for funding towards the research for the fish passage improvement programme and while Council supports the project, has decided not to provide funding. Refer to the staff comments on this sub topic (2360477).


44 Doc #2388486

RESOLVED

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/245 Buckthought / Swales CARRIED

Land drainage depreciation / renewals graph (staff submission)

RESOLVED

THAT staff investigate and make necessary changes to land drainage depreciation and renewals graph. C18/246 Adams / Milner CARRIED

27. Solid waste

Refuse and recycling collection

RESOLVED

• That Council supports the recommendation and that a change to biodegradable bags be considered as part of a wider review of the plastic waste disposal options.

• That the Council improve its communication regarding who is paying and receiving the refuse collection services.

• That the Council allocate $10,000 to investigate the cost of providing a recycling station in Ngatea, and District wide education and initiatives options for the reduction and reuse of waste.

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no other changes be made. C18/247 Tregidga / Smeaton CARRIED

Transfer stations

RESOLVED

• That the feedback is noted and that staff investigate the options for amending refuse transfer station hours.

• That the feedback is noted, and regarding the feedback on a seagull-type centre, the Council notes its support for the concept and will further investigate.

• That the Council notes the feedback received and no other changes be made. C18/248 Spicer / McLean CARRIED


45 Doc #2388486

Waste minimisation education

RESOLVED

• That the Council supports Keep New Zealand Beautiful to increase waste reduction education. • That the Council notes the feedback received and no other changes be made. C18/249 Spicer / Harris CARRIED

Solid waste signage

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/250 Rattray / Smeaton CARRIED

Solid waste funding

RESOLVED

That the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/251 Milner / Smeaton CARRIED

28. Resource management implementation

RESOLVED

• That regarding the provision of camping grounds in the District Plan, the Council notes that there is law and regulations on what a camping ground is and dispensation process which allows people to open camp grounds on their rural properties.

• That the Council notes that it will continue to have regard to the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management.

• THAT the Council notes that it will continue to provide assistance to building and subdivision applicants as much as the law allows, and that no change be made.



46 Doc #2388486

Resource implementation fees

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/253 Adams / Milner CARRIED

29. Building control

Building control fees

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/254 Milner / Adams CARRIED

Building consent fees and charges (staff submission)

RESOLVED

THAT the Council changes the 2018/19 fees to those set out in the staff submission. C18/255 Milner/Adams CARRIED

30. Community protection

Civil defence / emergency management

RESOLVED

• THAT the Council installs generator points in the Whiritoa Community Centre and the Whiritoa Surf Life Saving Club buildings, and that it be funded from Council's operations budget.

• THAT this project may need to be timed for completion over two financial years depending on funding availability.

• THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no other changes be made.

C18/256 McLean / Buckthought CARRIED


47 Doc #2388486

Noise control

RESOLVED


Parking enforcement

RESOLVED


Animal control

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/259 Milner / Smeaton CARRIED

Dog registration fees and charges (staff submission)

RESOLVED

THAT the penalty fee for dogs in excess of three be changed from $13.50 to $17.50. C18/260 Adams / Milner CARRIED

31. Democracy

Running of Election 2019 (staff submission)

RESOLVED

That an additional operating budget of $15,000 be included in year one of the long term plan, to cover the potential extra cost for the tendered contractors. C18/261 Adams / Milner CARRIED


48 Doc #2388486

32. Policy development

Climate change adaptation

Refer to the staff comments on this sub topic (2360477). The feedback received is consistent with the Council’s plans to complete a climate change adaptation work programme and to work with the Kaiaua community area to develop a community plan in 2018/19.

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/262 Adams / Milner CARRIED

Community planning

The feedback received was considered in conjunction with the feedback on the Kaiaua public toilets subtopic.

District Planning

It was noted that what the respondent refers to is the responsibility of the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and the Regional Council.

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/263 Smeaton / Buckthought CARRIED

Natural hazard management (excl. climate change)

Natural hazards are factored into the risk assessments for future works.

RESOLVED


Policy development – other


49 Doc #2388486

33. Other services

Arts and culture

RESOLVED

• THAT the Council fund $2,000 (from the district social discretionary fund) towards the Waikato arts navigator, and work with Creative Waikato to develop an arts plan.

• THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no other changes be made. C18/266 Spicer / Milner CARRIED

Menz Shed

RESOLVED

THAT the Waihi Ward Councillors work with Grey Power Waihi to look at options for the provision of a Menz Shed in Waihi. There is currently no funding allocated for this initiative.

C18/267 Tregidga / Buckthought CARRIED

Use of electric/lower emission vehicles

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/268 Spicer / Leonard CARRIED

Use of Te Reo Māori

This is the responsibility of the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) and the Regional Council.

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/265 Tregidga / Leonard CARRIED

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and will use Te Reo Māori language where appropriate. C18/269 Spicer / Milner CARRIED


50 Doc #2388486

Rubbish bins

RESOLVED

• THAT the respondents be informed that the Council undertook a bin study three years ago to look at where bins are best placed and reduced where possible. The single open type bins were replaced with the compacting bins which hold the equivalent of 3-5 bins worth of rubbish before needing to be emptied. This has resulted in a saving to the district.

• THAT the respondent #237 be informed that the Council install doggy doo bins in the official dog exercise areas, and that other Council rubbish bins for doggy doo can be used as long as it is wrapped in a plastic bag.

• THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/270 Smeaton / Harris CARRIED

34. Other financial matters

Staff remuneration and benefits

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/271 Harris / McLean CARRIED

'What rates will fund' information and water supply

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and replies to the respondent’s query. C18/272 Leonard / Smeaton CARRIED

35. Rates remission and postponement

RESOLVED

• THAT the Council makes a submission regarding the level of rates rebates, to the central government review of local government funding.

• THAT staff contact Kerepehi Brass Band about applying for a rates remission under the Council’s Community, Sporting and Other Organisations Remission Policy.

• THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/273 Harris / Buckthought CARRIED


51 Doc #2388486

36. Rates rebates

RESOLVED

• THAT the Council makes a submission to the current central government review of local government funding.

• THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made.

C18/274 Spicer / Smeaton CARRIED

37. Consultation process

Complaints regarding mail out

RESOLVED

• THAT the Council thanks respondents for bringing this to our attention and apologises for the mistake.

• THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/275 Spicer / McLean CARRIED

Consultation events

RESOLVED

• THAT the Council consider this feedback when wanting to engage with people in future. • THAT no changes be made. C18/276 Tregidga / McLean CARRIED

Consultation process – other

RESOLVED

• THAT the Council considers the feedback in preparing future consultation information. • THAT no changes be made. C18/277 Buckthought / Daley CARRIED

38. Outside scope matters


52 Doc #2388486

Bylaw matters

The feedback is outside the scope of a long term plan and is a bylaw matter.

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/278 Tregidga / Harris CARRIED

Customer service feedback

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/279 Swales / Leonard CARRIED

Financial operations

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/280 Smeaton / Harris CARRIED

Paeroa Racecourse

The Council is limited as to its influence on what the Paeroa Racecourse property can be used for as it is privately owned. Any change of use will need to comply with the RMA

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/281 Leonard / Harris CARRIED

Request for information

RESOLVED

• THAT the information requests be forwarded to the relevant staff member to follow up. • THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/282 Tregidga / McLean CARRIED

Request for service

The various service requests have been entered into Council's system to be addressed.


53 Doc #2388486

Resource management matter

RESOLVED

THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no changes be made. C18/284 Harris / McLean CARRIED

Town appearance

RESOLVED

• THAT staff look to where improvements can be made within existing budgets. • THAT the Council notes the feedback received and no other changes be made. C18/285 Milner / Spicer CARRIED

Trans Pacific Partnership (now CPTPP)

RESOLVED

THAT the Council is not in a position to support or otherwise the requested submission recommendation, and that no changes be made. C18/286 Milner / Tregidga CARRIED

39. Staff submission

Various grammatical and typing errors

RESOLVED

• That minor grammatical errors be corrected by staff, and • That it be noted that the Victoria Park playground development will be completed in 2018/19

rather than 2019/20 as incorrectly stated in the consultation document. C18/287 Adams / Milner CARRIED

RESOLVED

THAT the Council staff follow up these various service requests. C18/283 Harris / McLean CARRIED


of 7

Decision Report

To: Mayor and Councillors

From: Senior Strategic Planner

Date: Wednesday, 20 June 2018

File reference: Document: 2393946 Appendix A: Draft Our Long Term Plan: 2018-28 | Tō Mātou Mahere Roa: 2018-28 (to be circulated under separate cover)

Portfolio holder: Mayor

Meeting date: Wednesday, 27 June 2018

Subject: Adoption of Our Long Term Plan: 2018-28 | Tō Mātou Mahere Roa: 2018-28

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received, and THAT the Council adopts Our Long Term Plan: 2018-28 | Tō Mātou Mahere Roa: 2018-28 in accordance with section 93 of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act), and THAT the report from Audit New Zealand (on behalf of the Auditor-General) as required by section 94 of the Act be received and included in Our Long Term Plan: 2018-28 | Tō Mātou Mahere Roa: 2018-28, and THAT the Chief Executive be authorised to correct any minor errors or omissions in Our Long Term Plan: 2018-28 | Tō Mātou Mahere Roa: 2018-28 before it is made publicly available, and THAT the stormwater, land drainage, land transport, water, wastewater, community recreation, community facilities and property asset management plans will reflect the Our Long Term Plan: 2018-28 | Tō Mātou Mahere Roa: 2018-28 information.

Purpose

The purpose of this item is to present the final 2018-28 Long Term Plan to the Council for adoption. The long term planning process by its very nature is designed to involve consideration of new programmes, projects, expenditure or deliverables and indeed this item involves the adoption of such new deliverables.


of 7

Background

Over the last two years, the Council has been working through the long term planning process for the 2018-28 (and for infrastructure the 2018-48) period. On 14 March 2018 the Council adopted a set of proposals under the ‘We need to talk – Me kōrero ngātahi tātou’ umbrella on which feedback was sought. This included:

the long term planning consultation document and underlying supporting information

the revenue and financing policy

the rates remission and postponement policy and

two user fee changes (cemeteries and resource management fees). The Council invited stakeholders and the public to find out about and provide feedback on the ‘We need to talk – Me kōrero ngātahi tātou’ proposals in a number of ways between 23 March and 17 May. The opportunities and resulting feedback received were set out in previous reports and are not repeated here. The Council considered the feedback received on 17 and 21 May 2018 and made decisions on whether to retain or amend its proposals. The decisions on each topic are set out in the minutes to those meetings (and are included on this meeting agenda for confirmation). In summary, the Council decided to amend its proposals as follows:

Topic Change

Ngatea library The Council will further investigate option 5, in particular the concerns regarding the governance structure, access/parking issues, and protection of Council’s investment in the project. Further community consultation will also be undertaken. If option 5 is not feasible, then option 2 would be further investigated. The future of the present building will also be taken into consideration.

Ngatea main street upgrade Reflect decision that the Council will communicate and consult on the Ngatea main street plan before the project commences.

Hutchinson Reserve Remove upgrade project from LTP.

Hugh Hayward Reserve Add the Hugh Hayward Domain walk/cycleway budget of $20,000 in 2018/19 to the capital works schedule and revise the operating budgets as needed, to align with the proposal contained in the consultation document.

Dudding Reserve Add the Dudding Reserve development budget of $20,000 in 2018/19 to the capital works schedule to align with the consultation document proposal.

Whiritoa tennis courts Allocate $25,000 in 2019/20 towards Whiritoa tennis court resurfacing. The Council will work with the Whiritoa Tennis Club to look at options for the playing surface, costs and funding and present this back to the Council for consideration in the 2019/20 Annual Plan.

Whiritoa fire water tanks Add that the Council will provide the Whiritoa Voluntary Rural Fire Force with three 25,000 litre water tanks and a grant of $5,000 towards the purchase and delivery of one further 25,000 litre water tank and the fittings for four tanks (from the District water account). The Whiritoa Voluntary Rural Fire Force are to install and commission the four tanks on sites agreed with by the Council.

Whiritoa emergency generator Look to provide a generator point at both the Whiritoa Emergency Centre and Whiritoa Life Saving Club, funded over the next two years from existing operation budgets.

Railway Reserve skate park The Council has reallocated the funding from the skate park to Railway Reserve improvements, which may include basketball


of 7

Topic Change

court and parking, and will reconsider the timing of the project in the 2019/20 annual planning process.

Waihi dump station upgrade Remove the Waihi dump station upgrade budget of $30,000 in 2018/19 from the capital works schedule (and revise operating budgets as necessary).

Turua walkway Amend the Turua walkway capital works budget to $40,000 in 2018/19 to align with the proposal contained in the consultation document. There will be no rates impact.

Swimming pools Allocate an additional $35,000 to the swimming pool budget towards further work to extend the swimming season. Location and timing of extension to be determined.

Add commentary around Council support for the sub-regional facility approach, and that the Council does not wish to cover existing pools due to cost.

Ngatea pool Add an additional operating budget of $7,500 for various works for year one only.

Add a capital budget of $55,000 for the relocation of the Ngatea pool cover winder and dive blocks (and any subsequent operating budget changes).

Paeroa pool Add an additional operating budget of $9,000 for various works for year one only at the Paeroa Pool.

Waihi pool Add an additional $11,000 for various works for year one only at the Waihi Pool.

Weed control Ensure the following is adequately captured in AMP / operating procedures as relevant: Usage of glyphosate based herbicides is monitored to ensure it is applied in an efficient manner to reduce spray drift onto areas other than what is being targeted. Staff will continue to look for alternatives.

Berm mowing Promote messaging that WINZ help is available.

Pukerimu Cemetery The Council will consult with the ratepayers and residents of Paeroa and the wider district in regards to the concept plans for expansion of the Paeroa Pukerimu Cemetery.

Town promotion organisations The Council will reduce funding by 25% for town promotional organisations initially for a six-month contract term. At the end of this term, the Council will consider continuing funding following review of performance. The Council will also consider the employment of a district coordinator.

NZTA subsidy Amend the forecasting assumptions in the final long term plan and land transport asset management plan to reflect the amended subsidy.

Stormwater catchment management

Remove the stormwater catchment management plan budget of $107,794 in 2021/22 from the capital works schedule but retain as an operating expenditure item.

Waste minimisation Allocate $10,000 to investigate the cost of providing a recycling station in Ngatea, and District wide education and initiatives options for the reduction and reuse of waste. Includes but is not limited to the value of shifting to biodegradable refuse bags, support for a Seagull centre type concept. Note that the Council supports Keep New Zealand Beautiful to increase waste reduction education.


of 7

Topic Change

Running of 2019 election An operating budget of $15,000 to be included in year one of the long term plan.

Arts plan Provide for $2,000 (from the district social discretionary fund) towards the Waikato arts navigator, and work with Creative Waikato to develop an arts plan.

Land drainage depreciation & renewals

Investigate and make LTP changes regarding the following: The audit process resulted in the following misstatement being identified: the land drainage depreciation/renewals graph as it stands indicates depreciation is too low. The Council will consider revising the rated depreciation received against the forecast renewals programme in the final LTP or document that this will be looked into as part of the Improvement Programme in the final LTP.

Asset lives and depreciation Add general forecasting assumptions regarding asset lives and depreciation to Asset Management Plans.

Building consent fees and charges Change the 2018/19 fees to those set out in the staff submission.

Dog registration fees Change the penalty fee for dogs in excess of three from $13.50 to $17.50.

Of the key issues consulted on, the Council decided to retain its proposals to increase investment in managing local roads (issue #1) and shift some of the general rate from uniform charges to capital value based rates (issue #3). Staff have since revised the proposals to reflect these decisions, and these are presented in this meeting agenda for the Council’s consideration and adoption. The Council should consider whether the documents accurately reflect the decisions it has made.

Issue and options

Impact of changes

The financial implications of the revised proposals are set out in the draft LTP document. In short the following is now forecast:

a total of $416 million of total operating expenditure (up from $410 million) over the life of the LTP, or an average of $42 million per annum,

a reduction in the capital expenditure needed over the life of the LTP from $101 million to $70 million,

no changes to the forecast income from rates increases each year from that proposed, and

decreases in debt levels each year from that originally proposed.

Audit report

On behalf of the Auditor-General, Audit New Zealand has audited the draft 2018-28 Long Term Plan prepared by staff and assessed: a. whether the plan gives effect to the purpose, and b. the quality of the information and assumptions underlying the forecast information provided in the

plan1. At the time of writing, the audit is in the process of being completed. The outcomes of the subsequent audit report will be communicated when known. It is not anticipated that there will be any material issues.

1 As required by section 94 of the Act.


of 7

Options

The adoption of Our Long Term Plan: 2018-28 | Tō Mātou Mahere Roa: 2018-28 is the final step in the long term planning process. The Plan must be adopted prior to the end of the financial year (30 June). While the Council has the option to change previous decisions made and content in the document, depending on the nature of each change, this may involve the recalculation of financial forecasts, an additional audit of the change and additional step to adopt the Plan at a Council meeting. The practicalities of making a change therefore may be limited.

Next steps

Rates resolution

Once the Council has adopted its long term plan, it is required to set its rates for the year 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019. The recommended resolution is set out in a subsequent item on the meeting agenda.

Communicating decisions

The Act requires the Council to provide access to a clear record of the relevant decisions it makes including explanatory information (which may include reports considered before the decisions were made), to those who gave feedback2. The way and extent to which this is done is at the discretion of the Council. Given the higher numbers of feedback received compared to previous years, staff recommend that it would be prudent to provide a direct response to those who provided feedback in the form of a standardised e- and paper- leaflet type response with a summary of the decisions made and the reasons for them. This would be supplemented by information provided through other communication channels to the general public, including the website, facebook and newspaper pages. The plain English and informal tone of the ‘We need to talk | Me kōrero ngātahi tātou’ campaign would be maintained.

Publishing

The LTP document itself will be made available on the Council’s website and a limited print run done for Council offices, staff and elected members.

New deliverable

As noted above, the long term planning process by its very nature is designed to involve new programmes, projects, expenditure or deliverables. The preparation of both the LTP proposals in the form of the consultation document and supporting information, and the draft LTP itself provide for new deliverables.

Significance and Engagement Assessment

This decision is considered significant. It involves the adoption of the Council’s key strategic direction, plans, a high amount of new budgeted expenditure and an increase in the rates cap for the 2018-28 period. Staff consider that the Council has followed the legislative requirements regarding decision-making and consulting on the LTP and other proposals that reflect this degree of significance. The appropriate form of community engagement at this time is to communicate the decisions made after the LTP is adopted, in the form that is recommended earlier in this report.

Budget Implications

Please refer to the draft Our Long Term Plan: 2018-28 | Tō Mātou Mahere Roa: 2018-28 itself for the budget implications.

2 It is noted that the requirement to notify respondents directly of where to access the decisions made was removed

in the 2014 Act changes.


of 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). Staff recommend that the Council adopt Our Long Term Plan: 2018-28 | Tō Mātou Mahere Roa: 2018-28 as consistent with the decisions made after considering the consultation feedback received. Katherine Quinn SENIOR STRATEGIC PLANNER


of 7

Appendix A:


of 4

Decision Report


From: Group Manager Corporate Services

Date: Monday, 4 June 2018

File reference: Document: 2392596 Appendix A: Rates Resolution (2392595)

Meeting date: 27/06/2018

Subject:

Council Report – Balanced Budget Resolutions, Borrowing Delegation, and Rates Resolution

Recommendation: THAT the report be received, and THAT Council resolve, in accordance with section 100(2) of the Local Government Act 2002, to set overall operating revenue at a level that is insufficient to meet its operating expenditure in 2018/19, and THAT Council considers it financially prudent to set 2018/19 operating revenue at the levels specified in the Long Term Plan despite this not always matching expenditure in every activity, and THAT in adopting the 2018-28 Long Term Plan, that as per the balanced budget statement in the long term plan, its operating revenue is not sufficient to meet its operating expenditure in each year of the plan, and that Council considers it financially prudent to set operating revenue at this level. THAT pursuant to clause 6.2.3.4 of Council’s Delegation Manual, the Council delegates to the Group Manager Corporate Services the authority to borrow up to a maximum net debt level of $50 million during the 2018/19 financial year for the purposes of meeting Council’s expected maximum funding requirements during that year; and THAT the rates resolution for the 2018/19 rating year as detailed in Appendix A be adopted.

Purpose The purpose of this report is to present to Council the 2018/19 Rates Resolution, Balanced Budget Resolution, and Borrowing Delegation Resolution for adoption.


of 4

The matter or suggested decision does not involve a new activity, service, programme, project, expenditure or other deliverable.

Background Council adopted its 2018/19 Annual Plan at its April meeting. The Council now needs to adopt its Rates Resolution, Borrowing Delegation, and Balanced Budget Resolution.

Balanced Budget Resolution Where Council’s Long Term Plan shows its income for any activity lower than the expenditure for that activity, Council needs to resolve that it believes it is prudent to do so. The activities that are showing a forecast deficit in 2018/19 are:

Governance and Leadership

Solid Waste

Community Services

Community Development

Regulatory Services

Water

The majority of the deficits are in District Rate funded activities. This is due to Council’s plan to move the district rate from a deficit to a surplus over the life of the Long Term Plan. The deficits forecast are in line with the forecasts in the balanced budget statement in the Long Term Plan.

Borrowing Delegation To enable staff to borrow to meet Council’s 2018/19 operating and capital programmes Council needs to delegate the authority to borrow. Staff request that Council delegate the authority to borrow up to $50 million of net debt in 2018/19. This is based off the $47 million debt forecast for June 2019 in the 2018-28 Long Term Plan plus $3 million to allow for the peaks of debt that happen during the year. Council can alter this maximum delegation by resolution at any point in time. Council’s 2018/19 debt cap forecast in the Long Term Plan is $61.1 million.

Rates resolution Having adopted the Long Term Plan the Council is now required to set its rates for the financial year 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019. This resolution is attached as Appendix A. .

Conclusion Staff recommend that Council adopt the Rates Resolution, Balanced Budget Resolution, and Borrowing Delegation Resolution.


of 4

Duncan Peddie Group Manager Corporate Services


of 4

Appendix A Rates Resolution (2392595)


APPENDIX A: RATES RESOLUTION The Council is requested to adopt the rates resolution for the year commencing 1 July 2018 through to 30 June 2019, 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 2018 to 30 June 2019, and that the Rates be set at the following values plus GST at the prevailing rate.

Separately Used or Inhabited Part of a Rating Unit (SUIP)

Rating units, parts or portions of rating units are terms used to define separately used or inhabited rating units and 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 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 or inhabited part will be classified 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

Uniform Annual General Charge

A uniform annual general charge (as per section 15) of $537.99 on each rating unit within the District.

Differential General Rate

A capital value general rate (as per section 13) set on a differential basis based on land use.

The categories being:


Residential/Rural - all rating units used primarily for residential, recreational, cultural or primarily or predominately for the purposes of agriculture, viticulture, horticulture or silviculture.

Commercial/Industrial - all rating units used for commercial or industrial purposes, including utility networks.

Mineral Extraction - all mineral value rating units that are not used in gold mining.

Mining - all mineral value rating units that are used in gold mining.

The rates in cents per dollar of Capital Value being:

Residential/Rural 0.09328

Commercial/Industrial 0.13993

Mineral Extraction 1.01401

Mining 32.21328

Differential Roading Rate

A capital value targeted rate (as per section 16) set on a differential basis based on land use.


Residential/ Rural- all rating units used primarily for residential, recreational, cultural or primarily or predominately for the purposes of agriculture, viticulture, horticulture or silviculture.

Commercial/Industrial- all rating units used for commercial or industrial purposes, including utility networks.

Mineral Extraction Land Use - all mineral value rating units that are not used in gold mining.

Mining Land Use - all mineral value rating units that are used in gold mining.


Residential/Rural 0.07240

Commercial/Industrial 0.09654

Mineral Extraction 0.52469

Mining 13.21488

Paeroa Ward Targeted Rate

An annual charge (as per section 16) of $312.62 on each rating unit within the Paeroa Ward

Plains Ward Targeted Rate

An annual charge (as per section 16) of $252.87 on each rating unit within the Plains Ward

Waihi Ward Targeted Rate

An annual charge (as per section 16) of $290.65 on each rating unit within the Waihi Ward

Paeroa Ward Business Annual Charge Targeted Rate


An annual charge (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.


Paeroa Ward Urban – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the valuation rolls 5001, 5002, 5003 and 5004.

Paeroa Ward Rural – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the Paeroa Ward but outside the valuation rolls 5001, 5002, 5003 and 5004.

The annual charges being:

Paeroa Urban $750.38

Paeroa Rural $375.19

Plains Ward Business Annual Charge Targeted Rate

An annual charge (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.


Plains Urban – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the valuation roll 4771.

Plains Rural – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the Plains Ward but outside the valuation roll 4771.


Plains Urban $507.38

Plains Rural $284.20

Waihi Ward Business Annual Charge Targeted Rate

An annual charge (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.


Waihi Urban – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the valuation rolls 5020 and 5030.

Waihi Rural – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the Waihi Ward but outside the valuation rolls 5020 and 5030.


Waihi Urban $754.59

Waihi Rural $377.44

Paeroa Ward Business Capital Value Targeted Rate

A capital value targeted rate (as per section 16) on each rating unit in the Paeroa Ward set on a differential basis based on location.


Paeroa Ward Urban – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the valuation rolls 5001, 5002, 5003 and 5004.


Paeroa Ward Rural – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the Paeroa Ward but outside the valuation rolls 5001, 5002, 5003 and 5004.


Paeroa Urban 0.04234

Paeroa Rural 0.02117

Plains Ward Business Capital Value Targeted Rate

A capital value targeted rate (as per section 16) on each rating unit in the Plains Ward set on a differential basis based on location.


Plains Urban – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the valuation roll 4771.

Plains Rural – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the Plains Ward but outside the valuation roll 4771.


Plains Urban 0.02349

Plains Rural 0.01175

Waihi Ward Business Capital Value Targeted Rate

A capital value targeted rate (as per section 16) on each rating unit in the Waihi Ward set on a differential basis based on location.


Waihi Ward Urban – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the valuation rolls 5020 and 5030.

Waihi Ward Rural – all rating units used principally for commercial and industrial purposes situated within the Waihi Ward but outside the valuation rolls 5020 and 5030.


Waihi Urban 0.03310

Waihi Rural 0.01655

Kaihere Hall Targeted Rate

A land value targeted rate (per section 16) on all rating units situated within the Kaihere Hall Rating Area of 0.00380 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 0.00122 cents per dollar of land value.

Hikutaia Hall Targeted Rate

An annual charge (per section 16) of $20.00 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Hikutaia Hall Rating Area.

Kaiaua Hall Targeted Rate


An annual charge (per section 16) of $8.70 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Kaiaua Hall Rating Area.

Karangahake Hall Targeted Rate

An annual charge (per section 16) of $21.74 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Karangahake Hall Rating Area.

Kerepehi Hall Targeted Rate

An annual charge (per section 16) of $13.04 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Kerepehi Hall Rating Area.

Mangatangi Community Centre Targeted Rate

An annual charge (per section 16) of $20.00 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Mangatangi Community Centre Rating Area.

Netherton Hall Targeted Rate

An annual charge (per section 16) of $17.78 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Netherton Hall Rating Area.

Turua Hall Targeted Rate

An annual charge (per section 16) of $19.13 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Turua Hall Rating Area.

Waikino Hall Targeted Rate

An annual charge (per section 16) of $20.00 on each separately used or inhabited part of a rating unit situated within the Waikino Hall Rating Area.

Waitakaruru Hall Targeted Rate

An annual charge (per section 16) of $22.00 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 0.03823 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 0.06290 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 0.14513 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 0.05881 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 0.13573 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 0.05547 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 0.07664 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 0.01817 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 0.05881 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 0.00584 cents per dollar of land value

Western Plains Drainage District Pumping Land Area Targeted Rate

A land area targeted rate (per section 16) of $22.60 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 Residential, Commercial & Industrial, and Community land use rating units situated within the town of Paeroa, that receive a level of protection from stormwater flooding by being able to discharge directly, or indirectly, to a Council stormwater or drainage asset, of 0.05706 cents per dollar of capital value.

Ngatea Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate

A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all Residential, Commercial & Industrial, and Community land use rating units situated within the town of Ngatea, that receive a level of protection from stormwater flooding by being able to discharge directly, or indirectly, to a Council stormwater or drainage asset, of 0.07902 cents per dollar of capital value.

Kerepehi Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate

A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all Residential, Commercial & Industrial, and Community land use rating units situated within the town of Kerepehi, that receive a level of protection from stormwater flooding by being able to discharge directly, or indirectly, to a Council stormwater or drainage asset, of 0.08061 cents per dollar of capital value.

Turua Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate

A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all Residential, Commercial & Industrial, and Community land use rating units situated within the town of Turua, that receive a level of


protection from stormwater flooding by being able to discharge directly, or indirectly, to a Council stormwater or drainage asset, of 0.09578 cents per dollar of capital value.

Waihi Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate

A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all Residential, Commercial & Industrial, and Community land use rating units situated within the town of Waihi, that receive a level of protection from stormwater flooding by being able to discharge directly, or indirectly, to a Council stormwater or drainage asset, of 0.03251 cents per dollar of capital value.

Whiritoa Urban Stormwater Targeted Rate

A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all Residential, Commercial & Industrial, and Community land use rating units situated within the town of Whiritoa, that receive a level of protection from stormwater flooding by being able to discharge directly, or indirectly, to a Council stormwater or drainage asset, of 0.01286 cents per dollar of capital value.

Kaiaua Stormwater Targeted Rate

A capital value targeted rate (per section 16) on all Residential, Commercial & Industrial, and Community land use rating units in the wider Kaiaua area, that receive a level of protection from stormwater flooding by being able to discharge directly, or indirectly, to a Council stormwater or drainage asset, of 0.03043 cents per dollar of capital value.

Water Supply Annual Charge Targeted Rate

An annual charge (per section 16) of $98.94 per metered 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.


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 160.29c

Step One – Consumption between 200 and 400 cubic metres 134.56c

Step Two – Consumption over 400 cubic metres 121.69c

Category Two - 125.64c

Category Three 58.37c

Wastewater Unconnected Targeted Rate


An annual charge (per section 16) of $279.30 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 $559.00







Over 20 pans $207.00

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.


District Collected – all rating units within the District serviced by Council’s kerbside recycling collection excluding those in Whiritoa township.

Whiritoa Collected – all rating units serviced by Council’s kerbside recycling collection in the Whiritoa township.


District Collected $28.50

Whiritoa Collected $36.91

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

Instalment Date Last Date Before Penalty

Penalty Added


One 20 August 2018 29 August 2018 31 August 2018

Two 20 November 2018 28 November 2018 30 November 2018

Three 20 February 2019 27 February 2019 1 March 2019

Four 20 May 2019 29 May 2019 31 May 2019

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

Instalment date Last date before penalty

Penalty added

One 1 – Ngatea township - Paeroa township - Waihi township

20 August 2018 29 August 2018 31 August 2018

One

2 – Turua & surrounds - Paeroa commercial - Waihi commercial - Waihi gold

20 September 2018 26 September 2018 28 September 2018

One 3 – Waitakururu & Ngatea North – Waihi rural

20 October 2018 31 October 2018 2 November 2018

One 4 – Kerepehi & Ngatea South – Ohinemuri & Kaimanawa

20 November 2018 28 November 2018 30 November 2018

One 5 - Netherton 20 December 2018 27 December 2018 28 December 2018

One 6 – Karangahake/Mackaytown - Waikino

20 January 2019 30 January 2019 1 February 2019

Two 1 – Ngatea township - Paeroa township - Waihi township

20 February 2019 27 February 2019 1 March 2019

Two 2 – Turua & surrounds - Paeroa commercial - Waihi commercial - Waihi gold

20 March 2019 27 March 2019 29 March 2019

Two 3 – Waitakururu & Ngatea North – Waihi rural

20 April 2019 24 April 2019 26 April 2019

Two 4 – Kerepehi & Ngatea South – Ohinemuri & Kaimanawa

20 May 2019 29 May 2019 31 May 2019

Two 5 - Netherton 20 June 2019 26 June 2019 28 June 2019

Two 6 – Karangahake/Mackaytown - Waikino

20 June 2019 26 June 2019 28 June 2019

For rating units invoiced six times a year:


Instalment Number Instalment date Last date before penalty

Penalty added

One 20 August 2018

Two 20 October 2018 24 October 2018 24 October 2018

Three 20 December 2018

Four 20 February 2019

Five 20 April 2019 24 April 2019 26 April 2019

Six 20 June 2019

PENALTIES FOR LATE PAYMENT

That Council delegates authority to the Revenue Team Leader and rating staff to apply penalties to outstanding rates:

That the following penalties be applied:

For all rates (excluding water supply rates):

An additional charge on unpaid rates of 10% of the instalment amount will be added on the day following the last date on which the instalment is payable without incurring additional charges (as described above).

An additional charge of 10% will be added to all rates assessed in a previous year which remain unpaid on 3 September 2018

A further additional charge of 10% will be added to all rates assessed in a previous year which remain unpaid on 1 March 2019

For water supply rates:

For rating units invoiced twice a year:

An additional charge of 5% will be added to all current and previous years’ rates outstanding on the day following the last date for payment of the first instalment (as described above).

An additional charge of 5% will be added to all current and previous years’ rates outstanding on the day following the last date for payment of the second instalment (as described above).

For rating units invoiced six times a year:

An additional charge of 5% will be added to all current and previous years’ rates outstanding on the day following the last date for payment of the second instalment (as described above).

An additional charge of 5% will be added to all current and previous years’ rates outstanding on the day following the last date for payment of the fifth instalment (as described above).


Document 1439194


Document 1439195


Document 1439199


Document 2090793


Document 1439172


Document 1439208


Document 2101799


Document 916138


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


of 3

Decision Report


From: Strategic Policy Planner

Date: Tuesday, 19 June 2018

File reference: Document: 2395939 Appendix A: 2018/19 fees and charges schedule

Portfolio holder: Mayor


Subject: 2018/19 fees and charges adoption

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received, and THAT the Council adopts the Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2018/19 as attached in Appendix A to be effective from 1 July 2018.

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present the Council with the proposed 2018/19 Schedule of Fees and Charges (the Schedule) for adoption. The matter or suggested decision does not involve a new activity, service, programme, project, expenditure or other deliverable.

Background

Fees and charges are one of a range of funding sources legally open to local authorities. In general, the Council can charge fees through the following mechanisms: 1. the use of goods, services and amenities may be charged for under the Council’s ‘powers of general

competence’ (as per the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA02), section 12) 2. the provision of certificates, authority, approval, permits, consents and inspections may be charged for

if set via a bylaw or adherence to the consultation principles in the LGA02 3. some other charges are prescribed or provided for under other statutes. In effect, the Schedule provides for a single document in which all fees are documented and communicated to the public.


of 3

2018/19 review

The 2018-28 long term planning process involved identifying changes required to fees and charges. In some cases, other legislative requirements dictate how those fees are to be set, however the long term planning process provided a prompt to ensure proposed changes are consistent with the Council’s proposed budgets and funding arrangements as per its Revenue and Financing Policy. In a review of all fees and charges at the end of 2017, the following changes were made and approved by the Council:

the addition of land transport vehicle crossing inspection fees

an increase in library rental item fees

an increase in cemetery burial fees

an increase in event centre hire fees

an increase in pensioner housing rent

an increase in hall hire fees

a new swimming pool inspection fee

an increase in the building consent deposit fees

removal of the domestic proprietary buildings fee

the addition of new resource management fees

an increase in resource consents deposit fees

the addition of noise control infringement fees. Consultation A statement of proposal was published for consultation on the changes to fees and charges for cemetery and resource management services as required by the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 and the Resource Management Act 1991. The full fees and charges schedule was published as supporting documentation to the ‘We need to talk’ consultation document. At the hearing and deliberations meeting of 16, 17 and 21 May 2018, the Council considered the feedback received regarding the fees and charges proposals and the following changes were made:

Increase to building consent processing fees

Amendment to penalty fee for dogs in excess of three

These changes are provided for in the proposed schedule, attached as Appendix A. No other changes were made to the proposed fees.

Issues and options

Staff recommend that the options available to the Council include: 1. adopting the 2018/19 Schedule as proposed, or 2. instructing staff to further revise the proposed changes. As the 2018/19 planning process is now complete, and staff are not aware of any other fee changes warranted it is recommended that no further fee changes beyond those detailed above are warranted at this time and that it is appropriate that the Schedule be adopted.


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 public by:

including the new Schedule on the Council’s website

distributing the new Schedule to staff involved in communicating and collecting fees and charges (including customer services)

advising the public of the Schedule’s adoption and the changes made in the HDC News page

notifying the Council’s pensioner housing renters directly of rental increases


of 3

Budget Implications

The budget implications of the changes to fees and charges were presented above or in previous reports and are not repeated here.

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 2018/19 Schedule of Fees and Charges which will become effective on 1 July 2018. Following the adoption of the 2018/19 Schedule, staff will organise the publishing of the document and communication of the decision as indicated above. Sarah Holmes Strategic Policy Planner


2018/19 fees and charges | 1

2018/19 fees and charges Effective 1 July 2018


APPENDIX A


CONTENTS

CONTENTS ................................................................................................................................................... 2

A note on our fees and charges ....................................................................................................................... 3

Land transport ...............................................................................................................................................4

Waste water services .....................................................................................................................................4

Water supply services.....................................................................................................................................4

Solid waste services ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Rubbish bags ..........................................................................................................................................................5 Recycling ................................................................................................................................................................5 Refuse transfer stations ..........................................................................................................................................5

Community services ....................................................................................................................................... 7 District cemeteries ................................................................................................................................................. 7 Ngatea, Paeroa and Waihi Memorial Halls ............................................................................................................. 9 Waihi Events Centre ............................................................................................................................................. 10 Libraries ............................................................................................................................................................... 11 Pensioner housing ................................................................................................................................................ 12 Parks, reserves and sports fields ........................................................................................................................... 13 Swimming pools ................................................................................................................................................... 14

Regulatory services ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Building services ................................................................................................................................................... 15 Animal control ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Environmental health ........................................................................................................................................... 19 Alcohol licensing .................................................................................................................................................. 21 Noise control ....................................................................................................................................................... 24

Resource management implementation ....................................................................................................... 25 Resource consents ................................................................................................................................................ 25 Land information memoranda (LIM).................................................................................................................... 28 Development contributions ................................................................................................................................. 28

Corporate services ....................................................................................................................................... 29

Document management and control ............................................................................................................ 29



A note on our fees and charges We provide a wide range of services to the public that involve costs in staff time and resources. Many of these are paid out of general or targeted rates while others are recovered from government subsidies. We apply user fees and charges where the people who benefit can be directly identified and charged. The aim of doing this is to shift a proportion of the cost to the people who get the most use out of the service rather than the general ratepayer. Our fees and charges are reviewed annually.

All fees and charges in this schedule are GST inclusive (15%) unless otherwise stated.



Land transport

Inspection of vehicle crossing constructed by a Council authorised contractor

Service item Charge

(including GST)

First inspection $120

Additional fee for any further inspections $95

Inspection of vehicle crossing constructed by a contractor not authorised to work without supervision

Service item Charge

(including GST)

Fixed cost for two inspections $215

Waste water services

Paeroa septage facilities

The following fees are set for the Council’s septage in Paeroa.

Service item Charge

(including GST)

Application for use of the septage facility (includes issue of keys, security card, and training in use of facility)

$155

Replacement security card (lost or stolen) $26

Charge per m³ of septage deposited $15.50

PLEASE NOTE: Landfill leachate is prohibited from the Council’s facilities except by separate agreement.

Water supply services

Extraordinary water use

The Extraordinary Water Rate is set at 2 times the current urban treated water rate for purposes other than permanent metered connections such as tankered water for commercial users (sometimes outside of the District).



Solid waste services

Rubbish bags

Item Charge

(including GST)

The cost of purchasing a rubbish bag represents the costs for the kerbside collection and disposal of the refuse. Rubbish bags can be purchased from Council service centres and local supermarkets.

$2.20 each

Recycling

Bin replacements

The cost of purchasing a replacement bin should the bin be stolen or damaged Charge

(including GST)

Small wheelie bin (80 litre) – delivered to property $105 each

Large wheelie bin (240 litre) – delivered to property $118 each

Glass crate bin (60 litre) – collected from a Council service centre $15 each

Wheelie bin parts replacement

The cost of purchasing wheelie bin components should they become damaged Charge

(including GST)

Axle $6 each

Wheels $5 each

Hinge pins for lid $0.20 each

Refuse transfer stations

Disposal of refuse/rubbish

Load Type Maximum

quantity of refuse requiring disposal

Refuse charge (including GST)

Green /garden waste charge

(including GST)

Single rubbish bag Kleensac size $3.20* $2.20*

Pre-purchased yellow HDC rubbish bag Rubbish bag No charge No charge

Car boot 0.2m3 loose $9.60* $6.70*

Station wagon 0.4m3 loose $19.10* $13.40*

Small ute / trailer 1m3 loose $47.80* $33.40*

Large ute / trailer 2m3 loose $95.50* $66.90*

High volume / low weight (i.e. non-recyclable packaging such as polystyrene)

Per m3 $9.60*

Truck or bulk load weighed on certified weighbridge (Paeroa Refuse Transfer Station only)

Per tonne $159.20* $111.50*



Disposal of other waste

Other Type Charge

(including GST)

Tyres

Car tyres $3.20 each*

4WD tyres $4.20 each*

Truck tyres $8.50 each*

Tractor tyres $22.30 each*

LPG bottles Recycling fee $5.40 each*

Car bodies

Clean condition with seat and tyres removed, petrol tank pierced and all other fluids removed.

No charge

Other than described as above $27.60*

Recycling Glass, oil, paper, cardboard, aluminium, plastic soft drink and milk bottles, scrap metal and car batteries.

No charge

* Please note that for ease of use these fees have been rounded to the nearest 10 cent value.



Community services

District cemeteries

Service Item Charge

(including GST)

Plot Purchase

Casket for a resident of the Hauraki District $640

Casket for a non-resident of the Hauraki District* (resident charge+60%) $975

Plaque Lawn ashes plot for a resident of the Hauraki District $160

Plaque Lawn ashes plot for a non-resident of the Hauraki District $195

Upright memorial for a resident of the Hauraki District $160

Upright memorial for a non-resident of the Hauraki District $195

Burial Fees

Ashes burial $125

Casket burial for stillborn and under 1 year of age $125

Casket burial for 1 year of age and older** $1,115

Older area of Paeroa (Pukerimu) Cemetery (additional cost due to confined access space) $1,390

Weekend –additional charge to burial fees

Ashes burial $120

Casket burial for 1 year of age and older $265

Public holidays – additional charge to burial fees

Casket burial for 1 year of age and older $335

Waihi Memorial Wall

Memorial Wall plaque, inscription and attachment to wall (up to 100 letters) $390

Inscription cost per letter over 100 letters $0.75

Ngatea Memorial Wall

Memorial Wall inscription placed on wall $60

Ngatea Ashes Wall

Vault reservation only (not including placement of ashes or plaque inscription) $355

Placement of one set of ashes only into a pre-purchased vault (including plaque inscription) $210

Placement of two sets of ashes into a pre-purchased vault (including plaque inscription) $370

Purchase of vault and placement of one set of ashes (including plaque inscription) $540

Purchase of vault and placement of two sets of ashes (including plaque inscription) $705

Purchase of vault and placement of first (of two) sets of ashes (including plaque inscription) $515

Placement of second set of ashes into a pre-purchased vault (including plaque inscription) $335



Service Item Charge

(including GST)

General cemetery fees

Permit to erect headstone, plaque or memorial $55

Breaking concrete (to reinstate is family’s responsibility) At cost

Casket disinterment At cost

Casket re-interment At cost

Ashes disinterment At cost

Ashes re-interment At cost

Request to change reserved plot $60

Request to change ownership of reserved plot $115

Request to sell reserved plot back to the Council $60

Administration fee for unpaid reserved plot $60

* An ‘out of district fee’ is charged for plot purchases for deceased who were not a resident or a ratepayer of the district for at least twelve months prior to date of death. ** Up to three caskets may be interred within one plot. First, second and third burials are charged at the same rate.

Returned service personnel and spouses Under the Burial and Cremation Act 1964 the Council allocates part of its cemeteries to Returned Servicemen as defined by the Ministry of Defence. The cost of a plot in the Returned Services section of the cemetery is not passed onto the deceased person’s estate. However, we do still charge the burial fee as outlined above. The Office of Veterans' Affairs, (as part of the Ministry of Defence) is responsible for maintaining and ensuring the proper administration of the Returned Services section of the cemetery. Paeroa and Waihi Cemeteries have a Returned Services section, and there is a section available for Returned Services on the Ngatea ashes wall. The Miranda cemetery does not contain an RSA section.



Ngatea, Paeroa and Waihi Memorial Halls The fees are based on a minimum booking period of two hours and by the hour thereafter.

Category of user

User Description

Commercial Primarily business entities i.e. individuals or organisations whose prime goal whilst using the hall is to derive an income for personal or shareholders gain.

Social Individuals, clubs or organisations that are using the facilities for a social function such as weddings, birthdays, fund raising, funerals and celebrations etc.

Not for profit

These are individuals or organisations that may be an informal club or are registered as incorporated societies established as not for profit. This includes commercial entities which are using the hall for matters that are not for profit (e.g. meetings). The fees set for the ‘Not for profit’ category are at a level to encourage use of the hall by that category, which have to date been the main group hiring the hall facilities.

Civic An activity that is "sponsored" by the Mayor or the Chairman of the Ward Committee for a community associated purpose.

Hall hire – commercial user

All halls

Commercial user charge (including GST)

Minimum hire Per additional hour

Small hall - Minimum booking of 2 hours $40 $20

Main hall - Minimum booking of 2 hours $50 $25

Whole complex - Minimum booking of 2 hours $80 $40

Additional cleaning fee if alcohol is to be consumed during hire $50 per booking

Hall hire – social user

All halls

Social user charge (including GST)



Main Hall - Minimum booking of 2 hours $30 $15





Hall Hire – not for profit user

All halls

Not for profit user charge (including GST)



Main Hall - Minimum booking of 2 hours $20 $5



Hall hire – kitchen use

Item Charge

(including GST)

Use of kitchen $5 per booking

Use of crockery $10 per booking

Damage guarantee bond – memorial halls

User Charge

(including GST)

All users $500 (refundable)*

*All users must sign damage/cleaning guarantee form OR pay a refundable cash bond prior to the use of the hall. This is to meet all damage and after function cleaning costs associated with a respective hire. Bond payment may be waived if the risk of damage is considered to be low (based on the intended use of the hall). Users are required to meet all such damage/cleaning costs that exceed the value of any bond paid.

Waihi Events Centre The fees are based on a minimum booking period of two hours and then by the hour thereafter.

Waihi Events Centre Hire 2-hour minimum rate

(including GST) Additional base hourly

rate (including GST)

Not for profit users

Category 1 (regular sports users) $30 $15

Category 2 (casual sports users) $40 $20

Category 3 (where admission charge applies) $50 $25

Commercial users

Category 4 (specific events) $140 $70

Category 5 (where admission charge applies) $160 $80



Libraries Free library membership is offered to all residents of the Hauraki District and neighbouring districts. The Council has reciprocal membership with Matamata-Piako, Western Bay of Plenty, Thames-Coromandel and Waikato District Councils, meaning that you can join any of these libraries, no matter where you live in these districts. You will still need to use the correct library card for the area you are visiting, as the services all operate separately. Please see the Fees and Charges page on the libraries website for the cost to replace items, criteria for refunds and standard prices for items.

Rental items

Item

All charges including GST

Rental charge Rental period Renewals permitted

Overdue charge*

New fiction books $3 2 weeks $3 for further two

weeks $0.50 per day

Older fiction and adult non-fiction Free 3 weeks Free for further

three weeks $0.30 per day

Large print books Free 3 weeks Free for further


Magazines $1.50 1 week $1.50 for further

one week $0.50 per day

Audio books** $3 3 weeks $1 for further three

weeks $1 per day

DVD's $4.50 1 week $4.50 for further

one week $1 per day

Children’s fiction and non-fiction Free 3 weeks Free for further


*The maximum overdue charge is the cost of the item. ** National Library and Hauraki Audio books are free to borrow for users with approved print disabilities.

Reserve items

Item Reserve fee

(including GST)

Charged for all holds/reserves/transits on items $0.50

Computer charges

Service Charge (including GST)

Public internet access (APNK) Free

Public computer printing (APNK) A4 printing from APNK printer is $0.30 per page

Public word processing Free

Scanning $1 first page, then $0.50 per page

Photocopying

Single-sided A4 black and white $0.20 A3 black and white $0.30

A4 colour $1 A3 colour $1.50

Double-sided A4 black and white $0.30 A3 black and white $0.50

A4 colour $1.50 A3 colour $2.50

Other library charges

Service Charge (including GST)

Replacement library card $3



Inter-library loans $8 per items, plus the costs from the supplying library

Lost or damaged items The cost of the item, factoring in age and condition

Lost or damaged item administration fee $12 charge to cover staff time (additional charge)

Refunds for lost items returned Refunds are permitted if in accordance with the District Collection plan criteria.

Length of time overdue, condition and currency of the item may reduce the amount refunded. Amount will vary depending on criteria in the Collection Plan.

Debt collection charges If debt collection action is required, an additional charge may be added. Amount

will vary depending on cost of the service.

Sale of discontinued items Sales charges to vary between $1 - $5 with special prices at the library manager’s

discretion. Items may be given free of charge to Hauraki volunteer libraries or other approved institutions.

Pensioner housing The Council owns and operates pensioner flats at Paeroa, Waihi and Ngatea. To be eligible for pensioner housing you must be at least 60 years of age and have a genuine housing need. Full criteria and application forms are available on our website. No GST is charged on pensioner housing rental.

Pensioner Flats/ Units Rental

cost per week (no GST)

Ngatea

20 Pauls Drive single bedroom (4 Units) $128

Kaihere Road single bedroom (4 Units) $128

18 Paul Drive single bedroom (4 Units) $128

Paeroa

Junction Road single bedroom (18 Units) $128

King Street single bedroom (6 Units) $128

Waihi

Seddon Street single bedroom (4 Units) $128

Seddon Street bedsit (2 units) $122

Moresby Ave single bedsit (4 units) $122

Moresby Ave / Elliott Street single bedroom (7 units) $128

Kenny Street single bedroom (2 units) $128

Kenny Street single bedsit (2 units) $122



Parks, reserves and sports fields

Facility hire

Activity Charge

(including GST)

Field marking

Touch rugby (2 fields per rugby field) $230

Rugby (per field) $403

Athletics (400m and 100m track) $1,425

Soccer (per field) $403

Club or organisation marks field subject to agreement and conditions set by the Parks and Reserves Manager

No charge

Sporting event reserve use

Youth rugby and schools (including out of district users) No charge

Out-of-district user booking (*bond/deposit required) $65 per day

Out-of-district user grandstand hire (*bond/deposit required) $115 per day

Grandstand use (by local non-youth club per season) $230 per annum

Council supplied rubbish bins and disposal of refuse (per bin 44 gal / 200 litre) $35 per bin

Hirer provides own rubbish bins and disposes of refuse in an appropriate manner No charge

Special events e.g. circuses and other commercially based events (bond/deposit required) $125 per day

Paeroa Domain lighting for regular users (per hour) $12.50 per hour

Paeroa Domain lighting for non-regular user (set fee additional to regular hourly rate) $35 per booking

Damage guarantee bond

Bond or Deposit* Charge

(including GST)

Hire of parks and reserves only $200

Hire of parks, reserves, sports fields and grandstand booking for any one occasion $350

Bond/deposit is refundable provided the facility is left tidy and undamaged to the Parks and Reserves Manager’s satisfaction. The deposit will be used to meet some or all of any cleaning and repair costs incurred by the Council following an event. Users are required to meet all such damage/cleaning costs that exceed the value of any bond paid.

Overnight parking

Item Overnight fee

(including GST)

Railway Reserve overnight parking (maximum stay of two consecutive nights in any one calendar month applies).

$5 per night



Swimming pools

Single admission charges

Admission Charge

(including GST)

Pool entry per swimmer (5 years and older) $2

Children under 5 years when actively supervised by a responsible person over the age of 16 years.

No charge

Spectator/supervisor (non-swimming) No charge

No child under the age of 8 years shall enter the pool unless in the charge of a person over the age of 16 years.

Concession charges

Number of swimmers Charge (including GST)

Season Pass 10 swim concession

1 person $72 $18

2 persons $125 $34

3 persons $185 $50

4 persons $245 $60

School charges

School Charge (including GST)

Paeroa Primary and College consortium $2,000 per annum

Ngatea Primary $3 per enrolled pupil per season

Hauraki Plains College $2 per pupil per entry



Regulatory services

Building services Follow the process image below to see how much and when you will need to pay for your Building Consent.

Projects (minor) with set fees

These fees are for specific projects. If you are completing a project named in the below table, the total lodgement fee is payable and there are no other fees required.

Project Description PIM Admin Processing Inspection fees

Code of compliance

(CCC)

Total lodgement

fee

Temporary, short stay structures requiring an inspection and Code Compliance Certificate under the Building Act. (e.g. marquees, circus tents)

$160

Solid fuel heaters $70 $50 $160 $60 $340

Minor works requiring only one inspection (e.g. plumbing & drainage, demolition)

$70 $70 $60 $160 $60 $420

Proprietary brand domestic garages and outbuildings up to the value of $20,000

$85 $70 $110 $240 $95 $600

Wet floor up to the value of $20,000

$70 $70 $60 $320 $80 $600

Solar hot water conversions $160 $160

Building complete, costs are invoiced or refunded and

Code of Compliance (CCC)

is issued when payment settled.

• Payment may be required

Further costs may be incurred for

changes, additional inspections or

processing during the building

process.

The consent is issued when your

payment is received.

Building can start.


Technical check is completed by Council staff and you'll be invoiced for any additional fees you need to

pay.Major projects Lodge building

consent application with

deposit based on value of project.

Minor projects Lodge building

consent application with

set fees in

green table

OR



Deposit when lodging application for major projects (based on project value)

Project Value PIM/TAI Admin Processing Code of

Compliance (CCC) Total

lodgement fee

Up to 4,999 $90 $165 $120 $100 $475

5,000 – 9,999 $90 $165 $275 $100 $630

10,000 – 19,999 $90 $165 $380 $100 $735

20,000 – 49,999 $110 $165 $505 $140 $920

50,000 – 99,999 $110 $165 $685 $140 $1,100

100,000 – 249,999 $110 $165 $1,285 $140 $1,700

250,000 – 499,999 $110 $165 $1,735 $140 $2,150

500,000+ $110 $165 $2,235 $140 $2,650

Where the applicant does not request a PIM, the Council must still provide information such as hazard information relevant to the project and this is in the form of Territorial Authority Information (TAI) provided with their building consent application.

Additional fees to pay following technical check

Type Charge

Inspection fees – number of inspections required will depend upon the Building Consent requirements $160 / visit

Specialist services, peer review – structural checking (if required) Cost plus 10%

Accreditation levy per $1,000 of project value 0.85c

Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) levy for projects valued at $20,000 and above per $1,000 of project value $2.01

Building Research Association of New Zealand (BRANZ) levy for projects valued at $20,000 and above per $1,000 of project value $1

Suspensions of building consent application $100

An inspection audit is undertaken at the completion of each project and any extra inspections required in addition to those paid with the Building Consent Fees will be invoiced. These extra fees must be paid before a Code of Compliance Certificate (CCC) will be issued. Prepaid inspections that have not been required will be refunded when the Code of Compliance Certificate (CCC) is issued.

Other fees

Type Charge

Major amendment to an issued consent $360

Certificate of Acceptance application only (to gain approval for previously unconsented work) $390

Certificate of Acceptance lodgement fee – determine what the value of the unconsented work would have been and choose lodgement fee applicable to that value from project value table above

see project value table

Hourly rate If the cost of ‘processing’ the building consent significantly exceeds the deposit price then the actual time taken shall be payable at the hourly rate.

$160

Certificate of Title (per title) $35

Certificate of Public Use (for public use buildings - includes inspection) $210

Separate Project Information Memorandum (PIM) $190

Reactivation of a refused Code of Compliance Certificate (CCC) $200

Compliance schedule $110

Amendment of compliance schedule $60

Building code certification under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 $140

Swimming pool compliance first inspection fee. $80

Swimming pool second inspection (to check on pools that are not compliant with pool fencing requirements) $160



Animal control

Dog registration fees

Dog Owner Classification

Registration fee Penalty fee if paid

after 31 July Total fee if paid after

31 July

General dog

Entire $100 $42.50 $142.50

Desexed (vet certificate required) $75 $34.50 $109.50

Dogs in excess of three (3) $35 $17.50 $48.50

Responsible Owner Licence (ROL) Dog*

Entire $57 Loss of licence $147.50

Desexed (vet certificate required) $42 Loss of licence $114.50

Dangerous dog

Entire 150% of general fee

Desexed (vet certificate required) 150% of general fee

* Responsible Owner Licences (ROL) applications are accepted from 1 June 2018 to 15 July 2018. Failure to register your dog by 31 July of any year will disqualify your ROL.

Impounding fees

Item Fee

First impounding $70

Second impounding $100

Third impounding $160

Sustenance fee (additional charge) $12

per day

Microchipping fee to be paid for unregistered dogs before release from the pound $47

Other fees

Miscellaneous Fee

Consent to keep more than two dogs in an urban area** $52

Responsible Owner Licence (ROL) application fee $32

Transferred ROL Property Inspection Fee $25

Replacement dog registration tag (for lost or damaged tags) $5

** Refer to the Hauraki District Council Consolidated Bylaw Part 3: (Public Safety) on the Council’s website for more information.



Stock impounding fees

Stock Impounding Fee

Stallion, ass, mule or bull over the age of nine months $30

Mare, gelding, colt, filly, foal, ox, cow, steer, heifer or calf $25

Ram, ewe, wether, lamb or goat $15

Boar, sow or other pig* $35

Deer $25

Sustenance fee per day or part day $5

* The fee for the pig category is recommended to be significantly higher because of the potential damage that could be caused to the pound facilities.

Stock Callouts Following charges apply for each impounding occurrence and for stock on roads callouts, whether or not the stock is impounded.

Fee

Animal Control Officer $110

Advertising Actual cost

Repeat impounding Double the per day

charge

Transportation and cost of attendance, call out and vehicle charges Actual cost

Type of stock Trespass on

paddock, meadow, grass or stubble

Trespass on any grown or growing crop land, reserve, cemetery or burial ground

Horse, mare, gelding, colt, filly, foal, bull, cow, steer, heifer, calf, ass, mule or deer

$2.50 $6

Ram, ewe, wether or lamb $1 $1.50

Goat, boar, sow or other pig $6 $12



Environmental health

Food premises - food act 2014

The Food Act 2014 is coming into force over a three-year transitional period with the final day being 28 February 2019. Most of the sections of the Act came into effect on 1 March 2016 which requires food premises to operate under a Food Control Plan. Existing food premises operating under the now replaced Food Hygiene Regulations 1974 will have a three-year transitional period (March 2016 until March 2019) in which to move to Food Control Plans, but new operations must operate under a Food Control Plan from 1 March 2016.

Existing food premises (applicable March 2016 - March 2019)

Existing food premises registration fees are based on annual assessment and the assessed number of inspections. Each additional inspection may incur an additional charge equivalent to the base fee.

Regulation Fees

Food Premises – Non graded premises registration fee (fruit shops) $185

Food Premises – Registration/Grading fee for A graded premises $360

Food Premises – Registration/Grading fee for B graded premises $420

Food Premises – Registration/Grading fee for D graded premises $540

Food Premises – Registration/Grading fee for E graded premises $650

Food Premises – Re-grading fee $120

Food premises operating a Food Control Plan or National Programme

Food premises operating under a food control plan and new premises operating a food control plan or National Programme under the Food Act 2014 will not be required to renew their registration during the transition period but will be required to have an annual verification, inspection and audit, and pay the applicable fees set out in the table below. The fees for food premises operating a Food Control Plan or National Programme under Food Act 2014 are based on actual and reasonable costs associated with the activity which includes registration, verification, compliance and monitoring functions for food premises.

Regulation Fees

Application for registration of food control plan $100

Application for renewal of a registered food control plan $100

Application for registration of an amended food control plan $100

Non-significant amendment of food control plan $100

Change in circumstances for a food control plan. $100

Voluntary suspension of a registered food control plan $160

Verification, inspection and audit. $160 per hour

Revisit following an audit. $160 per hour

Issue of an improvement notice by a food safety officer. No charge

Application and assessment of a national programme $100

Application for renewal of a national programme $100

Amendment of a registered national programme. $100

Voluntary suspension of a national programme. $100

Transfer of registration - inspection of premises for change of operation or ownership $155

Dual registration fee Additional $110

Administration – hourly rate $85 per hour



Other environmental health fees

Regulation 7 of the Health (Registration of Premises) Regulations 1966, requires that the fees payable on application for Certificate of Registration and upon the issue, renewal, and noting of such Certificates shall be such as the local authority by resolution decides.

Other premises licences requiring a registration certificate

Regulation Fee

Offensive Trade Licence $250

Hairdressers Premises Licence $140

Fee for food stalls for one off events: 1 to 9 stalls 10 or more stalls

$180 $250

Other premises subject to inspection (not required to hold a registration certificate)

Regulation Fees

Inspection fee for premises used for one day licence $52

Re-assessment fee $52

All other registered premises not elsewhere specified (a fee equal to the base fee) $180

Mobile shops and hawkers $140

Gaming machine class 4 venue consent $150

Inspection of any registered premises on request $180



Alcohol licensing The following Alcohol Licensing fees are set by the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulation 2013. ‘The Act’ refers to the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

Determination of fee category

The fees payable by an applicant for an on-licence, off-licence, or club licence for premises comprise of: (a) an application fee; and (b) an annual fee. These premises will be classified by the Council on the basis of the premises' cost/risk rating, and the fees category for the premises. The cost/risk rating of premises is the sum of the highest applicable weighting in tables 2-4. These consist of:

Type of licensed premises

Latest alcohol sale time

Number of enforcement holdings in the past 18 months

Table 1: Definition of type of premises

Type of premises Definition

BYO restaurant means a restaurant for which an on-licence is or will be endorsed under section 37 of the Act.

Class 1 club means a club that has or applies for a club licence and— (a) has at least 1000 members of purchase age; and (b) in the opinion of the territorial authority, operates any part of the premises in the nature

of a tavern at any time.

Class 2 club means a club that has or applies for a club licence and is not a class 1 or class 3 club.

Class 3 club means a club that has or applies for a club licence and— (a) has fewer than 250 members of purchase age; and (b) in the opinion of the territorial authority, operates a bar for no more than 40 hours each

week.

Class 1 restaurant means a restaurant that has or applies for an on-licence and— (a) has, in the opinion of the territorial authority, a significant separate bar area; and (b) in the opinion of the territorial authority, operates that bar area, at least 1 night a week,

in the manner of a tavern.

Class 2 restaurant means a restaurant that has or applies for an on-licence and— (a) has, in the opinion of the territorial authority, a separate bar; and (b) in the opinion of the territorial authority, does not operate that bar area in the manner of

a tavern at any time.

Class 3 restaurant means a restaurant that has or applies for an on-licence and that, in the opinion of the territorial authority, only serves alcohol to the table and does not have a separate bar area.

Enforcement holding means a holding as defined in section 288 of the Act, or an offence under the Sale of Liquor Act 1989 for which a holding could have been made if the conduct had occurred after 18 December 2013.

Remote sales premises means premises for which an off-licence is or will be endorsed under section 40 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.



Table 2: Weightings relating to the type of licensed premises

Licence held or sought

Type of premises Weighting

On-licence Class 1 restaurant, night club, tavern, adult premises 15

On-licence Class 2 restaurant, hotel, function centre 10

On-licence Class 3 restaurant, other premises not otherwise specified 5

On-licence BYO restaurants, theatres, cinemas, winery cellar doors 2

Off-licence Supermarket, grocery store, bottle store 15

Off-licence Hotel, tavern 10

Off-licence Class 1, 2, or 3 club, remote sale premises, premises not otherwise specified 5

Off-licence Winery cellar doors 2

Club licence Class 1 club 10



See Table 4 for definition of type of premises.

Table 3: Weightings relating to the latest alcohol sales time allowed for premises

Type of premises Latest trading time allowed by licence (during 24-hour period from 6 am to 6 am)

Weighting

Premises for which an on-licence or club licence is held or sought

2 am or earlier 0

Between 2.01 am and 3 am 3

Any time after 3 am 5

Premises for which an off-licence is held or sought (other than remote sales premises)

10 pm or earlier 0

Any time after 10 pm 3

Remote sales premises Not applicable 0

Table 4: Weightings relating to the number of enforcement holdings in respect of the premises in the last 18 months

Number of enforcement holdings in last 18 months (applies to all types of premises) Weighting

None 0

1 10

2 or more 20

Fee category

The Council will assign a fees category to any premises for which an on-licence, off-licence, or club licence is held or sought. The fees category will be assigned in accordance with Table 5. Table 5: Fee categories based on weighting

Total weighting based on combined weighting from Tables 2-4 Fees category

0–2 Very low

3–5 Low

6–15 Medium

16–25 High

26 plus Very high

The Council may, in its discretion and in response to particular circumstances, assign a fees category to premises that is 1 level lower than the fees category determined above; but no premises may be assigned a category lower than very low.



The date on which the fees category for premises must be determined is— (a) for the purpose of an application fee, the day on which the application is made; and (b) for the purpose of the annual fee, the day on which the annual fee is payable.

On-licences, off-licences and club alcohol licences fees

Fees category for premises Application fee including GST

Annual fee (including GST)

Very low $368 $161

Low $609.50 $391

Medium $816.50 $632.50

High $1023.50 $1035

Very high $1207.50 $1437.50

Special alcohol licence fees

Special licence class Issued in respect of Fee (including GST)

Class 1 1 large event

more than 3 medium events more than 12 small events

$575

Class 2 3 to 12 small events

1 to 3 medium events $207

Class 3 1 or 2 small events $63.25

The Council may, in its discretion and in response to particular circumstances, charge a fee for a special licence that is 1 class below the class of the licence that is issued; but no fee may be less than the fee payable for a class 3 special licence.

Table 6: Event size and description

Event size Description

Large event An event that the Council believes on reasonable grounds will have patronage of more than 400 people

Medium event An event that the Council believes on reasonable grounds will have patronage of between 100 and 400 people

Small event An event that the Council believes on reasonable grounds will have patronage of fewer than 100 people.

Manager certificates

Type Fee

(including GST)

Application for a new manager certificate $316.25

Renewal of a manager certificate $316.25

Other fees payable

Type Fee

(including GST)

Temporary authority to carry on the sale and supply of alcohol $296.70

Temporary licence to sell alcohol pursuant to a licence from premises other than the premises to which the licence relates

$296.70 application fee

Permanent club charters $632.50

annual fee

Extract from register $57.50

Application for Building Certificate – Alcohol See building fees

Application for Planning Certificate of Compliance – Alcohol $160



Noise control

Seizure of items under Resource Management Act 1991 Fee

(including GST)

First impounding – payable before the equipment can be collected $210

Second impounding – equipment not returned at all N/A

Noise Control infringement fees Fee

(including GST)

Failing to adhere to an excessive noise direction $500

Failing to adhere to an abatement notice for unreasonable noise $750



Resource management implementation

Resource consents The Resource Management Act 1991 allows for an initial deposit to be charged to the applicant. Then if the base fee does not fully cover the actual and reasonable costs of processing the application, the Council will recover those costs with an additional charge. This additional charge is based on the time spent by the processing officers and the time taken to process the application. For subdivisions additional fees are payable once the consent has been granted – for the formal certification required and, if applicable, engineering approvals and inspections. We recommend that you speak to the duty planner at the Council before you lodge a resource consent application. You can do this by contacting a Council office and make an appointment with the duty planner to discuss your requirements.

Subdivision consent fees

We recommend that you speak to or engage a surveyor to submit an application on your behalf. The following chart is a guide to the process and when fees are payable.

Description Deposit Fee

Non-notified subdivisions $1,500

Limited notified subdivisions $3,000

Publicly notified subdivisions $5,000

Monitoring - administration $110

Section 221 – Consent Notice $200

Section 221 – Change or cancellation of Consent Notice $400

Section 223 – Survey Plan $300

Section 226 – Title registration $200

Section 222 – Completion $200

Section 224 – Title (not requiring engineering consideration) $500

Section 224 – Title (requiring engineering consideration) $850

221 Certificate (consent

notice) fee if applicable


Apply for 224 Certificate

(compliance with conditions)

• Payment required

Apply for 223 Certificate

(approval of survey plan).


Additional costs over or under

the deposit are invoiced or refunded.

• Payment may be required from both the blue table and the green tables below.

Consent processed by

the Council and any additional time taken is

recorded.

Lodge application with

applicable deposit fee.




Land use consent fees

The following process and fee schedule covers minor land use consents to major land use consents. The scale of the consent is determined on application by planning staff. We recommend that you speak to the duty planner at the Council regarding your land use needs before you lodge your application.


Non-notified land use $1,200

Limited notified land use $3,000

Publicly notified land use $5,000

Non-notified land use of a minor nature $850

Minor side/rear yard or daylight departure (with neighbour’s approval) $250

Monitoring - first inspection $200

Monitoring - each additional inspection $200

Monitoring - administration $110

Review of Consent Conditions Section 128 RMA $500

General consent fees

Type Fee

Planner – hourly rate $130

Senior Planner – hourly rate $150

District Planner – hourly rate $190

Administration – hourly rate $85

Engineering – hourly rate At cost

Disbursements – hourly rate At cost

General consultants – hourly rate At cost

Permitted boundary activity $250

Marginal or temporary rule exemption $600

Amendment to consent conditions and amended consent application Deposit Fee

Requiring engineering consideration $850

Not requiring engineering consideration $500

Monitoring is carried out on

consented activity.

• Payment required.

Advise Council when you are

implementing your consent

Additional costs over and under the

deposit are invoiced or refunded if

applicable when consent is issued.

• Payment may be required from the goldtable and the greentables below.

Consent processed by the Council and any additional time

taken is recorded.

Lodge application with initial deposit

fee




Type Fee

Application for extensions of time $350

Hearing Commissioners Deposit fee

Independent hearings commissioner Cost plus 5%

Independent commissioner for objection hearing Cost plus 5%

Hearing/Decision (independent commissioner) requested by applicant Section 100A of the RMA

$500

Hearing/Decision (independent commissioner) requested by submitter Section 100A of the RMA

$250 applicant $250 submitter

base fee

Bond documentation – Minor works bond preparation by the Council. $400

Bond documentation – Release of bond documents $600

Bond or Easement Documentation prepared by the Council’s solicitors $850

Designation fees


Designations – non-notified $1,400

Alteration to a designation – non-notified $650

Removal of a designation – non-notified $200

Designations of a minor nature – non-notified $650

Designations, including alteration and removal - notified $1,800

Outline plans $300

District Plan fees


District Plan change $10,500

Certificates of Compliance / Existing Use Right Certificates $800

Other planning fees

Type Deposit Fee

Right of way application fee $650

Right of way certification fee $350

Overseas Investment Certificate $200

Resource management planning certificates under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act See alcohol licensing

fees

Section 243 – Easement approvals and cancellation – report and certificate $200



Land information memoranda (LIM) LIM application Fee

Standard LIM (10 working days) $220

Urgent LIM (3 working days) $350

Development contributions Development contributions are required where the effect of a development is to require new or additional assets or assets of increased capacity which require the Council to incur capital expenditure. You will be advised in writing if any development contributions are payable when your consent is issued.



Corporate services

Administration fees

Service A4 A3 A2 A1 A0

Photocopying

Colour $0.50 $0.75 N/A N/A N/A

Black & White $0.30 $0.50 N/A N/A N/A

Printing

Line work only (including plans) $3 $3.50 $7.50 $10 $15

Imagery (including GIS prints) $3 $3.50 $15 $25 $50

Rate and water details (WINZ and other) No charge N/A N/A N/A N/A

Rates notices No charge N/A N/A N/A N/A

Dog notices No charge N/A N/A N/A N/A

Scanning

Per scan A2 and above N/A N/A $5 $5 $5

Electronic Information Fee

Information by CD $20*

Information by email $3*

Information on USB drive $30*

* This cost only covers the information being saved on to the type of electronic device or emailed. A separate rate will apply for time spent on collating and preparing information to be saved to the device – in this case the Official Information Requests OIA rate will apply.

Official Information Requests Fee

Initial charge for the first chargeable half hour or part thereof $40

For each additional half hour or part thereof. $40

Photocopy fees - as per standard fees and charges

Document management and control

Title: 2018/19 Fees and Charges

Sponsor: Strategic Planning Projects Manager

Approved By: Hauraki District Council

Adopted: Review Date: File Ref:

DRAFT adopted 14/03/18 M2196261

Property of Hauraki District Council



PO Box 17, William Street, Paeroa Phone (07) 862 8609, or 0800 734 834 from within the Hauraki District

Website – www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz

Email – [email protected]


http://www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/

mailto:[email protected]

of 5

Decision Report


From: Economic Development Officer


File reference: Document: 2399015

Portfolio holder: Councillor Ross Harris


Subject: Community Wireless Trust Project

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received, and THAT Council contribute $30,000 excl. GST to the Community Wireless Trust project in Hauraki District

in the 2018/19 financial year.

$18,000 of this amount will be identified in the funding application for phase 1 of the project.

A further $9000 will be identified in the funding application for phase 2 of the project.

The remaining $3000 GST will go towards the assistance of a funding advisor for phase 2 of the

project.

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to consider a recommendation from the Economic Development

Subcommittee for Council to contribute $30,000 towards the Community Wireless Trust project in Hauraki

District.

The matter or suggested decision does not involve a new activity, service, programme, project, expenditure or other deliverable


of 5

Background

In June 2017 Council staff met with the Community Wireless Trust to discuss their project to provide an ultra-

fast wireless network in Waihi. The Trust and Waihi College now have an agreement to use the College’s

fibre connection to provide high speed wireless internet in Waihi and the set-up of the initial phase has been

completed.

One of the core focuses of the Community Wireless Trust is to support education. Their vision for education

is that people can learn anywhere, anytime and that every student is connected and has access to a digital

device. Waihi College sees the project benefiting their students significantly, providing them with access to

the school’s internet 24/7 on a subscription basis. This supports the National Education Goal: Equality of

educational opportunity for all New Zealanders, by identifying and removing barriers to achievement (New

Zealand Ministry of Education, 2016), reducing the digital divide in Hauraki communities. Teachers will be

provided with a dedicated access to the school networks through the WLAN (Wireless Local Area Network),

allowing them to work from home when required.

The current residential subscriptions with the Community Wireless Trust range from $60 to $100 per month.

Business plans range from $100 to $180 per month and include a free home connection. All subscriptions

include unlimited data but have variations in speed according to plan.

The Trust is also currently working with a community in Maratoto Valley who have a very unreliable, low

speed internet connection. This community is going to self-fund the set-up of the wireless infrastructure

using the fibre connection from Hikutaia School.

Council staff met with the Trust again on 13 February, where it was indicated that the Trust would be

interested in providing a service to Ngatea and Paeroa as well. They suggested that with support from

Council, the time required to set up the wireless network would be significantly reduced.

A report was taken to the Economic Development Subcommittee on 27 February 2018 outlining what the

Community Wireless Trust does and how it would align with some of our strategic goals at Hauraki District

Council. The Subcommittee requested that Councillor Rattray and the Economic Development Officer look

into priority areas for a wireless network and discuss the potential project with the Community Wireless

Trust in detail.

A report was then presented to the Community Services and Development Committee on 11 April 2018

outlining the projects that were identified as being of benefit to Hauraki District. It was resolved at this

meeting:

THAT that $15,000 of the 2017/18 Financial Year Economic Development Budget for the digital enablement plan (06010.0525) be used to install wireless hotspots on the main streets (main business areas) of Waihi, Paeroa and Ngatea (approximately 1 km in each town), and

THAT up to $20,000 of the 2017/18 Financial Year Economic Development Budget for the digital enablement plan (06010.0525) be used to purchase and install repeater units in areas identified by Hauraki District Council and the Community Wireless Trust to speed up the delivery of wireless broadband to areas of the District with limited internet connectivity, and

THAT staff work with the Community Wireless Trust to identify alternative funding sources to reduce the level of Council funding.


of 5

Funding Advisor Diane Kiernan will prepare the funding applications on behalf of Hauraki District Council

and the Community Wireless Trust for the project in Hauraki.

Issue and options

The Council resolved to support the Community Wireless Trust project in Hauraki District at the 11 April

2018 Community Services and Development Committee meeting (please refer to the resolutions in previous

section). The Funding Advisor advised that financial support for the project from Hauraki District Council

would be of benefit when applying for external funding. The project is planned in two phases at this stage.

There are two funding options:

Option 1: Contribute $30,000 excl. GST to the Community Wireless Trust project in Hauraki District

$18,000 Project funding for phase 1

$9,000 Project funding for phase 2

$3,000 Funding application assistance project phase 2

Option 2: Do not contribute to the Community Wireless Trust project in Hauraki District

In addition, approximately $3000 will go towards funding application assistance for the project in the

2017/18 financial year.

The contribution from Council would go towards the projects identified by Hauraki District Council as being

of benefit to the community and used to leverage further funding:

1. Free wireless hotspots in the main streets (main business areas) of Waihi, Paeroa and Ngatea

2. Making ultra-fast wireless broadband available in rural areas (priority areas will need to be

identified)

Phase 1 includes:

Initial infrastructure set-up in Paeroa and Ngatea (fibre connections, routers, point to point links)

Free WiFi in the main street of Waihi, Paeroa and Ngatea (mesh units)

Expansion into the rural areas of Waihi

Phase 2 includes:

Expansion into the rural areas of Paeroa and Ngatea

Please note: the initial phase has recently been completed in Waihi. Once 2 Degrees enable the fibre at Waihi

College, Waihi residents who are in line-of-sight of the transmitter can subscribe to the Community Wireless

Trust service.


of 5

Current Community Wireless Trust network coverage map - Waihi

Connectivity subject to visible line of site to hight point (blue symbol)

No line of site – however connectivity possible with a bounce off another location

It was seen as important to inform Hauraki’s business communities of the project and provide them with the

opportunity to be involved. The town promotions organisations have been contacted about the project and

have received information to communicate to local businesses about the WiFi hotspots in town centres. The

Positively Promoting the Plains Committee discussed the project and decided it was not a priority for them

as they have a Spark phone box in town as well as some local businesses who provide wireless internet.

Positive Paeroa and Go Waihi will both speak with their committees about the project.


This decision does not trigger the Significance and Engagement Policy Assessment Tool and therefore is not

considered significant under the Significance and Engagement Policy 2014.

Budget Implications

The 2017/18 Annual Plan earmarked $44,000 towards the digital enablement plan. Of this amount some

$35,000 was earmarked for this project. Due to the timing of the project, actual expenditure will take place

in the 2018/19 financial year. Accordingly, staff are seeking Councils approval to undertake this expenditure


of 5

in the 2018/19 financial year acknowledging the budget was provided in 2017/18. This would result in an

underspend against budget in 2017/18 and a corresponding overspend in 2018/19.

Recommendation

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 Economic Development Subcommittee recommends that Council contribute $30,000 excl. GST to the

Community Wireless Trust project in Hauraki District in the 2018/19 financial year.

$18,000 of this amount will be identified in the funding application for phase 1 of the project.

A further $9000 will be identified in the funding application for phase 2 of the project.

The remaining $3000 will go towards the assistance of a funding advisor for phase 2 of the project.

Rebecca Jenks ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OFFICER


of 12

Decision Report


From: Group Manager Planning and Environmental Services

Date: Friday, 1 June 2018

File reference: Document: M2392465

Portfolio holder: Cr Paul Milner


Subject: Planning and Environmental Services Monthly Report – May 2018

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received, and That pursuant to section 34A (1) of the Resource Management Act 1991 Mr Alan Watson be

appointed as a Commissioner and as Chairman of the Hearings Panel to consider and decide on the notified consent applications to the Hauraki District and Waikato Region for the proposed Project Martha

That a working group made up of the Mayor and the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Hearings and Judicial Committee be delegated the Authority to appoint further Commissioners to the Hearings Panel pursuant to section 34A (1) of the Resource Management Act 1991 to consider and decide on the notified consent applications to the Hauraki District and Waikato Region for the proposed Project Martha.

Summary

Over this month our Customer Services team had an independent CRM survey undertaken. Ministry for the Environment have launched a discussion document on the national Planning Standards. The Methamphetamine changing contamination levels is being discussed. The Long Term Plan is up for Council adoption. There is a review of Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy is starting with a look at the Local Government Regulatory Systems Amendment Bill. There is an update on Waihi mining matters with Project Martha and the appointment of Commissioners.


of 12

Customer Services Team

May this year was some 20% quieter in terms of call volume than the previous period last year, and as a result we can confirm that we met our targets overall for May. The Service Level was 80.76% and the abandonment rate 5.57%. 1214 Rate Rebates have now been completed. Recently, the Customer Service Manager sought the assistance of CRM Consulting to complete an independent telephone audit on the service that we offer to our customers. The objective of the CRM survey is to measure the quality of service delivered by Contact Centres over the telephone and internet, and to raise awareness of the impact that this has upon their image. The survey also provides benchmarking data against which individual performance can be measured, highlighting specific areas of strength and weakness in relation to the performance of other Contact Centres. Laurie Smith delivered our results to the Customer Service Manager on Friday 8th June, with a good result, receiving a weighted average score of 88% - this is 2 percentage points higher than last year’s Public Sector Section Award Winner. We do undoubtedly have areas to work on as we strive to move from “good to great”, the most crucial being improving our time to answer. The Customer Service Manager has continued to work with IT and GIS on the project to move our cemetery data from CV (an unsupported application) to Authority, using Intramaps as the mapping tool. The Team Meeting was led by the two staff members who attended the Cemeteries and Crematoria conference in Christchurch, as they shared what they had learned with the team.

Development

31 May 2018

Consents Issued 2016/17 2017/18 Year to date

Building Consents 392 364 93%

Subdivisions 67 57 85%

Land Use 91 90 101%

Designations - - -%

Objections 3 5 166%

Certificates of Compliance - - -%

Variations 12 16 133%

Outline Plans - 1 100%

Right of Ways 2 - -%

Extension of Time - 1 100%

Permitted Boundary Activity Certificates n/r 9 -%

175 179 102%

LIMs 468 388 83%

Consent activity is now showing a slight decrease from this time last year activity numbers in particular with building consents, subdivision consents and LIMs.


of 12

Regulatory Services Team

Planning Implementation

Processing

For the last month 9 subdivision and 13 landuse resource consent applications were lodged and to date over that period all resource consents were processed within the statutory timeframe of 20 working days.

District Plan Review

The Growth Strategy and Plan Changes have begun their consultation phases with Iwi, Waikato Regional Council and NZ Transport Authority after receiving approval from Council to proceed to the Plan Change process. The outcome of this consultation will be reported back to the District Plan Committee after this Council meeting.

National Planning Standards

The Minister for the Environment (Ministry) has recently released the draft first set of National Planning Standards for public consultation. The aim of the standards is to provide a consistent structure for district plans. This standard prescribes the name and order of key parts, chapters and sections of district plans. The standard allows councils to add locally derived sections if required. The draft planning standards, and supporting materials can be found on Ministry website. This is a big change to how plans have been developed in the past. In total there are 18 planning standards in the draft first set. These cover the minimum requirements of the RMA that must be addressed, as well as complementary matters that will help achieve more meaningful consistency, and make plans easier for Council to develop. The Ministry are continuing to consult on proposals for a framework of zones, they have also developed new standards for how spatial planning tools (such as overlays and precincts) to be used. The proposed 5-year implementation timeframe (7 years for some councils who have, or are shortly to conclude a large plan review process) seeks to allow you to implement the planning standards at, or near to, the time of your next scheduled plan review. As all councils are at a different stage of review the Ministry recognises that for some this will result in plans being reviewed sooner than anticipated, but is a more workable for most councils than the default timeframes. From mid-June onwards, the Ministry will be holding a series of roadshow sessions in regional centres near you. Information on these roadshows can be found on the NZPI website. In drafting submissions to the consultation document, the Ministry would encourage Council to include comments on the workability of the standards to help you do what you do now, albeit within a different structure and form. The submissions period is open for 10 weeks, closing on Friday 17 August. There will be a further report on this to Council in the near future, including the impact on Council with implementing them.

Building Team

For the last month Council granted 46 Building Consent applications with 9 new dwellings last month and all were processed within the statutory timeframe. Of those 46 applications 8 consents did not require further information requests and 38 did have further requests for information.


of 12

General

Dog Control

Dog Control officers for past month have continued street patrols and preparing for dog re registration mail out at the start of June.

Methamphetamine Levels in Houses

With the release of the Sir Peter Gluckman’s report, there is now a state of uncertainty amongst the TAs and the methamphetamine sampling and decontamination industry and the real estate industry in terms of which advice is to be followed. Recent advice I received from our District Health Board stated the following: “The Ministry of Health doesn’t set the level for methamphetamine decontamination. The Ministry’s 2010 guidelines, “Guidelines for the Remediation of Clandestine Methamphetamine Laboratory Sites”, were only ever intended for methamphetamine labs, and not for contamination from methamphetamine use. Those guidelines were superseded by the New Zealand Standard NZS 8510:2017 last year, which was developed by Standards New Zealand (part of Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment), not the Ministry of Health. Standards New Zealand has advised the MoH that NZS 8510:2017 is a voluntary standard as it is not cited in legislation or regulations.” The NZ Institute of Environmental Health are currently seeking assistance from LGNZ for clarification as to which advice on the issue to follow. Our Council has and will only continue to serve a cleansing order where the level of methamphetamine exceeds 0.5 micrograms/100 sq. cm (present guidelines) for a dwelling advised to Council by the NZ Police as having been involved in the cooking of methamphetamine (P), until further advised in law.

Review of the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy and the identification of priority buildings for the earthquake-prone buildings regime

There is a report on the agenda to form a Councillor working party to work with staff on the review of the Earthquake-prone, Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy 2010, and the identification of potential priority buildings (unreinforced masonry buildings and corridor buildings) as part of the earthquake-prone buildings regime. It is envisaged public consultation will take place during September this year.

Secondary School Employment Partnership

Once again two members of the Planning and Environmental Services team will work with students from Hauraki Plains College this year as part of the Smart Waikato Trust Secondary School Employment Partnership programme. This is the third year in the three-year pilot project. A brief planning meeting was held with teachers from the College this month and on 3 July the programme will commence with representatives from the various local businesses (and organisations) presenting on their business. The students will create a promotional/advertising campaign for their business of choice and a site visit will take place during the programme. In November the students work will be presented to the business representatives and feedback provided to the students. The overall aim for the students is to see English in a variety of contexts and be able to use creativity, presentation and critical thinking skills to create a relevant and useful product whilst learning how to accept and use constructive feedback and overcome challenges. All while connecting young people, educators and employers to generate interest and knowledge sharing in local communities. For more information on the programme visit www.smartwaikato.co.nz/initiatives/ssep/


http://www.smartwaikato.co.nz/initiatives/ssep/

of 12

Communications

Business as usual for the communications officer this month has involved working with Waikato Regional Council on communication around the stopbank repairs in Ngatea, which are now complete. The communications officer has also developed a three phase communication plan to support flood preparedness in the Ngatea community. The closure of the Paeroa Domain toilets has been a topic of high community interest this month. Lots of feedback was received from the Paeroa community on this issue and after taking it all on board, a decision has been made to re-open the toilets on weekends. The communications officer has also been involved in organising and promoting a conversation with Waikino, Waihi and Paeroa communities to find out whether or not they would be open to a possible boundary change as part of Council’s upcoming representation review. Next steps in this process include the development of a communication plan to support a district wide conversation with all of our communities on Council’s preferred representation option. Two heavy rainfall incidents have sparked communication responses in the last month, the latest being over Queen’s Birthday weekend. Social media continues to be an effective form of two-way communication during these weather events, with some posts reaching more than 50,000 people. The page is also well used by the community to relay information back to us, either via comments on our posts or private message. The communications officer has continued to work with the strategic planning team on Long Term Plan communication and engagement. A plan for communicating Council’s decisions and replying to submitters has been developed and will be implemented over the next few weeks. Implementation of the Council’s refreshed brand is going well, although as anticipated the transition period is ongoing due to the old design being phased out in a staged process as things need replacing, rather than attempting to replace everything at once. Vehicle logos are currently being replaced as vehicles come in to be serviced. An engineer’s design for the welcome to the district signs has also been completed allowing this project to progress to the next stage of printing and installing the signs. The project team is also working through a new sign strategy and design for general signs. There are approximately 300 - 400 electronic letter and form templates to be updated and the communications officer and corporate planning administrator have started work with each department to refresh both the design and wording of these templates. A more comprehensive update on this and other communications projects will be provided by the communications working party at Council’s next meeting.

Strategic Planning

2018-28 Long Term Plan

Staff have prepared a draft long term plan document that reflects the decisions made by the Council. This is currently working through the final audit process. It is presented to the Council for adoption elsewhere on this meeting agenda.

2018/19 priorities

The long term planning project has taken a large proportion of the team’s time over the last two years. The team is now starting to turn its mind to upcoming bylaw reviews, Kaiaua community planning and the climate change adaptation programme in the coming months. These are anticipated to be the team’s priorities in 2018/19 and will be scoped with the Council in due course.


of 12

Review of the various Parts of the Hauraki District Council Consolidated Bylaw

Project plans are being developed for the review of the following Parts of the Hauraki District Council Consolidated Bylaw: Part 2: Land Transport Part 3: Public Safety (excluding the keeping of dogs and freedom camping) Part 4: Trade Waste and Wastewater Part 6: Cemeteries Part 9: Wharves Fire Prevention Involving Vegetation

The majority of these reviews are legally required as per the review timeframes set out in the Local Government Act 2002. A report will be on the July Council agenda to form a Councillor Working Party to work with staff during the review process.

Legislation and planning changes

The Government is continuing to proceed with a number of legislation and other policy and planning changes, including the national planning standards (as above). The team is monitoring initiatives that are open for consultation and working with others to determine whether a submission is warranted.

Local Government Regulatory Systems Amendment Bill

The Local Government Regulatory Systems Amendment Bill was introduced into Parliament on 12 June. The changes proposed in the Bill are designed to make technical and procedural fixes that are not controversial. They provide for: creating a mandate to facilitate voter participation in local elections (the electoral officer would be

responsible for ‘facilitating and fostering representative and substantial electoral participation’), clarifying the timing of taking office by a successful candidate following a by-election removal of requirement to set a rates limit (but the requirement for limits on rate increases still

remains) reducing local government filing requirements by removal of the requirements to provide hard copies

of long term plans, annual plans, annual reports, rates resolutions, report on dog control policies and practices to the Secretary for Local Government, Auditor-General and/or Parliamentary Library

improving accessibility to council documents by empowering the Secretary for Local Government to require specific accessible formats for types of documents that are made publicly available or filed

requiring public notices to be on the council’s website, in addition to the current newspaper requirements

rates resolutions to be put online within 20 working days clarifying the meaning of ‘internet site’ with regards to council information availability obligations standardising the meaning of working day to resolve the inconsistencies across legislation distinguishing between extraordinary meetings and emergency meetings clarifying the organisations permitted to certify disability assist dogs clarifying war veterans’ eligibility for rates rebates clarifying residents of retirements eligibility for rates contribution refunds, and clarifying the public notification requirements for the creation of a pedestrian mall.

The Bill awaits its first reading and referral to Select Committee. No indication has been given on estimated enactment timeframes or consultation on the Bill. The Bill can be viewed at: http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2018/0066/latest/LMS49025.html#LMS49100


http://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2018/0066/latest/LMS49025.html#LMS49100

of 12

2018 Annual Satisfaction Survey

Staff have been working with the external research provider, Versus Research, to prepare the 2018 annual satisfaction survey of Hauraki district residents. As there have been no changes to the content requirements and the survey is the annual version (rather than triennial, which asks additional questions prior to the local election) the questionnaire is largely the same as the year previous. The Council had previously agreed that we would engage Versus Research as our survey provider on a three-year basis; this will be the third survey undertaken by the company. As has been the case in previous years, building and resource consent applicants will be surveyed separately from the main survey. The key survey dates are: Final survey questionnaire circulated to Councillors for information: 28 June Surveying period: 2 July to 23 July Prelim results inserted into draft annual report: 14 September ELT review draft results: 25 September Council receive results report: 31 October Results communicated: November onwards.

Mining Matters

Project Martha

The Martha Project application was received on 28 May 2018 and accepted for processing on 8 June 2018. For HDC the Project consists of two applications; one for works on the north wall of the pit and underground mining below and to the south of the pit and the other for a subdivision in Bulltown and Cambridge Roads to allow for a road re-alignment. There are 28 separate reports to the HDC applications and the landuse consent is especially technically challenging as a result of:

The mining planned amongst the old workings under the pit

Stability issues in the underground and the interaction between the pit and the underground

workings.

The applicant has also lodged a number of applications with the WRC. The applicant has requested that all applications (HDC & WRC) be notified. The RMA gives direction that in instances where there are joint notified applications, that joint processes should be undertaken and joint hearings should be held. Decision making can be separate. I have had initial discussions with WRC and it has been agreed to approach these applications jointly and that the HDC will be the lead authority (to administrate the processes). As with previous joint applications the effects associated with the HDC landuse consents will generally affect more people than the WRC consents. There will also need to be a negotiation by the various parties as to the appointment of Commissioners. The time clock for the commencement of the RMA processes started on 28 May 2018. At the time of writing this report Council staff and advisors were assessing the applications and associated technical reports to determine if any further information is required from the applicant prior to the applications being notified. When we have collated the various requests for further information a further information request will be sent to the applicant. Once this further information is received it will also need to be assessed for completeness. Once the further information request is finalised I will arrange for publicity regarding the applications and arrange for the AEE, the technical reports and the further information request to be made available on our website.


of 12

The next key decision is to what extent we will notify individuals (owners and occupiers) as well as the normal advertising in papers and on the internet. While this is the Councils decision there has to be a justification for the extent of notification. I am currently considering the geographical extent of effects such as vibration, dust and noise and the permitted baselines in the District Plan.

Project Martha – Appointment of Commissioners

As discussed earlier in this report the appointment of Commissioners for Project Martha will need to be negotiated and agreed between WRC, HDC and the applicant. This negotiation could take some time as all parties, based on previous experience, are likely to agree that three Commissioners provide the most effective number for a hearing and decision making panel. However, the needs of the Council’s do not necessarily fit comfortably in terms of the skills and experience needed for three commissioners. We all agree that we need a very experienced Chairman with experience in mining consent matters. Both HDC and WRC have used Alan Watson in this role in the past and has previously been acceptable to the applicant. In terms of the remaining Commissioners we (the Councils) would be looking for expertise and experience in the following fields: Geotechnical and ground stability - HDC’s primary concern Groundwater abstraction/ecology – the key area for WRC Possibly an Iwi commissioner A community Commissioner

The parties will obviously canvas the Commissioner data to ascertain whether we can get a combination of these skills but it may not be possible. There are no budget implications resulting from these recommendations as all of the Council’s processing costs relating to these applications will be met by the applicant. Given the restricted timeframes (the sooner the Commissioners can be appointed and access the large number of reports the better) I am recommending that Council consider the following: That pursuant to section 34A (1) of the Resource Management Act 1991 Mr Alan Watson be appointed

as a Commissioner and as Chairman of the Hearings Panel to consider and decide on the notified consent applications to the Hauraki District and Waikato Region for the proposed Project Martha

a working group made up of the Mayor and the Chair and Deputy Chair of the Hearings and Judicial Committee be delegated the Authority to appoint further Commissioners to the Hearings Panel pursuant to section 34A (1) of the Resource Management Act 1991 to consider and decide on the notified consent applications to the Hauraki District and Waikato Region for the proposed Project Martha.

Extended Martha Mine Area (EMMA) variations consent

Staff have been working with Oceana Gold on possible variations to the EMMA consent to achieve consistency between the consent conditions and the standards in the Operative District Plan. The EMMA consent expires on 18 October 2019 and, at that stage, its conditions will become permitted activities in the District Plan. It is therefore important that there are consistent provisions between the consent and the Plan at that time. The Council has previously approved the appointment of Alan Watson as the independent Commissioner to hear and decide on the notification and planning reports


of 12

The combined notification and planning report has been forwarded to the Commissioner for consideration and decision.

Application for a crest raise on Tailings Storage Facility 2 (TSF 2)

The next step for this application is for the staff report to be prepared as required by section 42A of the Act. When this report is completed it will also be forwarded to Commissioner Watson for his consideration and decision-making. At the time of writing the section 42A report was only awaiting the hazard assessment required by section 6(h) of the Act. The WRC will be providing this assessment as it too is required to undertake the same assessment. We had jointly agreed that only one assessment was needed. Peter Thom Group Manager: Planning and Environmental Services


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 2016/17 was adopted on 25 October 2017.

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 decided and issued within 70 working days.

1 July 2017 to 31 May 2018 Notified Consents to the end of May 2018 In time 1 Out of time 0 (Limited Notified)

All non-notified resource consent applications are decided and issued within statutory timeframes. All non-notified consent decisions, not requiring a hearing, are issued within 20 working days.

1 July 2017 – 31 May

Total 179 In time 177 99% Out of time 2 1%

Land Use 90 In time 89 99% Out of time 1 1 %

Subdivision 57 In time 56 98% Out of time 1 2 %

Other

Misc/Desig 10 In time 10 100% Out of time 0 %

Variations 16 In time 16 100% Out of time 0 %

Objections 5 In time 5 100% Out of time 0 %

Ext. of time 1 In time 1 100% Out of time 0 %


of 12

Issue building consents within statutory timeframes. 100% of all building consents are issued within statutory timeframes - 20 working days

May-17 YTD

2016/17 May-18

YTD 2017/18

No. of Consents 47 392 46 364

% in time 98% 100%

New Houses

Paeroa 21 19

Waihi 93 60

Plains 41 26

TOTAL 155 105

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

14.00

16.00

18.00

20.00

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Nu

mb

er

of

Days

Month

2017/18 Average Processing Time of BC's

2016/17 2017/18


of 12

All LIMs are issued within statutory timeframes All LIMS are issued within 10 working days

May-17 YTD

2016/17 May-18

YTD 2017/18

No. of LIMs 52 468 38 388

% in time 100% 100%

LIMs by Ward

Paeroa 132 109

Waihi 212 159

Plains 124 121

TOTAL 468 388

# LIMS 2016/17

%in time 2016/17

Avg Processing

# LIMS 2017/18

%in time 2017/18

% Overtime

Avg Processing

July 42 100% 7 20 100% 0% 5.2

August 54 100% 7.7 33 100% 0% 5.7

September 39 100% 7.1 33 100% 0% 6.5

October 38 100% 6.1 34 100% 0% 6.7

November 39 100% 6.6 39 92% 8% 7.1

December 46 100% 6 23 100% 0% 5.4

January 32 100% 4.9 28 100% 0% 5

February 51 100% 7.2 39 100% 0% 5.6

March 46 98% 6.6 52 100% 0% 6.6

April 29 100% 6.5 49 98% 2% 6.2

May 52 100% 6.6 38 100% 0% 5.8

June 41 100% 5.9

TOTAL 509 99% 6.51 388 99% 1% 5.98


Page of

Decision Report

To: The Mayor and Councillors

From: Policy Analyst

Date: Wednesday, May

File reference: Document:

Portfolio holder: Mayor Tregidga and Councillor Milner

Meeting date: Wednesday, June

Subject: Identification of priority buildings for the earthquake-prone buildings regime and the review of the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy

Recommendation: THAT the report be received, and THAT Deputy Mayor Adams and Councillors Milner and Rattray be appointed to a Councillor working party to work with staff on the review of the Earthquake-prone, Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy , and the identification of potential priority buildings (unreinforced masonry buildings and corridor buildings) as part of the earthquake-prone buildings regime, and THAT Council staff, in conjunction with the working party, establish a draft stakeholder engagement approach to be undertaken as part of the special consultative procedure (s of the Local Government Act ) and approved by the Council.

Purpose This report seeks the formation of a councillor working party to work with staff on the following policy matters:

The review of the Earthquake-prone, Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy , and The identification of unreinforced masonry buildings on thoroughfares with ‘sufficient’ vehicle and

pedestrian traffic as priority buildings, and If applicable, the identification of transport routes of strategic importance (in terms of an

emergency response) where buildings might impede those routes if they collapsed in an earthquake and the subsequent identification as those buildings as priority buildings.


Page of

Background Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act and the Building Act From July the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act came into effect. The Amendment Act amended the Building Act and introduced a single national policy framework for earthquake-prone buildings, removing the requirement for councils to have their own earthquake-prone policy. As part of this national framework councils must:

identify potentially earthquake-prone buildings,1 ask the owner to provide an engineering assessment of the building (within months of

notification), and if applicable assign an earthquake rating and issue an earthquake-prone building notice that

seismic work must be completed. The Council received a report on this regime at its Council meeting of November . The Hauraki District is a medium seismic risk area meaning the initial Council identification of potential earthquake-prone buildings process must be undertaken within years of the Amendment Act coming into effect. Once an earthquake-prone building notice has been issued the building work must be complete within years. However, these timeframes are halved for ‘priority’ buildings. Priority buildings must be identified as potentially earthquake-prone by the Council by July . Several buildings are already deemed to be priority buildings in the Act, for example buildings likely to be used as an emergency shelter or emergency centre, emergency response buildings (fire, police, ambulance), and education centres with twenty or more people in attendance. While these buildings are automatically deemed to be priority buildings the Council has policy discretion over:

the identification of thoroughfares with ‘sufficient’ vehicle and pedestrian traffic to warrant classifying parts of unreinforced masonry buildings on those thoroughfares as priority buildings, and

the identification of buildings that could impede a strategic transport route as priority buildings. This is discussed in more detail in the issues and options section of this report. Building Act and the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy The Council previously received a report on the need to review the Earthquake-prone, Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy . It passed a resolution that the policy would be reviewed this year. The earthquake-prone policy matters will be removed from the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy and other updates made to the policy to reflect the amendments to the Building Act since . The Franklin earthquake-prone, dangerous and insanitary buildings policy needs to be revoked. This is the last Franklin District Council policy to be revoked.

Issue and options

. Identify thoroughfares of ‘sufficient’ vehicle and pedestrian traffic and prioritising parts of unreinforced masonry buildings

1 Earthquake-prone buildings are those likely to collapse causing injury or death, or damage to any other property, during or following a moderate earthquake. There are 3 profile categories of Buildings that must be identified as potentially earthquake-prone buildings; A – unreinforced masonry buildings, B - pre-1976 buildings either three or more storeys or 12 metres or greater in height, and C – pre-1935 buildings that are one or two stories. There are some exclusions.


Page of

As part of the wider work of identifying earthquake-prone buildings the Council must decide which thoroughfares in the District are busy enough to justify classifying adjacent unreinforced masonry buildings as priority buildings. In accordance with the Building Act the Council must identify any part of an unreinforced masonry building that could fall from a building in an earthquake (e.g. parapet/ external wall /veranda) as a priority building if it could fall onto a public road, footpath, or other thoroughfare, where sufficient vehicle and pedestrian traffic could be affected.2 Councils are not required to act if there is no reasonable prospect of any thoroughfare in the district satisfying the criteria. How do we determine what is ‘sufficient’ vehicle and pedestrian traffic? The thoroughfares with ‘sufficient’ vehicle and pedestrian traffic are to be identified by the Council after consultation with the community. In accordance with the Act councils must use the special consultative procedure.3 As a starting point Council staff have identified all unreinforced masonry buildings within the town centre zones of Ngatea, Paeroa and Waihi. The identification process was focused on the town centre zone (as contained in the Hauraki District Plan) as these areas are intersected by the busy State Highway and are the main shopping precincts meaning this zone has higher pedestrian and traffic flows than other zones in the district e.g. industrial or residential zones. However, it may not be appropriate to deem all streets within the town centre zones as having ‘sufficient’ vehicle or pedestrian traffic to justify classifying adjacent unreinforced masonry buildings as priority buildings. This will be discussed with the working party before a draft statement of proposal is presented to the Council for adoption and public consultation.

. Prioritising buildings that could impede a strategic transport route The Council may identify buildings, that if they collapsed might impede a transport route of strategic importance (in terms of an emergency response), as priority buildings.4 The Council has the discretion to undertake this work or not. If it does want to deem earthquake-prone buildings as priority buildings on routes of strategic importance it must use the special consultative procedure. What is a route of strategic importance? Staff recommend that a route should be deemed to have strategic importance where emergency services would likely not be able to reach people and/or property in an emergency if that route was blocked by a building, or part thereof, during an earthquake. Council staff have undertaken an initial assessment of the location of the Police, Fire and Ambulance stations in Paeroa, Waihi and Ngatea in relation to the location of potentially earthquake-prone buildings. When this information is plotted on maps there are multiple roads that emergency services could use in the event of an earthquake, even if all identified earthquake-prone buildings failed. It may not be necessary to deem any routes in the district as having strategic importance, however this will be discussed in more detail with the working party.

2 s133AE (1)(e) and s133AF(2)(a) Building Act 2004 3 s83 of the Local Government Act 2002 4 s133AF(2)(b) Building Act 2004


Page of

. Review of the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy An initial review of the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy has been undertaken by Council staff and various matters need to be discussed with the working party to determine the Council’s policy positon in relation to:

Continuing to take a “reactive approach” to the identification of dangerous and/or insanitary buildings.

The Council’s preferred approach to issuing formal notices for urgent and non-urgent remediation of dangerous and insanitary buildings.

The Council’s preferred approach to issuing notices for ‘affected’ buildings (buildings adjacent to dangerous buildings).

How the policy should apply to Heritage buildings. Other matters will also be discussed such as information concerning the dangerous, affected and/or insanitary status of a building being included on a land information memorandum (LIM) prepared for the property.

Significance and Engagement Assessment The decision to form a Councillor working party does not trigger the Significance and Engagement Policy Assessment Tool and therefore is not considered significant under the Significance and Engagement Policy . At this point in time, staff recommend the Councillor working party collaborate (i.e. working together to develop understandings and identify preferred solutions) with potentially affected stakeholders e.g. building owners and local business owners, during the process to meet its decision-making obligations under the Local Government Act . The Council must use the special consultative procedure to consult with the community on the draft policy and proposed priority buildings. The Council must:

Prepare and adopt a statement of proposal, Provide at least month for interested persons to provide their views to the Council, Provide persons interested in the proposal with an opportunity to present their views to the

Council in in a manner and format that is appropriate to the preferences and needs of those persons.

The detail of the special consultative procedure will be discussed with the Councillor working party and a recommendation reported to the Council. Staff propose the following timeframes:

Council adopt a statement of proposal for the draft Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy , and if applicable a statement of proposal for the identification of priority buildings, at the

Council meeting of August . Special Consultative Procedure to run from Friday August to Monday October .

Budget Implications There are no budget implications associated with the resolutions in this report, however consultation undertaken as part of community engagement will involve expenditure in the democracy activity. This is not considered to be additional expenditure as it can be met through existing budget provision.


Page of

Recommendation Staff recommend a Councillor working party is formed to work with staff during the review of the Dangerous and Insanitary Buildings Policy and the identification of priority buildings for the earthquake-prone buildings regime. Charan Mischewski Policy Analyst


of 7

Decision Report


From: Transport Manager

Date: Friday, 8 June 2018

File reference: M2395800

Portfolio holder: Councillor Adams

Meeting date: 27th June 2018

Subject: Transport Report May 2018

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received THAT the additional School Bus Parking on Kaihere Rd and shown in Appendix B be approved for construction; and THAT the Council note that the cost for the School Bus Parking on Kaihere Rd adjacent Hauraki Plains Parking is approximately $1,200 and that this amount will be an unfunded cost within the Minor Safety Project budget (2018/19); and THAT two P30 (30 min maximum parking) parking restriction signs be installed on the western side of the Hauraki DC main building as described in section; and THAT Council [approves / does not approve] the vesting of the Right of Way located the end of Strange Road (known as Trembath Close) as Council Road [, subject to the applicant undertaking required maintenance works].

1. Introduction This report provides the latest information on the Hauraki District Council’s Roading activities for the period ending 31 May 2018.

2. Discussion

2.1 Capital Projects

2.1.1 Key Capital Project Achievements

Table 1 shows the progress on the main capital projects scheduled for the 2017/18 financial year.


of 7

Table 1: Main Capital Projects – 2017/18

Project and Description Progress

% complete Comments / explanations (if off track)

Reseal Contract – 2017/18 100%

Due to the rain, a small portion of the work will be done in October 2018

Preseal repairs for 2018-19 Reseals 100%

Pre-reseal repairs completed for 2018-19 Reseal Contract.

Area Wide Treatment – Waihi Beach Rd 100% Project completed

Area Wide Treatment – Hauraki Rd, Turua 100% Project completed

Road Widening - Bradford St, Waihi 100% Project completed

LED Streetlight Renewals 60%

Work is progressing in accordance with the programme.

Torehape Rd West Slip 95%

Retrospective resource consent outstanding

Rahu Rd Embankment Failure 65% Design work in progress

Hopai West Bridge Repair 55% Detail design report received for review

Gerrand Rd Embankment Failure 100% Project completed

Non-subsidised work 2017/18 25%

Projects are with Project Management Office for pricing

Netherton School Parking Area 100% Project Completed

Mahuta Rd North Underslip 25% Land-take investigations underway

Paeroa Kindy drop-off Zone 65% C&M price is in hand and pending award

Waihi East Primary School 70%

Alternative funding will be advised by the Waihi Ward

Progress Key: ..... = Off track / behind schedule / over budget ..... = Rescheduled ..... = Off track but will be back on track soon ..... = On track ... . = Completed

2.1.2 Key Capital Projects Planned for July 2017

The work scheduled for June 2018 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 June 2018

Project Ward Comments

Reseal Contract 2018/19 District Prepare Tender document

LED Streetlight Renewals District Installation

Torehape Rd West Slip Plains Prepare consent application

Rahu Rd Embankment Failure Paeroa Finalise detail design

Hopai West Bridge Repairs Plains Tender document

New Footpaths and Kerb & Channel

District Design and tender


of 7

2.1.3 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

Failure of the Hopai West Bridge Medium Speed limits and load restrictions in place. Monitor the situation.

3.0 Parking Restriction Williams St Paeroa

3.1 Introduction

Paeroa Ward have requested that two Restricted Parking signs on (30 min maximum parking) the. western side of the Main Entrance to the HDC main building on Williams St Paeroa.

3.2 Discussion

The estimated cost for this work is approximately $300 considering that the signs can be mounted on existing poles. The restrictions will allow for short-term parking

3.3 Recommendation

That the installation of two 30min maximum parking restriction signs be installed on the western side of the Hauraki DC main building as described above.

4.0 Additional “School-Bus Parking” for Hauraki Plains College

4.1 Discussion

There are a number of school buses that park at various locations during the school day. Most these are on Kaihere Rd adjacent to the college frontage. There are 2 or 3 buses that cannot able be accommodated at the Kaihere Rd College frontage often use other roads in Ngatea. This practice has generated public complaints. In discussion with HP College, Ward Councillors, bus companies and drivers it was generally agreed that the recessed sealed area neral the intersection of Kaihere Rd and SH2 would be a functional location for the any additional school buses during the day. The roadmarking location plan is shown as appendix below.

4.2 Estimated Cost

The ROC for the additional road marking and signage is approximately $1,200.00 and can be initiated via Road Maintenance Contract who will provide an estimated time for construction.

4.3 Recommendation

We recommend that the additional School Bus Parking on Kaihere Rd and shown in Appendix B of this report be approved for construction at earliest opportunity for the unbudgeted amount of $1,200.to be added as an additional cost to the Minor Improvement Safety Project budget.


of 7

5.0 Vesting Trembath Close Entrance in the Hauraki District Council Ropad Network

5.1 Introduction

Trembath Close (52 Strange Road) located at the top end of Strange Road, is an entranceway / Right of Way of approximately 200m2 serving 4 Lots and 3 existing driveways. The subdivision development was approved by Council in December 2006.

Trembath Close Road


of 7

5.2 Discussion

The owner Mr Keith Trembath has requested Hauraki District Council take ownership of the RoW and has proposed vesting it with Council as Road. The area has a worn 1st Coat Seal and has a relatively steep gradient up the road that would need a moderate level of maintenance. Should the Council consider the request favourably, then a reasonable amount of maintenance and other works would be required to bring it up from a RoW standard to Council road standards. It is suggested that these works should be completed by Mr Trembath prior to them being vested with Council as road. The works include: 1. Drainage works 2. 2nd Coat seal The full extent of works required will be determined should the Council approve the vesting of the RoW as road. The initial cost estimate of surfacing and drainage is in the order of $7,000 to $9,000k. The following points should be taken into consideration in making the decision:

Vesting the entranceway as part of the network could create a risk of others asking for the same consideration.

The site has a magnificent view and, should it be developed to include a viewing platform, it could present a significant public asset

The financial risk is generally low but the road geometry and gradient may require a higher frequency of maintenance works.

5.3 Recommendation

That Council approves / does not approve the vesting of the Right of Way located the end of Strange Road (known as Trembath Close) as Council Road. Gene Thomsen TRANSPORT MANAGER


of 7

Appendix A: Capital Works Programme

Project July 2017

Aug 2017

Sep 2017

Oct 2017

Nov 2017

Dec 2017

Jan 2018

Feb 2018

March 2018

April 2018

May 2018

June 2018

Reseal Contract xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

Area Wide Treatment – Waihi Beach Rd xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

Area Wide Treatment – Hauraki Rd, Turua xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

Road Widening - Bradford St, Waihi xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

LED Streetlight Renewals xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

Torehape Rd West Slip xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

Rahu Rd Embankment Failure xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx

Hopai West Bridge Repair xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx xxxx


of 7

Appendix B: Hauraki Plains College Additional Bus Parking Plan


of 10

Decision Report


From: Group Manager – Community Services and Development


File reference: Document: 2398779 Attachment 1: Current Ward Map

Portfolio holder: Mayor John Tregidga


Subject: 2018 Representation Review Initial Proposal

Recommendation: THAT the report be received, and THAT Council adopts, as its initial proposal, one of the following options (after determining the total number of councillors, the number of wards, boundaries and names, the number of councillors to be elected from each ward and whether communities and community boards are established, after taking into consideration all relevant information and informal consultation):

Option 1 (status quo)

Twelve councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three current wards (Plains Ward, four councillors, Paeroa Ward, four councillors, Waihi Ward, four councillors), with/without community boards; or

Option 2

Nine councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three current wards (Plains Ward, three councillors, Paeroa Ward, three councillors, Waihi Ward, three councillors), with/without community boards; or

Option 3

Ten councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three current wards (Plains Ward, three councillors, Paeroa Ward, three councillors, Waihi Ward, four councillors), with/without community boards; or

Option 4

Twelve councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three slightly modified wards (Plains Ward, four councillors, Paeroa Ward, four councillors, Waihi Ward, four councillors), with/without community boards; or


of 10

Option 5

Nine councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three slightly modified wards (Plains Ward, three councillors, Paeroa Ward, three councillors, Waihi Ward, three councillors), with/without community boards; or

Option 6

Nine councillors (plus the mayor), six councillors elected from three current wards (Plains Ward, two councillors, Paeroa Ward, two councillors, Waihi Ward, two councillors), three councillors elected at large, with/without community boards; or

Option 7

Nine councillors (plus the mayor) elected at large, with/without community boards; and THAT a required explanation of the reasons for any proposed changes be given; and THAT if the adopted initial proposal is non-compliant with fair representation (+/- 10% rule), and this is confirmed by Council as its final proposal, the proposal must be treated as an appeal under section 19V (5) of the Local Electoral Act 2001 and referred to the Local Government Commission following the appeal/objection process; and THAT the adopted initial proposal be submitted for formal public consultation, including inviting submissions (in the period 4 July to 3 August 2018); and THAT Council work with the Communications Officer to develop a Communication Plan for the formal consultation phase.

Executive Summary The Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA) requires local authorities to undertake a review of their representation arrangements at least once every six years. The Council carried out its last review in 2012 (for the 2013 and 2016 triennial elections) and is therefore required to undertake another review in 2018 (for the 2019 and 2022 triennial elections). Current representation arrangements are the mayor (elected at large), 12 councillors (elected from three wards) and no community boards. One ward (Waihi) does not comply with the fair representation criteria (+/-10% rule). Council has held several workshops and one community meeting over the last few months to discuss and consider the relevant issues when undertaking a review (identifying communities of interest, ensuring fair and effective representation and reviewing community boards), and considered seven options. An indication was given at the workshops that the current three wards still best reflect communities of interest (albeit one ward no longer complied with the fair representation criteria), that Council would like to undertake some informal community consultation, that a reduction in the number of councillors be investigated and that community boards are not established. To adhere to the fair representation criteria (+/-10% rule) with minimum changes, would involve the township of Waikino being placed within the Paeroa Ward from the Waihi Ward. After consultation with


of 10

the Waikino community, there was overwhelming support for Waikino to stay within the Waihi Ward, to which it identifies as its community of interest.

Purpose The purpose of this report is for Council to resolve an initial proposal for its review of representation arrangements (number of councillors, wards etc) that will apply for the 2019 and 2022 triennial elections. The matter or suggested decision does not involve a new activity, service, programme, project, expenditure or other deliverable.

Background The Local Electoral Act 2001 (LEA) requires every local authority to undertake a review of their representation arrangements at least once every six years. These reviews are to determine the number of councillors to be elected, the basis of election for councillors and, if this includes wards, the boundaries and names of these wards. Reviews also include whether there are to be community boards and if so, arrangements for these boards. Representation arrangements must provide fair and effective representation for individuals and communities. Council last reviewed its representation arrangements before the 2013 triennial elections and is therefore required to undertake a review before the 2019 triennial elections. Current representation arrangements, in addition to the mayor elected at large, are 12 councillors elected from three wards (see Attachment 1), and no community boards i.e.:

Ward Councillors

Plains 4

Paeroa 4

Waihi 4

The Local Government Commission issued guidelines for local authorities when undertaking a review of representation arrangements, which must be taken into consideration. Council workshops were held to consider the review of representation arrangements on 15 November 2017 and 26 April 2018, with an informal workshop on 20 February 2018. An indication was given at the workshops that the current three wards still best reflect communities of interest (albeit one ward no longer complied with the fair representation criteria), that Council would like to undertake some informal community consultation, that a reduction in the number of councillors be investigated and that community boards are not established.

Legislative Requirements

Part 1A of the LEA sets out the processes and timeframes for local authorities to follow when undertaking reviews of representation arrangements. The three key principles that local authorities must consider are: • communities of interest • effective representation • fair representation


of 10

Territorial authorities are also required to consider: • total number of councillors • number of wards, boundaries and names • number of councillors to be elected from each ward • communities and community boards

Communities of interest

The LGC in its June 2017 ‘Guidelines for local authorities undertaking representation reviews’, advises territorial authorities to ensure that representation proposals provide effective representation of communities of interest in their district. Determining effective representation is based on considering the identified communities of interest, which in turn becomes the determinant in selecting the overall representation arrangements of a territorial authority. The term “community of interest” is not defined by statute. It is a term that can mean different things to different people, depending on an individual’s or group’s perspective from time to time. In a general sense, the LGC is of the view that a community of interest is the area to which one feels a sense of belonging and to which one looks for social, cultural, service and economic support contributing to the development of a shared identity. Geographic features (e.g. rivers, mountain ranges) and the roading network can affect the sense of belonging to an area. The community of interest can often be identified by access to the goods and services needed for ordinary everyday existence. Another community of interest factor could be the rohe or takiwa area of tangata whenua. The LGC, through previous reviews, views a community of interest as usually having a number of defining characteristics, which may include: • a sense of community identity and belonging; • similarities in the demographic, socio-economic and/or ethnic characteristics of the residents of a

community; • similarities in economic activities; • dependence on shared facilities in an area, including schools; recreational and cultural facilities and

retail outlets; • physical and topographic features; • the history of the area; and • transport and communication links. As communities of interest may alter over time, territorial authorities need to give careful attention to identifying current communities of interest within their region when undertaking representation reviews.

Effective Representation

The number of councillors for territorial authorities must fall within the statutory limits of between five and 29. Section 19T of the LEA requires territorial authorities to ensure: • that the number and boundaries of wards will provide effective representation of communities of

interest within the district; and • that ward boundaries coincide with the boundaries of the current statistical meshblock areas

determined by Statistics New Zealand and used for parliamentary electoral purposes; and • that so far as is practicable, ward boundaries coincide with the boundaries of any community boards.


of 10

The LGC in its guidelines provides the following principles that territorial authorities could apply when considering this issue: a recognised community of interest should not be split between electoral boundaries; grouping together two or more communities of interest that share few commonalities of interest

should be avoided; accessibility, size and configuration of an area should be considered:

would the population have reasonable access to its elected members and vice versa? would elected members be able to effectively represent the views of their electoral

constituency? would elected members be able to attend public meetings throughout their area, and provide

reasonable opportunities for their constituents to have face-to-face meetings?

Fair Representation

Fair representation is defined as a democratic model where there is a reasonable ratio of elected members per head of population; assurance that elected members are in reasonable geographic proximity to citizens for easy contact, and there is sufficient opportunity for representation and involvement of communities of interest. There should be a strong link between elected representatives and their wards so as to promote a healthy democracy, protect citizens’ rights and ensure that their views and opinions are heard. For this to be achieved, elected members must be able to respond to the interest and demands of their wards (if applicable). In essence, this is the requirement for the population of each ward (if applicable), divided by the number of elected councillors to be elected by that ward, does not exceed +/-10% of the population of the region divided by the total number of elected councillors. The population figures to be used for the review are either the last census (2013) or the latest population estimates (30 June 2017). We have used the 30 June 2017 population estimates. When considering fair representation based on the current three wards and current 12 councillors, the +/- 10% compliance is marginally not achieved in one ward (Waihi Ward by 68 people):

Ward Pop Cnrs Average Fits Rule % Variation

Plains 6,350 4 1,588 Yes -3.93%

Paeroa 6,150 4 1,538 Yes -6.96%

Waihi 7,340 4 1,835 No +11.01%

Note that should the existing three wards remain, but the number of councillors reduce to nine (three wards with three councillors each), Waihi Ward still falls outside the +/- 10% rule (+11.01%). If the number of councillors reduce to ten (two wards of three, one ward [Waihi] of four), then all wards comply with the +/- 10% rule. There is however some leeway in the LEA for allowing non-conformity of the fair representation criteria under certain circumstances: • an isolated community • an island community • compliance would divide a community of interest between wards • compliance would unite within a ward two or more communities of interest with few commonalities For the current ward arrangements, one ward does not comply with the +/- 10% rule (Waihi Ward at +11.01% is under-represented). Where a territorial authority considers that non-compliance of the +/- 10%


of 10

rule would divide a community of interest between wards, group unlike communities of interest together or there are isolated or island communities, then the territorial authority may go outside the +/- 10% rule, but this must be treated as an appeal under section 19V (5) LEA. This means the review would be required to be referred to the Local Government Commission for determination following the appeal/objection period.

Informal Community Consultation

Council agreed to undertake limited informal preliminary consultation between 1 - 22 May 2018, including: • advertising in the Hauraki Herald newspaper (11 May, 8 June), Waihi Leader newspaper (31 May) • Facebook • regular posts on Council page • Waihi Community Grapevine page • Waikino community page • Waihi iSite page • GoldFM page • Positive Paeroa page • mayor’s radio spots (2 stations throughout May and early June) • Waikino Whisper community newsletter (first week of May, first week of June) • Council’s website (published 11 May) A public meeting on the representation review for Waikino residents was held on 18 June 2018, with approximately 40 people attending. The majority’s view was that the Waikino township remains within the Waihi Ward. The formal consultation process under the LEA (one-month submission period and one-month appeal/objection period) will still occur in the period July – October 2018.

Options Considered Council at its earlier workshops considered the following seven options:


12 councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three current wards (Plains Ward, four councillors, Paeroa Ward, four councillors, Waihi Ward, four councillors), no community boards. This option does not comply with the +/- 10% rule (Waihi Ward):


Plains 6,350 4 1,588 Yes -3.93%

Paeroa 6,150 4 1,538 Yes -6.96%

Waihi 7,340 4 1,835 No +11.01%

19,840/12 members = 1,653 +/- 10% = 1,488– 1,818


of 10

Option 2 (nine councillors, three wards)

Nine councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three current wards (Plains Ward three councillors, Paeroa Ward three councillors, Waihi Ward three councillors), no community boards. This option does not comply with the +/- 10% rule (Waihi Ward):


Plains 6,350 3 2,117 Yes -3.95%

Paeroa 6,150 3 2,050 Yes -6.99%

Waihi 7,340 3 2,447 No +11.02%

19,840/9 members = 2,204 +/- 10% = 1,984 – 2,424

Option 3 (ten councillors, three wards)

10 councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three current wards (Plains Ward three councillors, Paeroa Ward three councillors, Waihi Ward four councillors), no community boards. This option complies with the +/- 10% rule:

Ward Pop Cnrs Averag Fits Rule % Variation

Plains 6,350 3 2,117 Yes +6.7%

Paeroa 6,150 3 2,050 Yes +3.33%

Waihi 7,340 4 1,835 Yes -7.51%

19,840/10 members = 1,984 +/- 10% = 1,786 – 2,182

Option 4 (modified status quo)

12 councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three slightly modified wards (Plains Ward four councillors, Paeroa Ward four councillors, Waihi Ward four councillors), no community boards. This option includes the Waikino township (312 population) with Paeroa Ward. This option complies with the +/- 10% rule:


Plains 6,350 4 1,588 Yes -3.93%

Paeroa 6,462 4 1,615 Yes -2.3%

Waihi 7,048 4 1,762 Yes +6.6%

19,840/12 members = 1,653 +/- 10% = 1,488 – 1,818

Option 5 (nine councillors, modified three wards)

Nine councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three slightly modified wards (Plains Ward three councillors, Paeroa Ward three councillors, Waihi Ward three councillors), no community boards. This option includes the Waikino township (312 population) with Paeroa Ward. This option complies with the +/- 10% rule:


of 10


Plains 6,350 3 2,117 Yes -3.95%

Paeroa 6,462 3 2,154 Yes -2.27%

Waihi 7,048 3 2,349 Yes +6.58%

19,840/9 members = 2,204 +/- 10% = 1,984 – 2,424

Option 6 (nine councillors, mixed system)

Nine councillors, six elected from current three wards (Plains Ward two councillors, Paeroa Ward two councillors, Waihi Ward two councillors), three councillors elected at large, no community boards. This option does not comply with the +/- 10% rule (Waihi Ward):


Plains 6,350 2 3,175 Yes -3.99%

Paeroa 6,150 2 3,075 Yes -7%

Waihi 7,340 2 3,670 No +10.98%

19,840/6 members = 3,307 +/- 10% = 2,976 – 3,638

Option 7 (at large system)

Nine councillors elected at large, no community boards

Initial Proposal Council at their 27 June 2018 meeting is to resolve an initial representation arrangements proposal from seven identified options. Council needs to determine the total number of councillors, the number of wards, boundaries and names, the number of councillors to be elected from each ward and whether communities and community boards are established, after taking into consideration all relevant information and informal consultation. Accordingly, it is recommended that Council adopts, as its initial proposal, one of the following options:


Twelve councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three current wards (Plains Ward, four councillors, Paeroa Ward, four councillors, Waihi Ward, four councillors), with/without community boards; or.

Option 2

Nine councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three current wards (Plains Ward, three councillors, Paeroa Ward, three councillors, Waihi Ward, three councillors), with/without community boards; or

Option 3

Ten councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three current wards (Plains Ward, three councillors, Paeroa Ward, three councillors, Waihi Ward, four councillors), with/without community boards; or

Option 4

Twelve councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three slightly modified wards (Plains Ward, four councillors, Paeroa Ward, four councillors, Waihi Ward, four councillors), with/without community boards; or


of 10

Option 5

Nine councillors (plus the mayor) elected from three slightly modified wards (Plains Ward, three councillors, Paeroa Ward, three councillors, Waihi Ward, three councillors), with/without community boards; or

Option 6

Nine councillors (plus the mayor), six councillors elected from three current wards (Plains Ward, two councillors, Paeroa Ward, two councillors, Waihi Ward, two councillors), three councillors elected at large, with/without community boards; or

Option 7

Nine councillors (plus the mayor) elected at large, with/without community boards. The initial proposal resolution requires an explanation of the reasons for any proposed changes be given. If the adopted initial proposal is non-compliant with fair representation (+/- 10% rule), and this is confirmed by Council as its final proposal, the proposal must be treated as an appeal under section 19V (5) of the Local Electoral Act 2001 and referred to the Local Government Commission following the appeal/objection process; The adopted initial proposal must be submitted for formal public consultation, including inviting submissions (in the period 4 July to 3 August 2018). It is recommended that Council work with the Communications Officer to develop a Communication Plan for the formal consultation phase.

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 2014 The level of engagement considered appropriate for this matter, at this point in time, is to consult (i.e. two-way communication to obtain public feedback) with the Hauraki District community.

Budget Implications There are no significant budget implications with this decision.

Recommendation 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). Council receives this report, resolves its initial proposal for representation arrangements for the 2019 and 2022 triennial elections and commences the formal consultation process. Steve Fabish GROUP MANAGER- COMMUNITY SERVICES AND DEVELOPMENT


of 10

Attachment 1:


2395818 Page 1 of 2

Information Report


From: Chief Executive


File reference: Document: 2395818Appendix A: 2395821 Appendix B: 2399050

Meeting date: 27 June 2018

Subject: Chief Executives Monthly Report – June 2018

Recommendation: THAT the report be received.

1.0 Staff

Our Health and Safety Administration Assistant student Kelcie Mills has been successful in gaining a $15,000 scholarship sponsored by Zespri International. Kelcie works for HDC part-time while studying her Bachelor of Health Science, Majoring in Occupational Safety & Health and Environmental Health. We congratulate Kelcie on her achievement. Natalie Goodson has been appointed as Accounts Officer to work part-time along with Kelly Fisher who has returned from Parental Leave in a part-time capacity. Natalie is a local Paeroa resident, formerly working at TCDC. In the Community Services team we have appointed 2 Library Assistants to work part time and on-call in both Paeroa and Waihi Libraries to replace Maree Smith who left some time ago. Corinna Fairburn from Waihi and Katie McLaren from Karangahake started in early June. The role of Community Pools, Facilities and Events Officer is being reviewed so has not yet been advertised. Interviews have been held for the position of Building Control Officer to replace Colin Wiggins. A decision is pending. Executive Assistant – Corporate and Engineering has been filled by Ruth Kriechbaum. Ruth starts in her new role 2nd July. Appointments are pending for both the Engineering Department Administrator and Water Services Administrator jobs. 30 applications were received for these roles which were jointly advertised as they require similar skillsets. The Design Team Leader role has been filled by an internal applicant Lukas de Haast who transferred from the Transport Team Leader role which is currently being advertised. Both roles sit within the Technical Services Business Unit.


of 2

Gene Thomsen has announced that he will be retiring from his position of Transportation Manager after 18 years’ service with HDC. His last day of work will be 20 July 2018 and we wish him well. His role will be reviewed then advertised in the next week or 2 Other roles currently advertised are:

• Accounting Team Leader to replace Heather Byrne • Asset Engineer Water Services (new position) • Information Officer (additional position within Corporate Services Department) • Strategic Planner to cover a 1-year fixed term parental leave pending vacancy.

2.0 2018 Local Government New Zealand AGM Remits

Attached (Appendix A) for the members information are the Remits that are to be considered at Local Government New Zealand’s 2018 Annual General Meeting on 15 July 2017. Voting on these remits will be made at the AGM and the Mayor, Chief Executive and Councillor Toby Adams are attending the AGM as the Council delegates. Discussion on these remits at the meeting is requested to inform the vote that is made at the AGM. 3.0 Waikato Local Authority Shares Services (WLASS) Attached (Appendix B) for the members information is the latest Collaboration in Action Document which gives an update on the activities of WLASS and provides details on the shared activities that are currently being undertaken. Langley Cavers Chief Executive


2018 Annual General Meeting Remits


2

1 Drug testing in the community

Remit: That LGNZ works with central government to develop a nationally consistent regime of waste water testing, to enable a solid basis for testing drug use in our communities.

Proposed by: Tasman District Council

Supported by: Waitomo District Council

Ruapehu District Council

Bay of Plenty Regional Council

Nelson City Council

Upper Hutt City Council

Far North District Council

Background information and research

1. Nature of the issue

a. The technology exists now to test wastewater for the use of drugs which gives a very straight forward comprehensive picture on the drug use in respective communities. This has been trialled currently with three communities in New Zealand and in each community a different drug has shown as the major issue. Where councils or communities would like to apply these tests, a consistent methodology will enable decision makers within those communities to determine the best course of action.

b. This will allow for the best utilisation of resources within the community to test for drugs. The aim is to provide all relevant services with the ability to identify the use of illegal and harmful substances and identify the practices to reduce harm.

2. Background to its being raised

a. We are all familiar that from time to time, issues with the use of illegal drugs cause particular problems within our communities. Currently one drug that is causing significant concern is methamphetamine. However, we shouldn’t assume that this is the only problem drug or in the future the problem drug may be different.

b. Testing wastewater is a straightforward and effective way to demonstrate the scale and nature of problems with illegal drugs within our communities.


3

c. The impacts of drivers being affected by methamphetamine have been raised within our community recently. However, there is wide spread evidence of this drug causing significant harm to families and communities. The simple straightforward test of this nature would be highly beneficial for use in communities when wanting to identify the scale and nature of this problem.

3. New or confirming existing policy

This is a new policy.

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

This does not relate to the current work programme.

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

Three communities have trialled the technology and the primary drugs they detected are Christchurch (MDMA), Rosedale, North Shore (cocaine) and Whangarei (methamphetamine).

6. Any existing relevant legislation, policy or practice

Not that I am aware of.

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

This has not been discussed at Zone or Sector meetings.

8. Evidence of support from Zone/Sector meeting or five councils

This has the support of the six mayors listed above.

9. Suggested course of action envisaged

Developing nationally consistent regime for testing wastewater for illegal or harmful drugs.


4

2 HCV – Rural roads policy

Remit: That LGNZ pursue investigation of a Road Pricing Policy Statement for Land Transport to incentivise route selection for HCV’s that encourages the most economically efficient use of the transport network over both Local Roads and the State Highway network.

Proposed by: Ruapehu District Council

Supported by: Zone Three



The following issues have been identified:

a) The current Road User Fees and Charges regime incentivises the shortest transport distance from Gate to Port or processing plant of primary produce without assessment of the most economic, efficient and sustainable transport route.

b) This does not enable efficiency in the use of the transport network nor take into account resilience and safety.


The cost of maintaining and renewing local road infrastructure has a significant impact on a territorial authority’s budget decisions within its LTP. The consumption of low strength pavements on low volume rural road networks is not well considered by HCV fleet managers when route planning and pricing for harvesting aggregates, forests or other high intensity produce from the primary sector.

The Road Controlling Authorities Forum made up of NZTA and representatives from TA’s and associated NGO’s have funded Research and produced Guidelines to assist Funding Policy Decision makers in Local Government. It is considered that more can be done at a National Funding Policy level to promote efficient and effective use of limited resources for Land Transport.


5


New - Policy goal – That price incentives are in place to ensure the most economic use of the transport network.


This issues relates to LGNZ’s strategic priority one1 regarding infrastructure and specifically around the policy priorities, actions and projects for transport. These include:

• Government Policy Statement for Land Transport 2018 and National Land Transport Programme presented to councils in an integrated manner for LTPs which addresses sector needs including freight, regional growth and tourism.

• Ongoing advocacy for new funding models for transport.

• Integrate policy positions from Mobilising the Regions including: integrated transport planning and decision making models into the above.


A large proportion of pavement consumption on local roads occurs on low volume roads, caused almost entirely from commodity cartage. The Special Interest Group – Low Volume Roads (SIG-LVR) of the Road Controlling Authorities Forum (NZ) (RCA Forum) has sought to provide a process for:

• Calculating pavement consumption on low volume roads caused by industrial land-use.

• Allocating the cost to industrial ratepayers, in an equitable way, using rules prescribed by local government legislation.

This work is now in circulation is being considered as one of the tools to equitably fund transport demands on Local Roads.

References

http://rcaforum.org.nz/sites/public_files/images/160429-Notes%20of%20290416%20forum.pdf

https://rcaforum.org.nz/sites/public_files/images/Guidelines_equitable_funding_pavement_maintence_LVR-July_2017.pdf


Land Transport Management Act 2003

• This governs the issuing of the GPS, the requirement that NZTA report annually on the use of funds from the land transport fund (including the contribution to the GPS outcomes and objectives) and the compliance of RLTP with the GPS.






6

Local Government Act 2002

• This specifies the LTP process and the inclusion of key roading funding and planning information as a mandatory activity.


That LGNZ pursue investigation of a Road Pricing Policy Statement for Land Transport to incentivise route selection for HCV’s that encourages the most economically efficient, safe and resilient use of the transport network over both Local Roads and the State Highway networks.

8. Discussion and conclusion

For example; The full cost of government afforestation incentives are not taken into full account when calculating Return on Investment. In the case of forest harvest today, the incentives for investment were made in the 1990’s in the national interest (primary exports and carbon agendas) and in many cases the costs today largely fall on property with higher capital values.

A potential exists to introduce road pricing to incentivise the best use or transport resources and provide for economic growth and productivity in the rural provincial sector.

In order to allow for more informed and effective decisions, the transport sector needs to be incentivised to use the best possible transport routes that are proven the safest most efficient and sustainable use of the network.

It is therefore recommended that LGNZ pursue an investigation into Road Pricing that can inform NZTA and the Ministry of Transport when considering any review of funding tools for New Zealand’s transport infrastructure.


7

3 Heritage buildings

Remit: That LGNZ lobbies for greater support for, and protection of, heritage buildings via the following mechanisms:

• Revision of the Building (Earthquake-Prone Buildings) Amendment Act to change the ‘25% building work’ clause instead to trigger earthquake strengthening once a threshold of “25% of the Capital Value or $200,000, whichever is the greater” is reached to make this a more equitable provision for regional centres.

• An increase in the heritage fund.

• Provision of tax relief for heritage building upgrades

Proposed by: Whanganui District Council

Supported by: Zone Three

1. Background information and research


The following issues have been identified:

a. The current Building (Earthquake-Prone Buildings) Amendment Act (the Act) contains a clause where any work that reaches 25% of the current Capital Value (CV) of the building subsequently triggers the need to earthquake strengthen the entire building. This has a significant impact on smaller centres with low CVs (e.g. where values can be below $100,000). This poses an imminent and real threat to heritage buildings and the future character of New Zealand’s town centres.

b. Earthquake strengthening deadlines are approaching and regional centres in particular may struggle to undertake this work. This is because there is not the same economic return for these improvements. More funding is required to ensure that this can be delivered on time.

c. There is no tax relief available for earthquake strengthening costs. This is a deterrent for delivering on this important safety and preservation work.


New Zealand’s heritage buildings are a critical reminder of our past. Regardless of size or splendour even unassuming pubs and shops in the smallest of towns are slowly earning respect


8

and recognition for their reflection of our heritage and their important historical insight. This is true irrespective of whether this is a nostalgic nod to memories of youth or a more significant need for heritage preservation. If we lose these then we lose the valuable visual reminders which mark our unique identity as a country – and once these are gone, they are gone. This recognition has been the impetus for successful rejuvenation efforts throughout the country, for example, along the Otago Rail Trail where redundant buildings have been given a new lease of life – which has translated into economic benefit for new business ventures, while adding significantly to the tourism experience. These opportunities should be encouraged and incentivised by government and strongly supported by LGNZ.

Amendment to the Act

• Whanganui’s Earthquake-Prone Buildings Community Taskforce (the Taskforce) submitted on the Proposals for Earthquake-Prone Buildings Regulations in 2016.

• Part of this submission focused on the trigger point for earthquake strengthening of an entire building. This had been set at 25% of the current CV – meaning that in instances where a building has had an ‘earthquake strength assessment’ carried out then once the 25% threshold is reached through building work of any kind then complete earthquake strengthening is required.

• As a result, despite the legislation not requiring earthquake strengthening for many years, once this point is reached then the building owner or tenant is effectively penalised for what might amount to just a minor upgrade.

• The Taskforce challenged this clause and instead recommended that it be reworded so that work that reaches 25% of the CV, or a value of $200,000 (whichever was the greater) become the trigger point instead.

• This is because most buildings outside of the major cities have low CVs. This is largely due to the age of the buildings and the nature of small town demand for retail and upper-storey living (with many of these CVs being below $100,000).

• As a result, even small scale building work such as $25,000 for a new bathroom or internal wall construction could enact this clause.

• Although the Taskforce’s submission received support from other communities it did not result in the requested changes to the legislation being made.

• The Taskforce has suggested that if the clause remains in its current form then it could cause a large number of heritage buildings (particularly in regional centres) to become dilapidated, and ultimately lost. This runs counter to the intent of the legislation and an urgent review of the determination is requested.

Increase in the heritage fund

• Heritage EQUIP provides grants for both retrofitting and major works2.

1. Retrofit grants are designed to support smaller scale seismic strengthening projects. These are to address specific aspects of the building or to provide retrofit solutions for common hazards. They provide up to 50% of costs – up to a maximum of $25,000.


9

2. Major works grants are for comprehensive seismic strengthening solutions including large-scale or staged projects. These provide up to 50% of costs, with no upper limit to the grant application.

• In 2016 the government announced a new $12M fund to support earthquake strengthening work on privately owned heritage buildings where seismic upgrades were required.

• Although this was initially limited to only Category 1 and 2 listed buildings, this has since been broadened to other buildings on local council heritage registers.

• While the initial $12M pool was a welcome funding mechanism for building owners, it is claimed that additional support will be required as earthquake strengthening deadlines approach.

Tax relief

• It is considered that commercial building owners should be allowed tax relief for earthquake strengthening costs.

• IRD currently provides no tax relief for expenditure.

• It is claimed that this discourages investment – especially for older buildings.

• The government could assist with the affordability of strengthening costs by allowing building owners to expense their construction costs by one of two ways:

1. Allowing the cost of strengthening to be treated as an expense in the year in which the costs occur, with the deduction ring-fenced to rental income activity. This would allow owners to claim the tax benefit of the expenditure and would provide a real incentive to owners to carry out the strengthening.

2. In lieu of the above option not being adopted then building owners should be allowed to capitalise the strengthening costs separately – with those costs depreciated or amortised over a period of, for example, 10 years. Although the first option is preferred and offers more benefit to owners, the second option would still allow the recovery of some tax relief over a defined period.


These changes would build on and support existing policy. Tax relief advantages would require new provisions.


The current LGNZ work programme identifies the implementation of earthquake prone buildings regulations as a strategic policy priority under Housing and Building.



10

The Taskforce has advocated strongly for the needs of regional New Zealand in relation to heritage and earthquake strengthening. Supplementary research alongside its submission suggests that the following outcomes are possible without intervention:

• Buildings will not be renovated until the very last moment. As a result, deterioration in the integrity of the building is likely to be significant and could lead to the building becoming unsalvageable.

• Buildings will slowly deteriorate – becoming even less attractive to rent. This will have an impact on regional town centres.

• Buildings are likely to be abandoned once the earthquake strengthening deadline is reached – particularly in the case of overseas landlords where the cost of either clearing the site or strengthening will far exceed the value left in the property.

• The 25-year strengthening timeframe allowed in the legislation for Zone B areas (such as Whanganui) is now seriously reduced in efficacy because of the ‘25%’ clause.


• Building (Earthquake-Prone Buildings) Amendment Act

• Income Tax Act 2007


This remit was presented to the Zone Three meeting on 20 April 2018. It was moved by Cr Helen Craig (Whanganui) and seconded by Mayor Don Cameron (Ruapehu). It was supported by all member councils:

• Central Hawke's Bay District Council

• Hastings District Council

• Hawke's Bay Regional Council

• Horizons Regional Council

• Horowhenua District Council

• Manawatu District Council

• Napier City Council

• New Plymouth District Council

• Palmerston North City Council

• Rangitikei District Council

• Ruapehu District Council

• South Taranaki District Council

• Stratford District Council

• Taranaki Regional Council

• Tararua District Council

• Wairoa District Council


11

In addition, Rangitikei District Council has acknowledged its specific endorsement of this remit.


It is recommended that:

a) The Act be amended to allow for work up to 25% of the CV, or $200,000, whichever is the greater.

b) The Heritage Fund be increased to adequately meet demand.

c) That IRD reviews its provisions in relation to tax relief for earthquake strengthening of heritage buildings with a view to introducing this assistance.

9. Discussion and conclusion

“Heritage buildings keep our history alive, telling the story of our past and giving perspective for today. Heritage buildings provide both private and public value throughout

New Zealand.”

(credit Heritage Equip website: heritageequip.govt.nz)

These recommendations are based on the value of heritage and the importance of ensuring that the rules are applied in a fair and equitable way, regardless of whether you live in a major city or a smaller regional centre. The current Act does not offer this even-handedness – meaning that those in smaller centres with low CVs can be charged with responsibility for full earthquake strengthening as a result of only small scale building works. A minor reframing of the Act to set a cost threshold of up to $200,000 would ensure that a more equitable approach could be applied nationwide, without unduly penalising regional New Zealand where the economics of building conversion are not the same. By not addressing this discrepancy heritage buildings may miss out on investment and upgrades – eventually becoming rundown and potentially lost.

The value of heritage preservation is further championed through a request to increase the Heritage Fund. This boost would provide greater opportunity for more building owners to receive a subsidy so that requisite strengthening work can be undertaken. It would also mean that government could better manage the influx of applications that are likely to be submitted as deadlines approach. It is considered that this assistance will be particularly important for regional New Zealand where there is not the same economic return for this kind of work. Although building owners are generally passionate about restoration, with costs being so high and returns so low it is possible that many buildings will be left abandoned and ultimately demolished due to a lack of financial viability. Related to this is the concern that councils will then be burdened with the cost of demolition and rates arrears. Furthermore, removal of heritage buildings will irreparably impact on town streetscapes – resulting in less attractive replacement structures (or building gaps) and generating a loss of character, community and cultural identity.

Investment can similarly be encouraged through the provision of tax relief to support heritage building owners. Although this would have minimal financial impact on the government it would


12

have a significant effect on the retention and strengthening of earthquake-prone heritage buildings. It is recommended that this review occur as soon as possible to mitigate the size of this issue as a growing number of older buildings increasingly require investment.


13

4 Climate change – advocate to banks

Remit: That LGNZ, consistent with the Local Government Position Statement on Climate Change 2017 and the Local Government Leaders’ Climate Change Declaration 2017, advocate to all major banks that they transition away from investments in fossil fuel industries, and consider opportunities for long-term investments in low- or zero-carbon energy systems.

Proposed by: Greater Wellington Regional Council

Supported by: Greater Wellington Regional Council

Porirua City Council

Carterton District Council

Masterton District Council

Kapiti Coast District Council

Palmerston North City Council



Climate change has been described as “a slow motion disaster that will change our lives, the economy, and our planet for ever”. The previous Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment Dr Jan Wright said that climate change is “by far New Zealand’s worst environmental problem”. The effects of climate change are already being felt globally and in New Zealand through: increased frequency of extreme weather events including storms, cyclones, tornadoes and droughts; wildfires; and rising sea levels.

Climate Change will have major impacts on areas of responsibility of local government. Over the next few decades, tens of thousands of New Zealanders will be displaced from their homes by threatened inundation by rising sea levels. Local government has the responsibility to manage, at regional, city and district levels, land use planning including requirements for coastal protection or managed retreat to ensure future residential and business development and infrastructure is located away from areas that will be inundated. Local government therefore has a very high interest in measures being taken to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, in accordance with NZ’s commitments under the Paris Agreement of 12 December 2015, and subsequent commitments by the Government.


14


Greater Wellington Regional Council has recently updated its Treasury Risk Management Policy and has included a section:

“5.3 Investments in fossil fuels The Council has a policy to divest from any direct investment in fossil fuel extraction industries and investigate existing non direct investment, with a view to preventing future investment where practical”.

The Council’s Treasurer has taken the opportunity to advise banks of this policy as part of Council’s on-going commitment to reducing carbon emissions and promoting this to the wider community. It has also advised the banks that as part of its on-going due diligence into this matter, it will continue to monitor the banks it transacts with to ascertain what they are doing to assist with reducing and discouraging the on-going use and investment in fossil fuel industries.


Local Government recognises, as stated in the Local Government Position Statement on Climate Change, 2017, and the Local Government Leaders’ Climate Change Declaration, 2017, that we must act on climate change now to avoid future risk. Local authorities have accepted that they are at the frontline of climate change adaptation and have a role to play in mitigation, and that their responsibilities will grow in addressing climate change as both anticipated and unforeseen problems are revealed. Local government has a strong interest in the impacts of climate change and what can be done to mitigate those impacts.

Support for this remit will reinforce the Local Government Leaders’ Climate Change Declaration 2017, which included: “A clear and consistent pathway toward a low carbon and resilient future needs to provide certainty for successive governments, businesses and communities to enable transformative decisions and investments to be made over time”.


LGNZ has climate change as a project in its Work Programme.

This remit relates to the following objectives of the project:

a. Climate Change Action: “Actions to reduce emissions”

b. A Collaborative Approach: “A collaborative and joint response to climate change, including a clear pathway to a low carbon economy”

c. Key work streams: “Mitigating the impacts of climate change”

d. Supporting work: “The sector will contribute to the Productivity Commission’s inquiry into NZ’s transition to a low-emissions economy”.


15


On 19 October 2016, the NZ$30 billion NZ Super Fund announced changes to become more resilient to climate change investment risk under a new strategy announced by the Guardians of New Zealand Superannuation.

CEO Adrian Orr said climate change was a material investment issue with risks for long-horizon investors. “In coming years the global energy system will transition away from fossil fuels. Some assets we invest in today may become uneconomic, made obsolete or face a dwindling market.”

“Climate change, and the coming transition to a low-carbon energy system, also present investment opportunities for long-term investors that we intend to capture”. Mr Orr said the strategy represented a significant and fundamental shift for the NZ Super Fund.

The New Zealand Super Fund has set an example for banks and other investment fund managers. The effect of this remit will be to reinforce to major banks the strategic importance and benefits of a shift of investments away from fossil fuel industries and towards long-term investments in low- or zero-carbon energy systems.

The banks that Council deals with have a range of appetites in terms of dealing with climate change issues, with them all formally acknowledging the issues of climate change.

The four Australian banks that Council deals with all have exposures in the billions of dollars to the coal mining sector. They all have some statement on environmental/climate/sustainability on their websites and in their financial statements. They all support the position on climate change and the need to reduce greenhouse gases.

Westpac is a leader having been recognised as the world’s most sustainable bank in 2016 for the ninth time and has a focus on energy efficient lending, and is the only bank to publish its exposures to both the fossil fuel and clean tech/environmental service sectors.

Kiwibank has little or no exposure to direct lending to fossil fuel industries as its focus is primarily on residential lending. They provide sustainable energy loans and their guiding principles espouse an ethical approach to their products and services.

The LGFA, while having not having a formal policy on climate change, is presently considering one as part of its work programme. They have no investments in fossil fuel industries.


The current Government announced shortly after it took office in November 2017 that it will introduce a Zero Carbon Bill with the objective of NZ becoming a net zero-emissions economy by 2050. It will also establish an independent Climate Commission to set five-yearly carbon budgets and a Green Investment Fund to direct investment towards low-emission industries.

This remit could make an important contribution to assisting the Government to meet the objective of a net zero-emissions economy by 2050, by encouraging banks to divest from


16

investments in fossil fuel industries and instead direct investment to low- or zero-carbon energy systems.

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

The proposal for this Remit was discussed at the first Greater Wellington Region Climate Change Working Group meeting on Friday 16 March 2018, which included representatives of all 9 councils within the Greater Wellington Region. There was strong support for the remit from the councils. The next Zone 4 Meeting is not until after the deadline for submission of remits for the 2018 AGM of LGNZ, so it was agreed that Greater Wellington Regional Council will send the proposed remit to all councils within Zone 4 seeking their support. (Note: this paragraph will be updated once replies have been received from all councils and before the date for submission of 21 May 2018)


Can be found in folder in I drive.


The following action is envisaged, if this remit is passed:

e. The President of LGNZ will write to the NZ Local Government Funding Agency, and all major banks in NZ which manage investment funds on behalf of local authorities, to advocate that they transition away from investments in fossil fuel industries and consider opportunities for long term investments in low- or zero-carbon energy systems.


17

5 Climate Change Adaptation Fund

Remit: Following on from the findings and recommendations of the Climate Change Adaptation Technical Working Group, that LGNZ calls on central government to establish a Climate Change Adaptation Fund to improve local level and community participation in responding to climate change.

Proposed by: Christchurch City Council

Supported by: Metro Sector

Hutt City Council

Selwyn District Council



The impacts of climate change will be experienced New Zealand-wide with increased frequency and intensity of extreme events such as flooding, droughts, and increased coastal inundation. Over the past year this has been felt particularly keenly by local government in coastal areas. Adaptation to climate change is a necessary and ongoing process for decisions relating to infrastructure, urban development, biodiversity and land and water management.

The cost and affordability of adaptation for communities, businesses and councils is a significant issue. Some of the rationale for establishing an Adaptation Fund are as follows:

1. Responding to climate change is a significant and nation-wide issue

Climate change will touch all communities and impact on all councils throughout New Zealand. It will impact on many council roles, services and infrastructure. For some communities and councils these impacts will be significant.

2. Disproportional impacts and costs

The impacts and costs of adapting to climate change will not be felt evenly across the county. Often the most vulnerable communities are hardest hit. Many councils will have limited ability to adequately anticipate and respond to changes brought on by climate change, further raising inequalities. For some councils the costs will be beyond their means.

3. Cost is a barrier to proactive responses


18

For many communities and councils the cost of proactively responding to climate change is a significant barrier. While it is often more cost-effective to adopt proactive solutions, the up-front costs mean that only reactive, higher cost responses are taken. New Zealand will miss opportunities to save costs and be more exposed to higher cost recovery pathways.

In their Stocktake Report (2017), the Climate Change Adaptation Technical Working Group identified the cost and/or funding of adaptation is a key barrier for councils, and communities, in being able to implement adaptation measures in their areas.

4. Cost can be a barrier to fulfilling legal responsibilities

Councils have specific roles and legal responsibilities under the Resource Management Act 1991 and the Local Government Act 2002 to consider the impacts of climate change and the needs of future generations that may not adequately be fulfilled, or fulfilled in a timely manner, because of cost. Up-front costs can be barrier to long-term decision making and costs on future generations are heavily discounted, meaning future costs are poorly recognised and rarely managed. The impact is that we have an “adaptation deficit” where future generations will disproportionally carry the cost of the impacts of climate change.

5. Complementary to other approaches

A Climate Change Adaptation Fund is complementary to other actions and proposals of Local Government New Zealand and the Government, described below in the New or Confirming Existing Policy section. The Fund would help unlock opportunities to collaborate and share learnings across communities and could leverage other private and public investments in adaptation research and the practical implementation of solutions.

Funding can provide an incentive for communities to adapt and ensure that costs of adaptation are equitable. It will also enable more effective conversations to be had with communities around adaptation as funding is a significant barrier in willingness to adapt.


A useful precedent for this is the International Adaptation Fund, which helps developing nations better understand and proactively respond to climate risks. This fund provides a way for relatively well-resourced countries and organisations to support those most at risk. In a similar way a New Zealand Climate Change Adaptation Fund could also leverage support from private and public organisations to help our most vulnerable communities.

A useful example is the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Resilience Fund, which was established by the Government in 2011. This well-subscribed fund supports worthwhile education, capacity building and monitoring projects across the spectrum of natural hazards, but mostly, earthquake, flood, tsunami related projects. However, climate change adaptation is currently poorly resourced through this fund as the fund itself has a limited scope and very limited resources, especially considering that New Zealand’s economy is one of the most


19

vulnerable economies in the world to natural hazards. Consequently, current funds are insufficient and limited in focus to support critical and large scale adaptation projects needed to adequately prepare New Zealand for climate change. A contestable New Zealand Climate Change Adaptation Fund would be an important way to address these barriers and vulnerabilities.


This remit supports and confirms LGNZ’s specific policy priority on seeking clarification from central government on funding for climate change adaptation.

More generally, climate change is a key area of work for LGNZ. For example, LGNZ’s Policy Statement (2017) and its Climate Change Plan on a Page stated ‘All local authorities (city, regional, district and unitary councils) are at the front line of climate change adaptation’ . In addition, LGNZ has catalogued the pervasive impacts of climate change for local government roles and responsibilities, with a key focus on adaptation.

Supporting the development of a Climate Change Adaptation Fund will encourage dialogue on funding options, which LGNZ seeks through its Environmental policy priority. This would help to support the critical need for proactive collaboration between central and local government, and between city, district and regional councils.

The remit also supports the LGNZ Climate Change Project which promotes a collaborative approach to address the risks, challenges and opportunities of climate change. This includes local government requiring central government to establish adaptation funding for councils to access.


As noted above, the Government’s Climate Change Adaptation Technical Working Group has recently completed its Stocktake Report, focusing on how New Zealand can build resilience to rising sea levels, a warmer climate, extreme weather and other impacts of climate change. We understand a second report is underway, which will consider how New Zealand can effectively adapt to the impacts of climate change, in which recommendations will be made to central government. The report was expected to be completed in March 2018 but at the time of writing, had not yet been released publicly.

A research paper has also recently been completed on The Case for new Climate Change Adaptation Funding Instruments, which outlines some guiding principles and design issues in establishing an adaptation fund. The paper has key linkages with the work carried out by the Technical Working Group, and identified further areas for investigation in subsequent research.

In July 2017, the former Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Dr Jan Wright, released the report Stepping stones to Paris and beyond: Climate change, progress and predictability. Amongst its many recommendations, the report calls for the government to focus on adapting to climate change, noting its inevitability. It states that ‘New Zealanders have an expectation that central government will provide financial assistance for those affected by


20

natural disasters’ and notes ‘it is not too soon to consider the economic and fiscal risks of sea level rise, and to include the forward liability into planning and investment decisions.’ Dr Wright’s report was well-received, however at the time the Government opted not to action its recommendations.

At a regional level, councils are considering adaptation funding as part of their own individual climate change policies. For example:

f. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council has completed initial work on developing a contributory fund for adaptation actions in the Clifton to Tangoio Coastal Hazard Strategy 2120.

g. Christchurch City Council is in the early stages of engaging with the Southshore and South New Brighton communities around responding to the effects of climate change. Funding of adaptation actions will be a critical component of the project.

Although work is happening at a regional level, central government leadership and action is required.


As noted above, local councils are primarily acting alone with respect to climate change adaptation funding, with some guidance from LGNZ’s policy work in this space. Central government action may stem from the Technical Advisory Group’s second report, which is expected to be publicly released soon.


Supported

Moved/Seconded: A.Turner/R. Wallace


Can be found in folder in I drive.


21

6 Local Alcohol Policies

Remit: That LGNZ seeks the Government’s agreement to:

• amend the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 so that Local Alcohol Policies can more accurately reflect local community views and preferences.

• review policy levers it can apply to reduce alcohol-related harm that will complement LAP provisions established by TLAs and include consideration of mechanisms for addressing the density and location of off-licensed premises.

Proposed by: Christchurch City Council and Napier City Council


Hutt City Council



Strong community concern about the effects of the increasing number of alcohol sale outlets in many communities resulted in changes to the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act in 2012 which devolved responsibility for alcohol policy-making from a central body to local government. The 2012 legislation enables each territorial authority to develop a Local Alcohol Policy (LAP) in order to control where and when alcohol can be sold. As designed, LAPs can:

• restrict the granting of new licences in a community (or across the district);

• restrict the location of new premises with respect to proximity to other premises or sensitive sites;

• set maximum trading hours of alcohol sales from outlets e.g. pubs, night clubs, restaurants, sports clubs, supermarkets and bottle stores;

• identify conditions able to be placed on licences to minimise alcohol-related harm.

However, a LAP is only one of 11 criteria that a District Licensing Committee must have regard to in its decision-making and currently the provisions do not apply to existing licenses (apart from provisions reducing the maximum trading hours). Whilst a District Licensing Committee could impose conditions on a new licence to reflect the provisions of LAP, the LAP provisions do not automatically apply.


22

The biggest difficulty is the wide ground on which a LAP can be appealed and the costs councils face in defending appeals and subsequent legal avenues available to appellants. The promises of increased community input through the adoption of a LAP is largely to be realised.

The “reasonableness” test able to be applied to LAP provisions via an appeal, largely renders local preferences ultra vires. Community preferences need to be based on robust foundation evidence, which can be difficult to obtain. There is also no ability to include a “sinking lid” provision as there is with regard to Class 4 Gaming policies.

While the ability to establish a local alcohol licensing framework has been devolved to councils, it has not been accompanied by the required authority and resources. As a result, the majority of LAPs so far developed have been appealed by alcohol industry groups and, in most cases, have resulted in adopted LAPs which closely align with national legislation.

As Alcohol Healthwatch states, ‘the devolution of policy-making to local governments with limited financial and personnel resources to fight appeals appears to have been, in the most part, an impossible ask’. The lack of provisions within many of the adopted LAPs (and the requirement for District Licensing Committees to only have regard to an LAP in decision-making) creates a significant burden on communities to be involved in individual licensing decisions.

No council would advocate for a LAP process that is not fair, appropriate and robust, but the current ability for appellants to endlessly challenge a community’s preferences regarding the sale of alcohol is untenable.


From 2012 to 2017, the Christchurch City Council followed the current provisions of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 to introduce a LAP in Christchurch. Once a provisional LAP was adopted and notified, 19 appeals were filed. There were also eight interested parties. At considerable expense, the Council entered into a mediation process with all 19 appellants and eventually resolved 17 of the 19 appeals. Following conclusion of the mediation process, one appellant filed judicial review proceedings against the Council in relation to the failure to take into account an implied planning consideration. Ultimately the judicial review proceedings were successful. Following those proceedings, with the effluxion of time and no end date in sight, the Council decided to abandon its LAP process.

Overall, the Council’s costs were in the order of $1.1 million. The majority of costs were incurred during the mediation process, judicial review proceedings and during the preparation for the appeals.

Suggested actions are as follows:

1. Review the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act to ensure community views are able to be reflected in a LAP

– repeal or review section 81 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012; and/ or – add a new subclause to section 4 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the

Object of the Act) “the views and preferences of communities regarding local alcohol licensing matters are appropriately responded to”.

2. Request the Government explore policy levers to address alcohol-related harm that are

available to it but that aren’t able to be included in a LAP. These include:

– review of the minimum age for purchasing alcohol – consideration of minimum pricing – consideration of changes to the taxing of alcohol


23

– consideration of providing funding to local authorities to offset the cost of LAP development


This issue relates to LGNZ’s Social Issues portfolio, which is:

Working alongside central government and iwi to address social issues in our communities including an ageing population, disparity between social groups, housing (supply and quality) and community safety.

It can be said that good alcohol policy plays a strong role in preserving and improving community safety.

The issues with establishing LAPs have been identified by other councils, which we understand are also planning on submitting draft remits to the LGNZ Annual General Meeting on this issue.


The Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 provides for councils to develop a LAP if they wish. The Act details the matters able to be addressed through a LAP, which are limited to maximum opening hours and location of licensed premises as well as providing for the requirement of one-way-door provisions for on-license premises and special conditions to apply.

The Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Renewal of Licences) Amendment Bill (No 2) is currently before the House. This Bill addresses an anomaly in the current Act that effectively provides existing use rights for licences in place before a LAP is adopted and makes the introduction of amended trading hours through a LAP problematic. The Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority (ARLA) has overturned the introduction of amended trading hours via LAPs on the basis they can't be applied to all licenses on an equal basis - due to existing licenses not being covered until renewal is required.

The Bill will address the practical issue of introducing new maximum trading hours but does not address the lack of weight able to be given to community preferences in an LAP or the seemingly low bar for reasonableness being applied by ARLA when considering appeals.


As noted above, the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Renewal of Licences) Amendment Bill (No. 2) is currently before the House. However, from the Christchurch City Council’s point of view, the Bill doesn’t adequately address the lack of weight that can be given to community preferences in an LAP or the definition of ‘reasonableness’ of appeals.


Supported – suggested wording amended to ensure any changes to the Act deal with the proliferation of off-licenses as the LAP is not working. This amendment has been made.

Moved/Seconded: A.Turner/R.Wallace


24

7 Biofuels

Remit: That LGNZ encourages the Government to investigate options to support the use of biodiesel such as financial incentives; tax offsets; subsidies to bio-diesel manufacturers; and/or subsidies to renewable fuel manufacturers; and/or subsidies at the pump, in order to support the valuable New Zealand industries developing alternative and low carbon fuels.



Hutt City Council




With the decrease of global oil prices, and All-of-Government contracts negotiated on behalf of councils for the supply of diesel, the price councils now pay for diesel is substantially lower than the price of alternative fuels, such as biodiesel. While the lower cost of diesel is beneficial to councils and other consumers in the short- to medium-term, it is at the expense of the development of alternative fuels and associated technologies, and is acting against councils’ activities in other areas to reduce emissions.


In November 2017, Christchurch City Council’s Infrastructure, Transport and Environment Committee received a deputation from a biofuel supplier in New Zealand, which raised concerns about the impact of lower diesel prices on the alternative fuels industry. Following the deputation, the Committee requested that the Council write to the Minister for Greater Christchurch Regeneration, Hon Dr Megan Woods, to raise the issue. The letter invited the Government to consider potential solutions to support the use of bio-diesel and alternative fuels through mechanisms such as tax offsets, financial incentives for using bio-diesel, a subsidy to bio-diesel manufacturers, and or subsidies at the pump.

At the time of writing, the Christchurch City Council had not received a response from the Minister. Further interest from LGNZ in this area may stimulate further discussion or action in this area.


25


This issue is very connected with LGNZ’s Climate Change Project, as increasing the amount of alternative fuels used will meaningfully contribute to the reduction of emissions. The proposed remit is also aligned with the 2017 Local Government Leaders’ Climate Change Declaration, where signatories committed to ‘encourage Government to be more ambitious with climate change mitigation measures.’


The most recent work carried out by central government organisations relating to biofuels relates to information provision. The Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority has a repository of information on its websites relating to biofuel and bioenergy, providing information for drivers, businesses, researchers and biofuel producers on its website. In addition, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment publishes standards for biofuel quality requirements on its website.


There is no existing relevant legislation, policy or practice on this matter, likely driven by the perceived lack of need and therefore the diminished commercial viability of biofuels at this stage.

Previously, the Biodiesel Grants Scheme ran from 1 July 2009 to 30 June 2012. The Scheme aimed to kick start the biodiesel production industry in New Zealand. With the decreased cost of diesel, the commercial viability of biofuels was diminished, and the fund was discontinued.


Remit supported as package that dealt with Climate Change

Moved/Seconded: A.Turner/G.Brownless


26

8 Walking the talk – single use plastics

Remit:

• That LGNZ asks central government to urgently develop and implement a plan to eliminate the use of single-use plastic bags and plastic straws.

• That LGNZ encourage member councils take steps to phase out the use of single-use plastic bags and straws at council facilities and events.





The environmental impact of single-use plastics has been well-traversed. Many studies and media reports have documented the risk to birds and sea-life and the proliferation of plastic-derived toxins and micro-particles in the seas, lakes and rivers from plastic bags that have been improperly disposed of.

It is estimated that New Zealanders use 1.6 billion single-use plastic bags each year, with each bag used for an average of 12 minutes before being disposed of. Plastic straws are similarly ephemeral, with an estimated 541 million straws thrown away by New Zealanders each year.

The extent of the issues posed by single-use plastic bags and plastic straws is such that a multi-pronged approach is required from central government, local councils, and citizens and should focus on limiting the use of single-use plastics and promoting responsible recycling.


This issue relates to LGNZ’s third policy priority, Environment:

Leading, in collaboration with others, the challenge of enhancing environmental qualities, protecting freshwater resources and biodiversity and addressing the impacts of climate change and other threats.

As noted above, single-use plastics present real risks to New Zealand’s water quality, biodiversity, and water-based fauna in particular. Reducing the use of single-use plastics, even


27

in a non-regulatory sense, will go a long way to reduce the volume of plastic waste that ends up in our waterways.


It is noted that a number of Mayors and Councillors from across the country were signatories to the aforementioned petition delivered to Parliament in February 2018.

Prior to this, in July 2017, LGNZ wrote to the previous Associate Minister for the Environment, Hon Scott Simpson, calling for the Government to introduce a levy on single use plastic bags. The letter was based on a remit to the 2015 LGNZ Annual General Meeting, which was supported by 89 percent of councils. This was intended to deter people from using single-use plastic bags, and was intended to, in time, reduce the number of bags that needed to be produced.

At the time, the then Associate Minister maintained his stance against a legislative approach, and instead undertook to establish a working group to explore options for reducing plastic bag consumption.

It is apparent that the plan to establish the working group was overtaken by the subsequent Foodstuffs and Progressive Enterprises announcements that they would be phasing out single-use plastic bags by the end of 2018.

At a local level, the Christchurch City Council received a staff report in 2016, further to a 1,500+ signature strong local petition that called on the Council to ban single-use plastic bags. The staff recommendations, later resolved by Council, encouraged the Council to champion non-regulatory initiatives, such as:

a. Taking a leadership role by reducing where the Council itself uses plastic bags, such as in libraries and at Council-run events

b. Expanding community education about alternatives

c. Advocating to central government for a national response

Staff advice was that non-regulatory initiatives were preferable to a regulatory approach due to the limitations of the bylaw-making powers available to the Council and the practical difficulties of enforcing any bylaw banning single-use plastic bags. It was also determined that if regulatory reform was to occur, broader, nationwide action would be more appropriate as the issue is a matter of concern for the whole country.


Single-use plastic bags

The Associate Minister for the Environment, Eugenie Sage, has recently requested advice from officials on banning plastic bags, after a 65,000 signature-strong petition was delivered to Parliament in February 2018. The timeframe for when the Minister will consider this advice is


28

not yet known, nor are the options or next steps. It is suggested that LGNZ continues to push for central government action in this space, to maintain the momentum that has gathered to date.

New Zealand’s two largest supermarket chains, Foodstuffs and Progressive Enterprises, are leading non-regulatory efforts to reduce the use of single-use plastic bags, announcing last year that they plan to phase out all single-use plastic bags in their respective New World and Countdown supermarkets by the end of 2018. Other large retailers, such as Bunnings, have adopted similar approaches by choosing to phase out plastic bags based on community interest.

In conjunction with the Packaging Forum, supermarkets are also continuing to promote a soft plastics recycling scheme, initiated in 2015 with support from the Government’s Waste Minimisation Fund.

Following a Council decision in 2016, the Christchurch City Council has opted to take a non-regulatory approach to reducing the use of single-use plastic bags in Christchurch by:

a. reducing the number of plastic bags it uses itself at Council-run events and at libraries;

b. expanding its community education about waste minimisation;

c. working proactively with retailers; and

d. including more environmental considerations in its procurement policy.

Plastic straws

It’s estimated that over 800 straws are given out weekly by some bars and restaurants, and Sustainable Coastlines has stated previously that straws, or parts of straws, are one of the top five items found during beach clean ups.

Non-regulatory approaches are underway to reduce the use of plastic straws. Examples include:

a. Wellington City Council, which has been working with local communities and Sustainable Coastlines to raise awareness of the impact of plastic straws, with the aim of reducing usage overall.

b. Mackenzie District Council, which has been driving a change of habit by encouraging local hospitality operators to provide straws only on-request.

c. Industry-led initiatives, such as that led by Hospitality NZ, which is encouraging bars and restaurants to stop offering straws automatically with every drink; and switch to biodegradable paper or reusable straws where possible.





29

9 A mandatory register of cooling towers

Remit:

1. That LGNZ acknowledges the potentially fatal risks posed by legionella bacteria in industrial water cooling towers used for air conditioning and manufacturing;

2. That LGNZ asks central government to resume its work related to reducing the risks posed by legionella bacteria in industrial water cooling towers. This could include:

• Amending the Building Act 2004 and/or the Building (Specified Systems, Change the Use, and Earthquake-prone Buildings) Regulations 2005 to collect information for a mandatory register of cooling towers and a mandatory testing and reporting regime.

• Providing enforcement powers to councils to address the risks associated with cooling towers such as requiring regular testing, reporting and compliance with specified standards under Building Warrant of Fitness certification.

• Requiring medical professionals to report cases of legionellosis (Legionnaires Disease) to local District Health Boards’ Medical Officers of Health (as is required with Campylobacter outbreaks)..



Hutt City Council




Every few years Legionnaires’ disease dominates headlines for a period as another "outbreak" occurs. In order to assist preventing such outbreaks we propose a mandatory nation-wide register of cooling towers to be updated annually, and overseen by the Ministry of Health via District Health Boards.

Regulatory action is required to help combat instances of legionellosis from water-based sources. Mandatory testing and reporting regimes will help building owners and authorities to ascertain the health of specific water cooling towers and will enable early intervention if


30

unacceptable levels of legionella bacteria are found to be present. A mandatory register of water cooling towers’ locations will help healthcare professionals to isolate sources of legionellosis outbreaks, and will aid them to reach potentially affected individuals and communities in a timely manner.


Legionella bacteria from the wet surfaces of water cooling towers, evaporative condensers (cooling plant) and scrubbers can cause a pneumonia called Legionnaires’ disease, which is often severe and can be fatal. Although this is a nationwide issue, this issue is of particular concern to Christchurch City Council after in 2005, an outbreak of 19 cases of Legionnaires’ disease (legionellosis) led to the deaths of three Christchurch citizens. The subsequent coronial investigation into their deaths in 2007 recommended better regulation of industrial, water-based cooling towers, with monthly testing and a mandatory register of cooling towers’ locations to help pin-point sources of legionella bacteria more readily. The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment undertook to act on these recommendations at the time. However work to establish a testing regime and register seems to have been paused recently.

Outbreaks of legionellosis in New Zealand are sporadic but the disease’s impact is often severe. Approximately 240 people contract legionellosis each year. This figure includes people who contract legionellosis from soil or potting mix, as well as those who contract the disease from water-based sources. One-third of patients with legionellosis become unwell enough to warrant admission to intensive care units1. The medical and social cost of the disease is consequently high.

Citizens are becoming increasingly aware of the risks posed by handing soil or potting mix after a number of well-publicised cases of legionellosis. However, the spread of the disease from water-based sources is more difficult to avoid or mitigate against, due to the comparatively ‘invisible’ nature. The spread of legionella from water-based sources is more insidious than cases caused by exposure to potting mix. This is because the source of the bacteria is not as readily identifiable by health professionals during a routine examination and patients can sometimes be misdiagnosed with other respiratory infections.


As noted above, the Coroner made a number of recommendations to the Ministry of Health, District Health Boards and to the Government as part of their 2007 investigation into the deaths of three Christchurch residents from legionellosis:

To the Ministry of Health and District Health Boards:

(i) That the Legionellosis case definition for New Zealand be reviewed in light of the testing methods now available.

1 https://www.nzdoctor.co.nz/in-print/2014/november-2014/5-november-2014/legionnaires%E2%80%99-disease-likely-not-just-a-canterbury-phenomenon.aspx


https://www.nzdoctor.co.nz/in-print/2014/november-2014/5-november-2014/legionnaires%E2%80%99-disease-likely-not-just-a-canterbury-phenomenon.aspx

https://www.nzdoctor.co.nz/in-print/2014/november-2014/5-november-2014/legionnaires%E2%80%99-disease-likely-not-just-a-canterbury-phenomenon.aspx

31

(ii) That appropriate samples where clinically indicated be collected for Legionella culture and PCR testing from suspected Legionellosis cases. Bronchial washing, bronchoalveolar washing laveage, pleural fluid, sputum, or lung tissue specimens are regarded as appropriate samples for Legionella culture and PCR testing. All these clinical samples where available should be forwarded to the Legionella Reference Laboratory for purposes of national surveillance of the disease.

(iii) That if they have not already done so, District Health Boards consider including the urinary antigen test in the range of tests for Legionellosis.

To the Government through it appropriate Departments and Ministries: - that it gives consideration to legislation and/or regulatory amendments to achieve the following outcomes:

(i) That the owners and/or operators of all cooling towers be required to register the towers with their Territorial Authorities.

(ii) That Territorial Authorities create and maintain a single database of all cooling towers for heating and ventilating systems for both commercial and industrial processes.

(iii) That all cooling towers, whether commercial or industrial, be brought within the Compliance Schedule/Building Warrant of Fitness regime administered by Territorial Authorities.

(iv) That cooling towers be classified as a separate class of specified system for the Compliance Schedule/Building Warrant of Fitness regime.

(v) That it be mandatory for all new and existing cooling towers to comply with AS/NZS 3666 or other comparable standard and that NZS 4303 no longer be optional for any towers, with pre 2004 towers that do not now comply being required to up-grade within a specified period.

(vi) That testing for Legionella be undertaken at least monthly to AS/NZS 3896 and AS 4276.3.1 by an IANZ biologically accredited laboratory.

(vii) That it be mandatory for the laboratories to notify Legionella test results greater than, or equal to, 100 cfu/ml within 48 hours to the local Medical Officer of Health, and the required control strategy from Table 3.1 of AS/NZS 3666.3 be implemented by the owner or operator.

(viii) That Territorial Authorities and Medical Officers of Health be given powers to audit testing and test results and to ensure that appropriate corrective action is taken following results that do not meet the standard.2

From our understanding, these recommendations have not been substantively addressed by central government in the 10 years since the Coroner’s findings were released. In 2015, the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment stated that cooling towers were covered by Health and Safety guidelines and that it was up to councils to create their own registers3.

2 FINDING OF CORONER T L SAVAGE IN THE MATTER of Inquests into the Death of ROSS ANDREW HERN, PETER RUSSELL JONES, VALMAI MARJORIE FINLAYSON (April 2008) 3 https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/290386/still-no-action-on-coroner's-legionnaires-call


https://www.radionz.co.nz/news/national/290386/still-no-action-on-coroner's-legionnaires-call

32

In 2015 Auckland Council introduced its own bylaw that requires all industrial cooling towers to be registered, tested and regularly maintained. One of the purposes of the Property Maintenance and Nuisance Bylaw is to:

c) protect, promote and maintain public health and safety by requiring all industrial cooling tower water systems in Auckland to be registered with the council and regularly tested and where appropriate maintained to mitigate against the risk of exposure to Legionella bacteria often linked to outbreaks of Legionnaire’s disease.

Given the bylaw was introduced relatively recently, its efficacy is not yet widely known. It must be noted that for some councils, the cost and resource required to introduce a bylaw to address the risks of industrial cooling towers may be prohibitive. In addition, councils will need to ensure that any bylaws are consistent with and do not supercede the requirements of the relevant legislation (e.g. the Building Act 2004 or the Building (Specified Systems, Change the Use, and Earthquake-prone Buildings) Regulations 2005).


The Building (Specified Systems, Change the Use, and Earthquake-prone Buildings) Regulations 2005 refer to mechanical ventilation and air conditioning systems in the definition of ‘specified systems’. Under the Regulations, if a building has a ‘specified system’, the relevant Building Consent Authority will issue a Compliance Schedule that sets out the inspection, testing and maintenance requirements for the system. Building owners must maintain the systems in accordance with the Compliance Schedule, issuing a Building Warrant of Fitness to the Territorial Authority each year confirming that this has been done. The Regulations go some way in addressing the risks of ventilation and air conditioning systems harbouring bacteria, such as legionella, however industrial cooling towers are not included as a specified system and are therefore not subject to a compliance schedule. Industrial cooling towers are instead governed by Health and Safety at Work legislation, which is less prescriptive in its approach and does not require Compliance Schedules to be adhered to in the same way.





https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/bylaws/current-bylaws/Pages/property-maintenance-and-nuisance-bylaw.aspx

https://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/plans-projects-policies-reports-bylaws/bylaws/current-bylaws/Pages/property-maintenance-and-nuisance-bylaw.aspx

33

10 Copper in brake pads

Remit: That LGNZ calls for central government to introduce legislation to limit or eliminate the copper content of vehicle brake pads to reduce contaminants in our urban waterways.

Proposed by: Environment Canterbury

Supported by: Regional Sector

1. Background information and research


Many urban centres have some level of waterway degradation as a result of urbanisation. Stormwater runoff is the major source of copper and other metals.

A necessary part of any water quality measurement strategy is to reduce or eliminate contaminates at the source. Some sources can be management at a regional or local level with bylaws and district plans, however, the control mechanisms available to a local authority are not sufficient to tackle copper. The remit seeks central government action.


Research and modelling from various parts on New Zealand indicates that brake pads are the dominate source of copper in urban waterways. Many brake linings contain copper or bronze chips or powder to improve braking properties and provide mechanical strength. The debris worn from brake linings may be retained within the brake pad housing or released onto the road. Brake pad dust is frequently washed from wheels into the storm water network when a vehicle is cleaned.

Research shows that end-of-pipe stormwater treatment practices such treatment basins, swales and filters are insufficient to achieve the outcomes sought. Therefore, councils across New Zealand see a need for national-scale mechanisms to take the most effective action to remove copper from stormwater.



34

In 2010, both Washington and California passed legislation-requiring brake pads sold or installed to have reduced levels of copper and other heavy metals. There is no such legislation in New Zealand.


The issue fits under LGNZ’s priority 3 – Environment: leading, in collaboration with others, the challenge of enhancing environmental qualities, protecting freshwater resources and biodiversity and addressing the impacts of climate change and other threats.

The issue fits within water 2050 Work stream 2: Water Quality.


The Christchurch City Council, Environment Canterbury and the Canterbury Water Management Strategy’s Christchurch Melton Zone Committee are closely collaborating to improve water quality outcomes. These groups have worked together to investigate the issue and possible solutions. More detailed analysis is available should it be required.

Wet weather data that is available – from limited monitoring that has occurred during wet weather and from research by NIWA, Canterbury University and other centres – indicated that copper concentrations in storm water runoff are two to ten times in Canterbury land and water regional plan water quality standard. Research elsewhere suggests that is will be the case for most large urban centres.

Modelling software developed at the University of Canterbury was used in a study of urban catchment in Christchurch. It defined large carparks and highly trafficked roads as primary contributors of total suspended solids, and highly trafficked roads and industrial carparks as primary contributors of copper. Modelling also showed:

• Removal of copper contributors onto roads ad carparks via implementation of copper-free brake pads is predicted to have significant reduction (78%) on catchment copper loads.

Copper free and low-copper brake pads are available for sale in New Zealand but there is no one source of information in New Zealand and there are varying prices and quality for all brake pads. Unlike in the US and Europe there is no requirement for labelling. As an importer of brake pads, New Zealand could easily achieve a ‘quick win’ for water quality by restricting imports to low copper or copper free brake pads with no significant implications for New Zealand industries. The United States Environment Protection Agency (in 2015) committed to reduce copper in brake pads to less than 0.5 percent by 2025.


35


Environment Canterbury proposed the remit at the 4 May Regional Sector meeting and sought support from members. The remit is:

LGNZ calls for central government to introduce legislation to limit or eliminate the copper content of vehicle brake pads.

The remit was supported unanimously by the members present.


That LGNZ work with central government to raise the issue and advocate for legislation change.


36

11 Reducing the waste stream

Remit: That LGNZ asks central government to address the China National Sword issue (action 1) and implement the local government waste manifesto (actions 2 -6), to reduce New Zealand’s waste by:

1. adopting a New Zealand-wide strategic approach to the collection, and processing of recyclable materials within New Zealand;

2. reviewing the New Zealand Waste Strategy and align, where practicable, with the “Local Government Waste Management Manifesto” to set a clear programme for action;

3. expanding the Waste Disposal Levy and progressively raise the levy rate in order to reduce total waste to landfills;

4. officially adopting the National Waste Data Framework and oversee its implementation to enable better planning and monitoring;

5. establishing a container deposit scheme in consultation with local government in order to lift recycling rates; and

6. declaring tyres, e-waste, agricultural chemicals and plastics, as priority products under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, to address problem waste streams.

Proposed by: Wellington City Council and Christchurch City Council

Supported by: Zone Four



On 1 January 2018, a Chinese ban on foreign waste came into effect, meaning that all plastic, slag, unsorted waste paper and textile products that were once sent to China for processing needed to be sent somewhere else. The change in policy, made by the Chinese government for environmental reasons, has had a significant impact on global recycling processing companies, which have had to find alternative processing facilities (generally shifting operations to South East Asia). The issue being the low prices paid for the product

In the New Zealand context, it is estimated that seven of the 41 million kilograms of plastic waste exported from New Zealand to other countries in 2017 was sent to China (with the


37

balance being sent Hong Kong (13.5m kilogram), Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and Vietnam (19 million kilograms))[1].

At the time, the Ministry for the Environment provided a statement noting that options included finding alternative markets for these materials overseas, or improving on-shore processing. While committed to the idea of increasing processing of recyclable materials in New Zealand, the Associate Minister for the Environment, Hon Eugenie Sage, has so far declined the suggestion of using Ministry for the Environment funds to build a recycling processing facility in New Zealand, suggesting instead that funding other companies that are already doing this work would be preferable. However, processing recyclables is a low margin business built on the economies of scale, which cannot readily be achieved in New Zealand.

With a council-by-council approach to solid waste collection, processing and disposal, it is unlikely that the necessary economies of scale needed to profit from recyclables processing in New Zealand can be achieved. Central government direction is required to develop a New Zealand-wide approach to recyclables processing.


Waste minimisation, including through recycling and reduction in waste to landfill, is a key aspect of addressing the risks of climate change, which is a key area of work for LGNZ.

LGNZ Climate Change Project promotes a collaborative approach between local and central government to address the risks, challenges and opportunities of climate change. As noted above, local government is unlikely to achieve the required economies of scale to improve the volume of recyclables processed in New Zealand, given the council-by-council model of contracting services relating to recyclables. Therefore, a national approach is warranted.


Some smaller scale recyclables processing plants are already operating in New Zealand, such as Flight Plastics in Lower Hutt, which processes PET plastic from plastic bottles, recycling it into punnets for fruit and other similar products. The $12 million plant was opened in August 2017 with the aid of a $4 million grant from the Government’s Waste Minimisation Fund, which made it a more feasible proposal. Smaller operators have contested the economic realities of establishing similar infrastructure for other types of plastics.

WasteMINZ, New Zealand’s largest representative body of the waste, resource recovery, and contaminated land sectors is working with councils and the Ministry for the Environment to understand the impact of the Chinese policy change; the availability of other markets for recyclables processing; and the potential for increasing recyclables processing in New Zealand. Christchurch City Council’s Solid Waste Manager has been invited to a summit on the issue, held in May, which may inform the next steps and an approach to central government.


38


Collecting solid waste is a core requirement for councils, set out in the Local Government Act 2002. However, how waste is collected; whether recyclables are separated; and how waste is processed is up to councils to decide.



The following documents may be requested from LGNZ for further background:

• Local Government Waste Manifesto (WasteMINZ) • Rebooting Recycling – What Can Aotearoa Do? (WasteMINZ)


39

12 Tyres stewardship

Remit: That LGNZ requests that the Government urgently implements a comprehensive and mandatory product stewardship programme for tyres.

Proposed by: Palmerston North City Council



Proposal

The proposal put forward is “that LGNZ requests that the Government urgently implements a comprehensive and mandatory product stewardship programme for tyres”.

Background

Under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, the Minister for the Environment can declare a product to be a priority product. When this happens, a product stewardship scheme becomes mandatory and the priority product must be managed through accredited product stewardship schemes. No products have been designated as priority products by any Minister for the Environment, and thus far only voluntary product stewardship schemes exist in New Zealand.

There are three criteria which must be met for the Minster to declare a priority product:

• the product will or may cause significant environmental harm when it becomes waste, or

• there are significant benefits from reduction, reuse, recycling, recovery, or treatment of the product, and

• the product can be effectively managed under a product stewardship scheme.

In 2012 an industry-led Tyrewise initiative was developed to provide a framework for the development of a stewardship programme. In 2018 the Tyrewise model was broadly endorsed by the Local Government Waste Management Manifesto, developed by the Territorial Authority Forum, a local government group representing 64 city and district councils.

In 2014 the Ministry for the Environment consulted on Priority waste streams for product stewardship intervention: A discussion document. In the Foreward to this document, the then Minister for the Environment, Hon Amy Adams noted that:

[s]ince passing the WMA five years ago, the Government has encouraged voluntary product stewardship efforts as a first priority. Over this time, 11 voluntary product stewardship schemes have been accredited by the Minister for the Environment. Nearly 34,000 tonnes of waste per year is being diverted from landfill for recycling or safe destruction under these schemes. This is an excellent start,


40

but in quantity is equivalent to only 1.4 per cent of the total waste stream going to disposal facilities which pay the waste disposal levy. There is an opportunity to foster greater progress in waste minimisation and resource reuse through improved producer responsibility. In my view, the time has come to consider appropriate mandatory approaches for selected priority waste streams.”

The priority products proposed in the discussion document were:

1. electrical and electronic equipment 2. tyres 3. agricultural chemicals and farm plastics 4. refrigerants and other synthetic greenhouse gases.

Pages 19-22 of the Government’s 2014 discussion document, addressing the proposed tyre scheme, are attached to this report. Around 70% of submitters on the discussion document were in favour of tyres being a priority for the Government to consider regulatory interventions.

In 2015, the Waste Minimisation Fund was targeted at applications that would help solve the end-of-life tyre problem in New Zealand. Nine projects received $18.7 million from the Waste Minimisation Fund, for a variety of projects aiming to collect, shred, and recycle tyres.

No further action was taken by the 2014-2017 National-led Government towards the declaration of tyres as a priority product under the Waste Minimisation Act.

The establishment of a tyre stewardship fund is included in the Coalition agreement between Labour and New Zealand First. In January 2018 Hon Eugenie Sage, the Associate Minister for the Environment, confirmed the new government’s intention to consider product stewardship schemes as part of a review of the implementation of the Waste Minimisation Act.

Discussion

The Ministry for the Environment has shown that there is both the demonstrated need for measures to address the tyre problem, and also widespread industry support for a mandatory product stewardship scheme. The Tyrewise initiative makes a strong case for the viability of a mandatory scheme, and this approach is endorsed by local government experts.

Under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, the Government is able to declare tyres as a priority product. This declaration would require the development of a mandatory product stewardship scheme. A mandatory stewardship scheme would provide a comprehensive approach to tyre waste, and be a significant development for New Zealand.

While the mechanism for a mandatory product stewardship scheme currently exists under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, the Council notes that a review of the implementation of this Act has been signalled by the Government. The current remit proposal, therefore, simply requests that the Government urgently develops a comprehensive and mandatory product stewardship programme for tyres.

This remit proposal meets the LGNZ requirement of relevance to local government as a whole. It also meets the second LGNZ requirement as it addresses a major policy issue.


Information Report

To: Council





Subject: Financial Report for the period to 31 May 2018


Summary The attached report shows the financial results of Council’s activities for the eleven months to 31 May 2018.

Summary for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual ($ 000's)

YTD Budget ($ 000's)

% of YTD Budget

YTD Variance ($ 000's)

Annual Budget ($ 000's)

Expenditure Leadership 2,545 2,648 96.1% 103 3,097

Networks 17,454 16,409 106.4% (1,045) 19,623

Community Services 5,392 5,018 107.5% (374) 5,892

Community Development 1,815 1,764 102.9% (51) 2,101

Regulatory 3,628 3,332 108.9% (296) 3,667

Total Cost of Service 30,834 29,171 105.7% (1,663) 34,380

Less Revenue Leadership (2) 0 0.0% 2 0

Networks (4,138) (3,583) 115.5% 555 (3,885)

Community Services (558) (544) 102.6% 14 (604)

Community Development 0 0 0.0% 0 0

Regulatory (1,527) (1,418) 107.7% 109 (1,543)

Total Revenue (6,225) (5,545) 112.3% 680 (6,032)

Net Cost of Service 24,609 23,626 104.2% (983) 28,348


Activity Expenditure v. Budget ($000’s) Eleven months to May 2018

Operating Overview: For the eleven months to May, the Net Cost of Service is $983k (April = $1,100k) more than budget. The $117k improvement compared to April is as a result of around $51,000 increased revenue and $66k savings in Spending. Community Services and Regulatory is the only two groups having an adverse effect of $21k and $30k respectively. Details of the various activities shown in Appendix A. Balance Sheet Overview

Following are some Key Financial Indicators as at 31 May 2018:

Cash on hand April May BNZ $0.5m $3.7m Westpac $2.3m $0.3m Available Credit Facility BNZ $7.0m $7.0m Fixed term investment Westpac $0.0m $2.5m BNZ $0.0m $0.0m Total Available Funds $9.8m $13.5m Borrowing LGFA (long term borrowing) $27.0m $27.0m LGFA (short term borrowing) $11.0m $11.0m BNZ (short term borrowing) $ 0.0m $ 0.0m

Total $38.0m $38.0m Council’s cash flows remain more consistent than previous years. This is partly due to now having four quarterly instalments, rather than the three unevenly spaced instalments of the past.

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

20,000

Leadership Networks CommunityServices

CommunityDevelopment

Regulatory

Actual

Budget YTD


Debtors Water Rates Property Rates April May April May Current $0.9m $1.0m $5.7m $1.5m Arrears $0.5m $0.5m $1.2m $1.2m In Advance -$0.4m -$0.4m -$0.3m -$0.5m Total $1.0m $1.1m $6.6m $2.2m The current property rates balance reduced due to the 4th instalment due date being 30 May 2018. Duncan Peddie GROUP MANAGER CORPORATE SERVICES


Summary of Leadership for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenditure Democracy 1,809 1,805 100.3% (5) 2,101 Iwi Liaison 51 61 84.4% 10 72 Policy Development 684 782 87.4% 98 923 Total Cost of Service 2,545 2,648 96.1% 103 3,097

Less Revenue Democracy (1) 0 0% 1 0 Policy Development (2) 0 0% 2 0 Total Revenue (2) 0 0.0% 2 0

Net Cost of Service 2,542 2,648 96.0% 106 3,097

Notes to Report:

Democracy for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses 1 Democracy 1,809 1,805 100.3% (5) 2,101

Total Cost of Service 1,809 1,805 100.3% (5) 2,101

Less Revenue Democracy Income (1) 0 0.0% 1 0

Total Revenue (1) 0 0.0% 1 0


Notes to Report:

1 LGNZ 2016/17 subscription ($28k) was not expensed until the current year.

Iwi Liaison for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Iwi Liaison 51 61 84.4% 10 72

Total Cost of Service 51 61 84.4% 10 72

Net Cost of Service 51 61 84.4% 10 72


Policy Development for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses 2 RMA Policy 233 316 73.9% 83 344

3 Strategic Planning 451 467 96.6% 16 579

Total Cost of Service 684 782 87.4% 98 923

Less Revenue Policy Development Income (2) 0 0.0% 2 0



Notes to Report:

2 Work has now commenced on the Plan reviews. We expect to end around $80k under budget.

3 Forecast saving largely due to funds set aside for regional plans and strategies not being required.

Council input was done via internal staff time.


Summary of Regulatory for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenditure Animal Control 471 443 106.3% (28) 482 Building Services 1,263 1,143 110.5% (120) 1,243 Community Protection 952 804 118.5% (148) 912 RMA Implementation 942 942 100.0% (0) 1,029 Total Cost of Service 3,628 3,332 108.9% (296) 3,667

Less Revenue Animal Control (311) (277) 112.0% 33 (287) Building Services (643) (573) 112.3% 70 (625) Community Protection (143) (97) 147.4% 46 (106) RMA Implementation (430) (470) 91.4% (41) (525) Total Revenue (1,527) (1,418) 107.7% 109 (1,543)


Animal Control for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses 1 Animal Control 471 443 106.3% (28) 482

Total Cost of Service 471 443 106.3% (28) 482

Less Revenue 1 Animal Control Income (311) (277) 112.0% 33 (287)

Total Revenue (311) (277) 112.0% 33 (287)


Notes to Report:

1 Animal Control - The June 17 Animal Control invoice ($22k) was not accrued in 16/17 which has resulted in a corresponding overspend this year. However this is offset by $33k more income from fines.


Building Services for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses 2 Building Services 1,263 1,143 110.5% (120) 1,243


(73) Less Revenue 3 Building Services Income (643) (573) 112.3% 70 (625)

Total Revenue (643) (573) 112.3% 70 (625)

Net Cost of Service 620 570 108.7% (49) 618

Notes to Report:

2 Building Services - IANZ BCA audit and accreditation fees were $26k more than budgeted for. Unbudgeted WLASS costs of $21k were funded from the $200k prior year surplus set aside by Council resolution . There is $73k of external contractor and agency costs used to cover consent and inspection work more than budgeted for, but this has been offset by $70k of additional income.

3 Building Consent activity continues to be high.

Community Protection for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses 4 Community Protection 952 804 118.5% (148) 912


Less Revenue 5 Community Protection Income (143) (97) 147.4% 46 (106)

Total Revenue (143) (97) 147.4% 46 (106)


Notes to Report:

4 Emergency management exceeds budget due to the recent Kaiaua event costs of 171k. $57k of this spend should be recoverable from the Ministry of Civil Defence and this is shown in the income line. A significant tomo opened in Waihi and required remediation and additional work to be undertaken to an adjacent area to confirm that ground was sound. The reduced liquor licencing expenditure of $19k is offset by the $15k shortfall in liquor licensing income.

5 Income reflects the anticipated reimbursement from the Ministry of Civil Defence for the Kaiaua welfare

claim $57k. It is partially offset by reduced liquor licencing income of $16k.


RMA Implementation for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses RMA Implementation 942 942 100.0% (0) 1,029

Total Cost of Service 942 942 100.0% (0) 1,029

Less Revenue 6 RMA Income (430) (470) 91.4% (41) (525)

Total Revenue (430) (470) 91.4% (41) (525)


Notes to Report:

6 RMA Implementation - while the expenditure is showing that we are on budget there are still around $50k processing costs to incur that will impact this budget by year end. The $42k less income is due to fewer LIM applications and large resource consents than expected for the year. This gives a net effect of $41k over budget with more processing costs to incur.


Summary of Community Development for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenditure Community Growth 884 928 95.3% 44 1,039 Community Initiatives 931 836 111.4% (95) 1,061 Total Cost of Service 1,815 1,764 102.9% (51) 2,101

Less Revenue Community Growth 0 0 0.0% 0 0 Community Initiatives 0 0 0.0% 0 0 Total Revenue 0 0 0.0% 0 0


Community Growth for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Destination Coromandel 129 131 98.7% 2 132

1 Economic Development 322 338 95.2% 16 445

Go Waihi 111 111 100.0% (0) 112

2 Information Centres 182 206 88.6% 24 207

Positive Paeroa 123 125 98.4% 2 126

Positively Promoting the

Plains 17 18 97.2% 0 18

Total Cost of Service 884 928 95.3% 44 1,039

Less Revenue Income 0 0 0.0% 0 0

Total Revenue 0 0 0.0% 0 0

Net Cost of Service 884 928 95.3% 44 1,039

Notes to Report:

1 As per report to the CS&D Committee no projects have fulfilled the criteria for support. Therefore, the

Development Assistance funds will remain unspent for this year. 2 July and August contributions ($23k) paid in previous financial year and not accrued.


Community Initiatives for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Contestable Social Fund 36 36 100.0% 0 71

3 Cycleway Project 563 465 121.0% (98) 503

4 Grants and Donations 102 100 102.0% (2) 179

Other 129 131 97.9% 3 177

Social Initiatives 98 100 98.4% 2 126

Whiritoa Beachcare 4 4 100.0% 0 7

Whiritoa Surf Lifesaving Grant 0 0 0.0% 0 0

Total Cost of Service 931 836 111.4% (95) 1,061



Net Cost of Service 931 836 111.4% (95) 1,061

Notes to Report:

3 $42k relates to the Hauraki share of the trail and bridge repairs that were not budgeted. In addition to this, the Trust funding is $60k over budget due to Council funding additional overheads of the Trust, including the General Manager role. Both of these items were approved by Council.

4 Council granted a $15k donation to The Treasury in Thames. Total grants are $5k more than was

allowed for in the budget. This is funded by previous year underspends.


Summary of Community Services for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenditure Community Facilities 1,405 1,290 109.0% (116) 1,771 Recreation 3,987 3,728 106.9% (259) 4,121 Total Cost of Service 5,392 5,018 107.5% (375) 5,892

Less Revenue Community Facilities (427) (420) 101.8% 7 (469) Recreation (130) (124) 104.8% 6 (134) Total Revenue (558) (544) 102.5% 13 (604)


Community Facilities for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Interest 0 0 0.0% 0 270

1 Pensioner Housing 364 282 129.2% (82) 367

Public Toilets 455 463 98.3% 8 531

2 Cemeteries 374 312 120.2% (63) 345

3 Community Halls 212 234 90.6% 22 259


Less Revenue Income (427) (420) 101.8% 7 (469)

Total Revenue (427) (420) 101.8% 7 (469)

Net Cost of Service 978 870 112.4% (108) 1,302

Notes to Report:

1 Painting of junction road pension units ($64k) was not forecast for this year. Council has engaged APR to complete a pensioner housing strategy per Council instruction ($18k). This is a ring-fenced activity and will be funded through future revenue from pensioner housing.

2 • Paeroa cemetery ($35k over) o $5k Spent on refurbishing the Paeroa RSA cemetery offset by a grant of $5,700 from Veterans Affairs. o $4k Overspend on mowing as per increase in level of service requested by Council. o $7k Extremely wet conditions making burial activities very difficult o $5k Reactive works for RSA cemetery in preparation for 100 - year event. Instruction from Council to carry out work. o $14k Grounds and site gardens more than budget. • Waihi Cemetery ($27k over) o $9k Grounds and site gardens more than budget. o $2k Overspend on mowing as per increase in level of service requested by Council. o $3k Extremely wet conditions making burial activities very difficult. o $13k Over budget on routine servicing – $3.5k of this can be explained due to preparation for Anzac ceremony. • Kaiaua Cemetery (4k over) o $4k Extremely wet conditions making burial activities very difficult. • Ngatea Memorial Wall ($3k)


o $3k Update names on memorial wall for Anzac event.

3 Reactive repairs required to date is tracking below budget.

Recreation for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Libraries 1,000 1,042 96.0% 42 1,155

4 Recreation Reserves 1,645 1,354 121.5% (291) 1,540 Sports Co-Ordinator 101 102 99.0% 1 103

5 Sports Fields 509 510 99.9% 1 564

6 Swimming Pools 612 589 103.8% (22) 612

Events Centre 120 131 92.2% 10 147


Less Revenue Income (130) (124) 104.8% 6 (134)

Total Revenue (130) (124) 104.8% 6 (134)


Notes to Report:

4 • Town Centre Overspend - Paeroa overspent by 26k o $3,500 to replace Museum seat foundations o $4,200 to replace lawn and install umbrella stands at Post Office building o $14,821 footpath cleaning o $3,464 – activities associated with the Battle of the Streets • Town Centre Overspend – Waihi overspent by $15k) o $13,000 to replace gardens causing traffic visibility issues in Seddon St o $1,700 additional cleaning of the white tiles outside the Memorial Hall • Recreation Reserves Overspend (8k) o $1,100 to repair potholes in railway Reserve car park o $2,200 for tree planting in Railway Reserve o $1,100 for vegetation control in Waihi o $1,500 for the installation of Miners Memorial plaques at Gilmour Lake o $1,900 to remove an old swing frame from Victoria Park • Refuse collection overspent by 174k o Use of the Manco bins has increased the quantity of refuse being deposited. C&M unable to empty the bins at the budgeted rate. Their monthly charge is around $20k and the budget allows just over $5k. • Weather events overspent by $27k. o $21 January storm clean-up costs- Plains Ward o $5k January storm clean-up costs- Paeroa, Waihi Ward

5 $13k to demolish the old scout hall on the Hugh Hayward Domain and remove asbestos. $7k was recovered from the NZ Scout Assoc. in the 2016/17 financial year. Overspend in Domain is offset by savings ($12k) at the Grand stand where no routine maintenance was carried out.

6 Energy costs have a saving of around $31k due to the warmer season leading to a lower heating requirement. This was offset by annual assessments of each pool ($4k each) and additional maintenance ($14k). Extended pool season as per council resolution.


Summary of Networks for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenditure Land Drainage 1,084 1,055 102.8% (29) 1,026 Roading 7,811 6,922 112.8% (889) 8,152 Solid Waste 507 479 105.8% (28) 547 Stormwater 764 696 109.8% (68) 785 Wastewater 2,254 2,456 91.8% 202 3,187 Water 5,033 4,802 104.8% (232) 5,926 Total Cost of Service 17,454 16,409 106.4% (1,044) 19,623

Less Revenue Roading (3,752) (3,219) 116.6% 534 (3,511) Solid Waste (75) (83) 90.6% (8) (83) Stormwater 0 0 0.0% 0 0 Wastewater (305) (282) 108.4% 24 (291) Water (6) 0 0.0% 6 0 Total Revenue (4,138) (3,583) 115.5% 555 (3,885)


Land Drainage for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Depreciation 212 212 100.0% (0) 232

1 Floodgates 11 27 41.7% 16 29

Interest 0 0 0.0% 0 (150)

Maintenance/Fencing/Culverts 10 11 89.6% 1 12

2 Mechanical Cleaning 135 135 99.9% 0 180

3 Other 69 46 149.4% (23) 59

Overheads 203 203 100.0% (0) 222

4 Pumps 306 236 130.1% (71) 257

5 Vegetation Control 137 185 74.2% 48 185



Notes to Report:

1 No significant maintenance events have occurred, but there may be some of this saving spent in the

remaining months. 2 It is expected that the Mechanical Cleaning budget will come in on target.

3 A peer review on AMPs was undertaken by Morrison Low which was not budgeted for.

4 The Pumps budget has exceeded budget and this will continue to worsen this financial year due to the recent weather events. The budget is based on a rolling 5-year average and is difficult to profile as it is rainfall based - likely to be $80k overspent if we get further significant events in June.

5 Any further expenditure here is unlikely as the weather has ostensibly brought this work to an end.


Roading for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Roading Interest 0 0 0.0% 0 612

Administration 421 421 100.0% (0) 459

6 Amenity Maintenance 445 396 112.5% (49) 436

Depreciation 2,729 2,725 100.1% (4) 2,973

7 Non-Subsidised Works 397 377 105.2% (20) 424

8 Other Subsidised 1,526 1,219 125.2% (307) 1,340

9 Pavement Maintenance 1,572 1,174 133.9% (398) 1,248

10 Professional Services 693 590 117.4% (103) 640

11 Public Transport 28 20 138.9% (8) 20


Less Revenue 12 Roading Income (3,752) (3,219) 116.6% 534 (3,511)

Total Revenue (3,752) (3,219) 116.6% 534 (3,511)


Notes to Report:

6 Amenity Maintenance • TS costs for managing the Downers Pavement Maintenance Contract up to the end of April were allocated in May. This amount of $60k was charged against Prof Services before.

7 Non-subsidised works • Expenditure on Donations and Grants (Netherton School Parking and an additional stock underpass) resulted in an overspend of $57k. An amount of $42k was allocated against this cost centre for the Netherton School Parking Area project. The additional Stock Underpass Subsidy of 15k was accepted Resultant over expenditure is approx. $57k.

8 Other Subsidised Budget deficit decreased as expenditure is cut back. Overspent items remains as follows: • Waitawheta bridge is a Minor safety Improvements project was not originally budgeted for but was identified as a Safety Deficiency by the local residents, Councillors and Police. The project was formalised by a report to Council. • Electricity Supply charges to date are $14k more than forecast. Future over expenditure of this is likely to be reduced due to the installation of LED's. • Expenditure on Streetlight Maintenance Contract to date is approximately ($15k) more than expected due to replacement/repair decorative poles • $138k spent to date on various slips that originates from the storm events that occurred in 2016/17 financial year. • Emergency Work $265k spent on the January 2018 storm event relating to Roading iclean-up. The annual budget for Emergency works is $120k. The total cost of Emergency repairs and clean-up to date is $403k. A further $320k is expected to be spent on reinstatement of the underslip on East Coast Rd at the Auckland District boundary. This is an unbudgeted Emergency Event cost. NZTA have approved the Enhanced FAR of 78% for the January 2018 Storm Event. The timing of this work will be determined by Auckland City Council who are undertaking the work on our behalf.

9 Pavement Maintenance overspend was attributable to inclement weather $30k and the remaining

$295k which was pre-seal repairs required to be completed prior to the 2018/19 reseal programme.

10 Professional Services • Investment to increase and improve Network Management though resourcing capability, systems and process development have resulted in higher cost $130k. • We expect time and cost efficiencies savings to result from system improvements over the following three year period • Policy gaps still exist but implementing new systems will result in less time spent on professional services going forward. • AMPs, peer reviews and 30yr Infrastructure strategy development expenses $17k. The current budget is not sufficient to cover this. • Analysis of the Roading team labour charges indicates that at reaching full complement it will be running at higher cost than budgeted in order to achieve the required level of service ($200k per annum). At the moment this effect is not fully realized as the Roading Team has only been at full complement for the last 3-4 months.


11 Approx. $5K was paid for the Public Transport trial of the Coromandel-Rotorua-Coromandel proposed

service. No additional spend is expected. 12 Increased income is related to the increase NZTA budget resulting from Emergency works.


Solid Waste for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Closed Tip Sites 40 49 80.3% 10 75

13 Refuse Collection 183 173 106.3% (11) 190

Solid Waste Other 57 65 87.6% 8 69

14 Transfer Stations 226 191 118.3% (35) 214


22 Less Revenue Solid Waste Income (75) (83) 90.6% (8) (83)

Total Revenue (75) (83) 90.6% (8) (83)


Notes to Report:

13 Rebate from Smart Environmental is only $9k against a $27k budget. This is less than expected due to revenue from recyclables is determined by the recycler selling the product which is a challenge at present. The rate per ton has also reduced since budgets were set.

14 Landfill (Waste disposal) charges are higher than budgeted due to increased volume being moved

through the transfer stations.

Stormwater for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Depreciation 379 379 100.0% 0 414

Floodgates 0 5 0.0% 5 5

Interest 0 0 0.0% 0 (65)

15 Maintenance/Fencing/Culverts 64 41 157.0% (23) 47

16 Mechanical Cleaning 18 11 160.7% (7) 14

17 Other 115 72 159.9% (43) 162

Overheads 169 169 100.0% (0) 184

Pumps 10 9 110.8% (1) 10

Vegetation Control 10 10 91.8% 1 13





Notes to Report:

15 More pipes failed than anticipated. Repairs for Waihi were carried out at Consol street $15k, Tauranga

Road $3k and Adams Street $3k 16 Due to rain events more work was required, particularly in Kaiaua.

17 AMPs, peer reviews and 30yr Infrastructure strategy development expenses $44k. The current budget is not sufficient to cover this. No further Significant spend is envisaged for the balance of the financial year. Therefore, this should be offset by underspend in other budget lines within this activity by year end. A study has been commissioned to investigate the long term solution for the Criterion bridge pump station.


Wastewater for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Depreciation 777 777 100.0% 0 847

Fixed Costs 29 30 97.1% 1 176

Interest 0 0 0.0% 0 363

18 Major Maintenance 3 108 3.2% 104 118

19 Other 162 228 71.0% 66 246

Overheads 386 386 100.0% 0 421

Pumpstations 196 226 87.0% 29 251

Reticulation 92 88 104.5% (4) 96

Treatment 609 614 99.2% 5 670

Total Cost of Service 2,254 2,456 91.8% 202 3,187

Less Revenue Wastewater Income (305) (282) 108.4% 24 (291)

Total Revenue (305) (282) 108.4% 24 (291)

Net Cost of Service 1,949 2,174 89.6% 225 2,897

Notes to Report:

18 Tracking below budget. Not a lot of major maintenance is required this year. A saving of $100k is

anticipated. 19 No network failures occurred to date that required design work.


Water for the 11 months ending 31/05/2018

YTD Actual

($ 000's)


% of YTD Budget



Expenses Depreciation 1,229 1,219 100.8% (9) 1,330

Fixed Costs 57 59 96.0% 2 200

20 Headworks 309 310 99.8% 1 326

Interest 0 0 0.0% 0 642

21 Major Maintenance 19 147 13.2% 127 149

22 Other 326 348 93.7% 22 360

Overheads 863 863 100.0% 0 941

Pumpstations 21 32 65.9% 11 34

23 Reticulation 677 490 138.2% (187) 551

24 Treatment 1,532 1,334 114.9% (198) 1,391


Less Revenue Water Income (6) 0 0.0% 6 0



Notes to Report:

20 Paeroa intake riverbed had to be reinstated to lift the water level. Lightning at the Quarry intake caused the failure of various equipment that cost almost $30k to fix, of which $10k was operational. This was offset by operational savings due to Waitakaruru WTP shutdown for electrical upgrades.

21 Not a lot of major maintenance was required this year, a saving of $128k is anticipated.

22 AMP compilation cost $61k. This is offset by savings of around $100k in operating expenses due to

not using the professional fee provision in the budget.

23 Pipe breaks in the network required more reactive repairs ($183k) than provided for in the original budget. Paeroa Network accounts for $133k of this overspend. Council has increased the amount budgeted for pipe replacement in the new LTP to address this issue. In order to locate the leaks in Waihi an amount of more than $ 10k has been spent thus far. This amount does not include the repair cost, additional treatment etc.

24 Running the taste and odour plants resulted in additional chlorine costs for Paeroa and Waihi of $16k and more than $ 12k in electricity. Caustic soda has had a price increase that amounts to an additional $10k per annum across all plants. The Chemical budgets have been exceeded in each of the last three years. Currently tracking at $192k over budget. It is envisaged that this will be in the vicinity of $250k by year end. The LTP has been adjusted to reflect this level of chemical usage. The additional costs to do the manganese removal at Kerepehi resulted in an expenditure of $65k.


of 5

Information Report




File reference: Document: 2399031 Appendix A: CCTV Policy - #2133283


Subject: CCTV Activity Update

Recommendation:

THAT the report be received.

Summary

This report gives an overview of the CCTV activity and the status of current projects. Some of the challenges faced with the delivery of the CCTV activity are also outlined for your information.

Background

Council first ventured into the CCTV activity with a pilot installation in Paeroa late in 2005. The primary purpose of this installation was for crime deterrence in the town centres and was not specifically designed for evidential level surveillance. Since that initial pilot there have been two other implementations in Waihi and Ngatea, both based on that same primary purpose of crime deterrence. The projects were all based around Council owned buildings in an effort to keep the overall cost of these implementations down. In conjunction with these specific community projects, CCTV cameras have also been installed on various Council buildings to monitor these assets. In 2016, a CCTV Policy was developed and adopted which detailed the purpose and management of CCTV footage and equipment. (Appendix 1) The primary purpose of deterrence of criminal activity is still there, along with other specific purposes for which the footage may be used for.

CCTV Upgrades and Extension – Paeroa and Waihi

The majority of the early CCTV hardware has reached the end of its useful life and we have recently been working through an upgrade and extension plan for these public space CCTV installations in Paeroa and Waihi. We are approximately half way through our programme in each town.


of 5

The Police from both towns have provided some input around areas of interest and there has been a request that the CCTV upgrades and extension will provide number plate recognition or a similar level of evidential footage. Where possible we have tried to deliver on this type of requirement but primarily aimed to provide an overview of as much of the vicinity as possible, in line with the deterrence aspect of the CCTV purpose.

CCTV challenges

There are many challenges that we encounter when designing a CCTV installation and very careful planning goes into each site to ensure we can deliver the best outcome at the best cost.

Communications

With the need to have CCTV cameras spread throughout the towns comes the very real challenge of connecting them back into our offices in Paeroa, Waihi and Ngatea to record whatever they are seeing. As the availability and speed of hardwired communications are very limited in the district at present, we opt to utilise wireless radio networks for this purpose. This attracts a higher installation cost, but effectively no ongoing operational costs other than for power and cyclic replacement. As these wireless devices operate in the public radio spectrums allocated by Radio Spectrum Management (a business unit of the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE)), we are occasionally subject to interference from other radio users and need to actively reconfigure our devices to restore a reliable communications link. Whiritoa presents a different challenge with the limited speed and reliability of the connection we have to the CCTV Server situated in the township. The connection is insufficient to do any sort of efficient remote reviewing and usually necessitates a site visit to retrieve any footage that may be required.

CCTV Footage Processing and Storage

In the past we have been able to absorb the additional footprint and load of the CCTV processing and storage requirements using equipment on hand. However, with the newer generations of high resolution cameras we now need to purchase specific hardware and storage appliances for the CCTV activity. As a prerequisite for the recent upgrades we also needed to design and plan for an upgrade of all the existing radio communication links to accommodate the extra bandwidth requirements of the upgraded and additional cameras.

Building access

Historically CCTV installations were preferably targeted for Council owned buildings and property. This made it much easier for access for the installation, powering equipment and continued access for maintenance. It also gave a lot of freedom to install cameras where they should ideally be located. We now negotiate with buildings owners and arrange access agreements for new CCTV installations, which takes more time and adds some restriction around what equipment we can install and where.

Health and Safety

The increased focus on health and safety has had an impact on how quickly and cheaply many of the CCTV related jobs can be completed. Staff are needing to provide more oversight and monitoring of contractors to ensure they are doing the job safely, especially as the majority of this in very much in open, public areas.


of 5

Access to, and availability of specific equipment e.g. scissor lifts, cherry pickers has caused delays and the increased usage of this gear has made getting the job finished more expensive. In some situations, traffic management plans may be required which will extend the duration and cost of the installation.

Privacy

Ensuring that an individuals’ privacy is maintained while still delivering on the purpose of CCTV for the Council has been considered as part of the CCTV Policy. Access to the CCTV footage is restricted to specific Council officers for specific purposes e.g. for regular maintenance checks. Council’s Privacy Officers can also authorise access to recorded footage. Both the Paeroa and Waihi Police have direct access from their stations to the CCTV footage from the cameras in the public spaces – both live and recorded - although still request assistance from Council staff from time to time.

Cameras

Camera selection is critical and this is where we get advice from CCTV specialists and manufacturers. Given all the environmental variables that are thrown at these cameras 24x7, this means we have to choose the best compromise to get the best result in all conditions. The cameras are constantly subjected to rain, blazing sunshine, shade, freezing, dirt, dust, spray from the road and the occasional item thrown at them and are expected to deliver the best possible image day or night as well. It is the last factor of night time footage that is often the most difficult to deliver well, especially with respect to moving objects like cars with their lights on. The camera is operating in low light conditions and then the high intensity light from the car lights flares the image around the light source and obscures any detail around that vicinity - much the same way you own eyes would in the same situation. We do have a very good relationship with a supplier and manufacturer and often are able to source ex demo equipment at very good prices, which has meant we have been able to deliver some good outcomes within the budget constraints we have.

Operations

From an operational perspective, Council staff perform fortnightly checks to make sure the cameras are functioning as intended. This includes ensuring the communication links, CCTV application and CCTV storage are operational. This check also picks up when a camera lens may be significantly dirty and requires cleaning for example. We also have real time monitoring and alerting if the CCTV equipment stops being visible on our network. We aim to have the cameras lenses and housing cleaned twice per year to remove dirt, grime and cobwebs. This work is outsourced this work to a CCTV specialist rather than being conducted by Council staff. Because of the number and locations of the CCTV cameras, this necessitates the use of equipment to work at height, some of which isn’t suitable for performing safely in the winter months when the ground is soft. This activity has historically had a low impact on staff input and direct costs, but as the CCTV base has expanded and the operational requirements have increased, it is becoming a reasonably significant aspect that fits into part of our business as usual workload.


of 5

Conclusion

Council’s CCTV network was designed primarily as a crime deterrent and to protect Council assets. In some instances, expectations have outstripped the ability of current technology that is affordable within current budgets. Maintaining Council’s CCTV network is an exercise that takes up a significant amount of staff time. Duncan Peddie Group Manager – Corporate Services


of 5

Appendix A:


2016

Hauraki District Council

Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy Including the collection of other visual media

www.hauraki-dc.govt.nz

Hauraki District Council PO Box 17, Paeroa 3640

1 William St, Paeroa

Ph: 07 862 8609 or 0800 734 834 (within the District)

Fax: 07 862 8607 Email: [email protected]


Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy 2016 1

1. INTRODUCTION This Policy sets out the purpose for collecting Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) footage, how the CCTV system will be operated, and how privacy impacts will be minimised. This Policy also sets out the purpose for the collection of personal information in other visual media by the Council, for example images collected by cameras on Council drones, and how privacy impacts will be minimised. The Policy follows best privacy practice to ensure that any image captured, collected and stored is handled in an appropriate and confidential manner that protects an individual’s right to privacy in accordance with the Privacy Act 1993 (the Act).

2. APPLICATION OF THE POLICY This Policy applies to the CCTV network owned and operated by the Hauraki District Council and to the collection of ‘other visual media’ by the Council. The Policy applies to all employees, councillors and contractors of the Council and the general public who may enter the areas where CCTV is in operation or where other visual media is being collected by the Council.

3. STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT This Policy assists in the delivery of two of the Council’s core priorities as set out in its Long Term Plan - ‘Lifestyle Hauraki’ and ‘Interactive Hauraki’. In particular, the operation of the CCTV network supports community safety which is a key priority for the Council. The Council also uses images and footage of the District to promote Hauraki as a great place to live, work and play.

4. PURPOSE FOR COLLECTION OF CCTV FOOTAGE The Council operates the CCTV network and collects footage for the following purposes:

i. Deter criminal activity from occurring in public and semi public spaces, this includes but is not limited to vandalism, theft and anti-social behaviour.

ii. Monitor and respond to any activities and/or events which could affect the delivery of

the service the Council is providing at that location.

iii. Monitor and respond to health and safety situations, including but not limited to safety at Council owned assets and facilities, traffic incidents and civil defence situations.

iv. Provide evidence of non-compliance with Council regulations or bylaws and/or central

government legislation, including but not limited to the Building Act 2004, the Resource Management Act 2002, and the Dog Control Act 1996.

v. Provide evidence to the Police, court or tribunal proceedings, or a public sector agency where it is necessary for them to uphold the law.

vi. Monitor actions of Council staff, including but not limited to situations where there is

suspicion that a breach of the Council’s workplace standards has occurred.



5. CCTV CAMERAS The Council operates CCTV cameras throughout the District. A list of the general location of CCTV cameras is attached as Schedule One to this Policy. The locations are indicative only; the Council should be contacted directly for current information on the location of CCTV cameras.

5.1 Location of CCTV cameras

i. In accordance with the Act the Council’s CCTV cameras are/will be positioned to observe public spaces and semi-public spaces (privately owned spaces open to the public during opening hours) but will not unreasonably intrude on a person’s privacy.

ii. In cases where CCTV cameras record the interior of a building on semi-public premises the owner of the premises will be informed.

5.2 Signage for CCTV cameras

i. Where CCTV is operated at outdoor locations signage will be displayed at the main access points of the perimeter of the CCTV system’s range to notify people that cameras are operating.

ii. Where CCTV is operated indoors signage will be displayed at the main entrances to

the building to notify people that cameras are operating.

5.3 Operating times of CCTV

i. The Council CCTV is in operation on a continuous basis.

6. COUNCIL MANAGEMENT OF CCTV FOOTAGE

6.1 Security of CCTV footage stored by the Council

i. All information collected by the Council will be stored securely. Access to the

Council’s CCTV network is protected by a password.

ii. A log of access to CCTV footage will be maintained by authorised council officers.

iii. All footage will be deleted by an automated erasing process after a maximum of forty

days unless it is required for evidential or administrative purposes, or if the footage must be retained as an archive in accordance with the Public Records Act 2005.

6.2 Access to CCTV footage by Elected Members, Council staff and contractors

i. Only authorised council officers have direct access to the Council’s CCTV network

and CCTV footage. Authorised council officers are specific officers that have been



granted access to the CCTV network and footage through delegations by the Chief Executive Officer of the Council. These delegations are contained in the Council’s Delegations Manual.

ii. An authorised council officer may review any relevant CCTV footage for monitoring purposes or in response to an event/incident.

iii. CCTV footage can only be viewed by elected members, council contractors and council staff (that are not authorised council officers) if viewing that footage is relevant to their role within the Council and is in accordance with the purpose/s for the operation of the CCTV network.

iv. Where an elected member, council employee or a council contractor has concerns about health and safety matters or compliance with Council regulations which may have been captured by a camera, they should in the first instance report the matter to the Council for authorised council officers to investigate.

v. The manner in which council officers access CCTV footage will be audited to ensure CCTV footage is only being used for its intended purposes. Any confirmed breach of access to the Council’s CCTV footage will be treated as non-compliance with the Council’s workplace standards and subject to disciplinary action.

6.3 Access to CCTV footage by the New Zealand Police, Courts and public sector agencies

i. The New Zealand Police will be provided access to CCTV footage.

ii. Any criminal activity captured by the Council’s CCTV network will be forwarded by

authorised officers to the New Zealand Police for investigation. iii. In accordance with the Act any CCTV footage will be made available to the Police, a

court or tribunal proceeding, or a public sector agency where it is necessary to uphold the law.

6.4 Request to access CCTV footage by other parties

i. The general public and media shall not have access to any CCTV footage, unless a

person is requesting to access footage of themselves.

ii. Any person may request to access CCTV footage of themselves, but this request will

be assessed in accordance with the Act. In particular the request will be accessed in relation to the ability to readily retrieve the footage and to maintain the privacy of any other identifiable individual in the footage.

iii. The Council will respond to requests for footage as soon as reasonably practicable,

and in any case within twenty (20) working days unless an extension of time is provided for as per the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

iv. If a request to view the footage cannot be granted by an authorised council officer a written or oral description may be provided of the footage.



v. Where a member of the public believes a crime has been committed which may have

been captured by a camera, they should in the first instance report the matter to the Police.

vi. Where a member of the public has concerns about health and safety matters or compliance with Council regulations which may have been captured by a camera, they should in the first instance report the matter to the Council for authorised council officers to investigate.

7. OTHER VISUAL MEDIA The Council may collect personal information in the form of other visual media, for the following purposes:

i. For use in various documents of the Council and on the Council’s website, including

but not limited to planning documents, maps and promotional material.

ii. To monitor the state of Council assets and facilities.

iii. To monitor and respond to civil defence emergencies and health and safety situations at Council owned assets and facilities.

iv. To monitor compliance with Council regulations and central government legislation,

including but not limited to the Building Act 2004, the Resource Management Act 2002,

and the Dog Control Act 1996.

8. COUNCIL MANAGEMENT OF OTHER VISUAL MEDIA

i. Where an individual is clearly identifiable in other visual media (excluding CCTV footage) collected by the Council the council officer will endeavour, where practicable, to seek permission of the individual to collect that footage/image.

ii. The general public and the media shall not have access to any visual media held by the Council, unless a person is requesting to access footage of themselves. These requests will be handled in accordance with section 6.4 of this Policy.

iii. Other visual media will be stored in the Council’s document management system which can only be accessed by employees of the Council.

9. ENQUIRIES AND COMPLAINTS

i. Any person, who has queries about this Policy or the operation of CCTV cameras, should in the first instance contact the Council’ s Customer Services department to be directed to the appropriate officer of the Council.

ii. All complaints regarding the operation of the Council CCTV network or collection of other visual media are to be directed to the Privacy Officer and will be investigated through the Council’s complaints procedure.



iii. If the complaint relates to an issue of privacy, a complaint may also be made to the

Privacy Commissioner.

10. GLOSSARY Unless the context requires otherwise, the definitions of words or terms used in this Policy are also those in the Privacy Act 1993. AUTHORISED COUNCIL OFFICER means a member of staff of the Hauraki District Council, who has been delegated authority to monitor and have direct access to the CCTV system and has been made aware of their obligations under the Privacy Act 1993 regarding the confidentiality and appropriate use of CCTV footage. The Privacy Officer is considered to be an authorised council officer. CRIMINAL ACTIVITY means any violation of the law where a person is liable to punishment for a criminal offence. A criminal act often threatens and harms public safety, property and/or welfare. OTHER VISUAL MEDIA means data or information in the form of visual representations such as photographs or film footage, but excludes CCTV footage. PUBLIC SPACES means spaces that are completely accessible to the public, such as streets, footpaths and public reserves. SEMI PUBLIC SPACES means spaces that (even if privately owned) are accessible to the public during opening hours, or sometimes even when the business is closed e.g. a petrol station forecourt. PRIVACY OFFICER means a member of staff of the Hauraki District Council that has been delegated the responsibilities under section 23 of the Privacy Act 1993. THE ACT means the Privacy Act 1993 (including any subsequent amendments).

11. REVIEW The policy will be reviewed:

i. at intervals not more than five years, or ii. at the request of the Council.

12. DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL

Title: Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) Policy, including the collection of other visual media.

Sponsor: Approved By:

Strategic Planning Hauraki District Council

Adopted: Review Date:

Version: File Ref:

June 2016 2021 Final 1500599-v4

Property of Hauraki District Council



13. SCHEDULE ONE:

Indicative location of CCTV cameras in the Hauraki District as at May 2016

Paeroa Ward – External CCTV Cameras

Location

Paeroa Town Centre

Paeroa Domain

Railway Reserve, Paeroa

Karangahake Recreation Reserve

Plains Ward – External CCTV Cameras

Location

Hauraki District Council Service Centre, Ngatea

Hugh Hayward Domain, Ngatea

War Memorial Hall, Ngatea

Waihi Ward – External CCTV Cameras

Location

Waihi Town Centre

Whiritoa Beach Road, Whiritoa

Internal CCTV Cameras

Location

Hauraki House, Paeroa

Hauraki District Council Ngatea Service Centre

Hauraki District Council Waihi Service Centre


Page of

Information Report


From: Water Services Manager

Date: June

File reference: Document:

Portfolio holder: Councillor Harris


Subject: Water Services ‐ Monthly Activity Report for May

Recommendation:


Summary This report summarises performance and issues in the Water Services work area. The body of the report refers to the May works.

WATER SUPPLY

Operations Notebook

The consents for the Waitakaruru bore field run out at the end of June. It is a consent condition to cap the bores. The power to the bores was disconnected and decommissioning will be progressed when the paddocks dry out.

As a power saving initiative, the Kerepehi WTP, minimum pump pressures have been lowered to kPa. The remote set point pressure remains the same, so only night time and low demand times will reach the new low pressures. This will also be applied to Waitakaruru WTP.

The quarry storage has been lowered to below the mid‐level pump chamber, ready to inspect the faulty mid‐level pump.

Waitakaruru Water Safety Plan should be ready to be sent to the DHB in June.


Page of

Capital Works

Project Status Update

Waitakaruru Water Treatment Plant Upgrade

The tender has been awarded and the contract has started. The civil works tender has come in at almost double the engineer’s estimate for this project. It was therefore decided to do this works with in house team combining of Tech Services and C&M resources. The C&M works programme has been adjusted to fit this critical project in.

Connection of the Kaimanawa Network

A meeting was held with the landowner for the proposed reservoir site to resolve some matters relating to the easement.

Proactive Water Main Replacement

No pipe replacements were done for May.

Plains Storage The settlement of the preloading is tracking the predicted settlement and therefore not a concern at this stage. Designs of the pipework has been completed and the C&M team is planning to do this work in July . The procurement process for the materials has been approved by Council on the th of June. The tank kits will be shipped mid‐June with an arrival date a month later.

Water meter replacement programme

A business case and options report is being compiled and will be submitted to the next Council meeting.

Waitawheta Intake Airburst system

Consultation letters has been sent to the Iwi Groups and only supportive feedback has been received to date.

Waitakaruru Intake Planting of the riparian zones has been delayed by the contractor. The agreed planting date is the last week in June

Kerepehi Manganese Procurement documents have been prepared and are busy being signed off.

June / July Planned Works

Waitakaruru WTP electrical upgrade Replace Membrane modules at Kerepehi WTP x BA sets need replacing

Waitakaruru Bores to have power disconnected, pumps removed and casing capped Waitakaruru WTP roof to be sealed Finalising land negotiations for Kaimanawa reservoir Finalise the WSP’s for Waihi and Paeroa Update the Waitakaruru WSP


Page of

WASTEWATER

Operations Notebook

We have received compliance certificates for the Waihi WWTP. The plant is now back to normal. Water levels have risen during the latest storm event at all the Wastewater plants. All the plants are coping with the extra water.

Capital Works

Project Status Update

Karangahake Gorge sewer line. Designs have been signed off. Construction is due to start early in July with an anticipated construction period of weeks.

Silverton Pump station: Replacement of generator

Design of the generator has started.

Turua Consent Thus far the Iwi consultation has been positive and the Iwi groups supportive of the application. Cllr Harris and the Water Services Manager have had a productive meeting with Fish and Game. It was agreed to supply them with more information. In general Fish and Game is supportive of the Offset principle

District Wide Pipe Renewals Paeroa

Due to the current workload this project is not progressing as planned.

Waihi East Sewer Manholes A field survey of leaky manholes is being conducted. The purpose of the survey is to identify leaky sewer manholes and potential stormwater infiltration points. The majority of the manholes that have been inspected to date have been found to be defective. Details of the findings will be reported on at the July Council meeting.


Replacement of bridge crossing at the Puke road drain. Procurement of the lifting beam structures. Construction of the Karangahake sewer main Finalise Waihi East manhole report


Page of

STORMWATER

Operations Notebook

Paeroa – Cleared Russell Street Grate Waihi – Used camera and jetting unit for sewer line in Montrose Street Waihi – Jetted line in Boundary Road Kaiaua – Cleaned the drain beside the bowling club in Lipscombe Road Kaiaua – Cleared dump outlet Kaiaua – Inspected flood gates Kaiaua – Repaired discharge pipeline at East Coast Road Ngatea – Installed cesspit and line at Pipiroa Road Turua – Installed cesspit at Matai Street Turua – Installed a swale drain at Matai street Turua – Carried out investigations to cesspits on Hauraki Road. Found a catch pit lead that was not connected to the stormwater system. Whiritoa – The stormwater system draining the southern end of Whiritoa is draining out onto private land. The private land is a marshy area that has become overgrown over time. The result is that the stormwater system does not drain effectively. Staff have negotiated with the Iwi landowners to get permission to clean the drain. The one group has given permission but staff is not getting feedback from the other group. Some members of the Whiritoa community is upset with the slow progress in this regard. Once contact has been made and permission obtained would it be recommended to get an easement in place to give Council the right to maintain the drain.


Piping of the drain in Pipiroa Road Manhole and piping in area around open drain in Whiritoa Design of the Christensen Street stormwater pipe is being finalised. EJ Wentzel WATER SERVICES MANAGER


of 14

Information Report


From: Group Manager Engineering Services



Portfolio holder: Councillor Harris


Subject: Discussion Paper: 3-Waters Review


Summary This report gives some context and background to the Government’s recent announcement at the LGNZ 3-Waters Summit on the establishment of a regulator and the potential aggregation of water supplies. The intention is not to state any particular position, but to provide the groundwork and information to initiate a discussion on this significant review – the outcomes of which could be significant for local government in New Zealand.

Background The following is an extract taken from the Department of Internal Affair’s website and roughly sets the scene:

The Government is reviewing how to improve the management of drinking water, stormwater and wastewater (three waters) to better support New Zealand’s prosperity, health, safety and environment. Three waters services are a core responsibility of local councils. Effective three waters services are essential for our communities Our health and safety: depends on safe drinking water, safe disposal of wastewater and effective stormwater drainage. Our prosperity: depends on adequate supply of cost effective three waters services for housing, businesses and community services. Our environment: depends on well managed extraction of drinking water, and careful disposal of wastewater and stormwater. The government is undertaking a comprehensive review of three waters services Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta has announced a reform programme to transform drinking, storm and wastewater. It is focussed on the challenges facing the sector, including funding pressures, rising environmental standards, climate change, seasonal pressure from tourism, and the recommendations of the Havelock North Inquiry. The review is in its second stage.


of 14

Stage One – This stage explored the issues and opportunities with three waters services by gathering and analysing information. This was completed at the end of 2017. Stage Two – This stage commenced in March 2018. It is looking at options for improving the three waters system, including the management, service delivery, funding, and regulatory arrangements.

Central government will work closely with councils, iwi and all stakeholders with an interest in three waters services in order to develop options and recommendations by the end of the year.

https://www.dia.govt.nz/Three-waters-review#Background The above link has a number of key reports and documents linked to it. I have included a key document in Airwatch. This is titled Review of three waters infrastructure: key findings and next steps. For a number of years there has been discussion within the 3-waters sector – central and local government, working parties and industry – around various issues that include regulation and efficiency of the sector. The discussion has not had much traction until the investigations and subsequent reports on findings related to the Havelock North campylobacteriosis outbreak. Appendix 4 (included as optional background reading) is the literature review from my thesis and gives a good background to the water industry and the frustrations and the thinking that now appears to be driving the current discussion. The literature review considers both water source management and water delivery management. Havelock North has been an effective catalyst to provide real impetus to this. It also gives a brief explanation of the Scottish (and other) water delivery models that are being considered as part for the review. On 30 – 31 May 2018, LGNZ hosted the LGNZ Water Summit. The Minister of Local Government, the Honourable Nanaia Mahuta, set out her terms of reference for the 3-Waters review that the previous government initiated (the transcript is included in Appendix 3). She brought her thinking into sharp focus and set the tone for 2 days of challenging conversation. The following link is to the Summit’s proceedings and includes both the PowerPoints and the video (Youtube) of each presentation. http://www.lgnz.co.nz/our-work/our-policy-priorities/3-environment/lgnz-water-summit-2018/ I have included key presentations in Airwatch for convenience. These include:

1. The Minister of Local Government, the Honourable Nanaia Mahuta 2. Honourable Lyn Stevens QC – Chair, Havelock North Drinking Water Inquiry 3. Marcus Rink – Chief Inspector for Water Supplies with the Department for Environment, Food

and Rural Affairs (United Kingdom) I have also included Richard Ward of the DIA’s presentation to the LGNZ Rural and Provincial Sector on 7 June 2018.

The Review There are 3 key points we should be aware of with the review:

1. This is a 3-waters review – too often we only think of potable water, but the government is looking at the delivery of all 3. This is significant as the National Policy Statement for Freshwater (NPSFW) will likely drive significant investment by LGNZ in upgrading wastewater treatment plants (WWTP’s) in the short to medium term. Significant investment is also likely to provide treatment of stormwater.

2. A key outcome of the review is likely the aggregation of water supplies. What this will look like is currently unknown – from status quo to an aggregation of water suppliers into 5 large


https://www.dia.govt.nz/Three-waters-review#Background

http://www.lgnz.co.nz/our-work/our-policy-priorities/3-environment/lgnz-water-summit-2018/

of 14

suppliers. The Scottish Model has had been held up as a viable example for New Zealand – and is certainly the preference of the WaterNZ CEO. In New Zealand we have 2 aggregated suppliers – Watercare and Wellington Water. Both these models are different – one key difference being asset ownership: WaterCare is a CCO wholly owned by Auckland Council in whom all the potable water and stormwater assets have been vested and Wellington Water manages the 3-Waters infrastructure for 5 Councils, BUT does not own the infrastructure. They are a CCO owned by the Hutt, Porirua, Upper Hutt and Wellington city councils and Greater Wellington Regional Council. The councils are all equal shareholders. WaterCare does not own or manage stormwater. A recent attempt to create an aggregated water supplier (CCO) between Waipa District, Hamilton City and Waikato District Council’s failed.

3. Behind all of this is the likelihood – and strongly supported – establishment of a national regulator. The establishment of the regulator for drinking water is reasonably “simple” but not so for wastewater and at this stage very few have any idea as how to deal with stormwater. Minister Mahuta indicated at a meeting of the Water Utilities Association on 3 May that it currently falls into the “too hard basket”. The presentation by Marcus Rink is relevant to the establishment – and benefits to the communities – of an independent regulator.

Local Government New Zealand LGNZ released their Water 2050: Governance A better framework for drinking water regulation discussion paper. This important paper sets out the situation and position of LGNZ with respect to the 3-Waters. I have included this in the Airwatch folder. In response to the review being driven by Minister Mahuta, LGNZ has established a 13-strong Three Waters Review LGNZ Reference Group. The membership and terms of reference for this group was circulated on 18 June 2018. I have included it as Appendix 2. In this communique, Malcolm Alexander states “We strongly advise all councils to spend time understanding the review and any possible issues or implications” he further urges Councils to consider “the future regulation of water including the potential for an independent regulator and whether its scope will be limited to drinking water or will also cover wastewater, stormwater and economic issues; and how can the Government’s outcomes achieved through the design of the regulatory framework; and what alternatives there may be to aggregation of service delivery.” It is important that LGNZ takes a leadership role in the review. There has been some confusion with media outlets in particular, believing that WaterNZ is the industry spokesperson for all things 3-Waters. We have had this discussion with WaterNZ and have given then a clear message that they do not speak for local government. The Hauraki Situation Hauraki District Council provides a complete 3-waters service to our communities. 3-Waters relates to stormwater, wastewater and potable (drinking) water. Below is a brief discussion on where each is and the likely challenges facing the infrastructure. Water HDC has recently upgraded all of its water treatment plants (WTP) so as to enable it to deliver drinking water than meets or exceeds the Drinking Water Standards of NZ 2008 (DWS08). We have extended the reticulation network from our upgraded plants to the areas previously supplied by “rural schemes”. This means that Waikino, Karangahake, MackayTown and Ohinemuri now receive excellent potable water. The last remaining rural scheme – the Kaimanawa Scheme will be supplied water from Paeroa during the next financial year (2018-19) thus eliminating the final WTP that does


of 14

not comply with DWS08. By June 19 we will have thus abandoned 5 WTPs. This represents a significant capital investment by the Council. Council has increased our renewal budgets significantly and will be well placed to meet or exceed any regulatory standards for water. Wastewater The Council has spent some time considering the implications of the NPSFW on our WWTP’s and the cost of upgrading the WWTPs in order to meet a higher standard of discharge to the receiving area, as a result, no additional information will be given. Stormwater Stormwater is currently a bit of an unknown. Until recently stormwater has been treated as a bit of a poor cousing to the other 2-waters. This has changed. We will be applying for new discharge consents for stormwater in the next 5 years. The Minister for the Environment has indicated that the NPSFW will likely be revised to include contaminant loading such as heavy metals. At this stage it focusses on nutrients primarily. We are already required to treat new catchment areas for heavy metals and suspended solids. It would be prudent to consider that new discharge consents will require retrospectively treating stormwater before it discharges into the receiving environment. We have made some allowance for this in the LTP. And then there is climate change! We are addressing this through our capital and renewal programmes. We are sizing pipes etc to accommodate expected increases in storm intensities. Income from 3 Waters. The table below shows the projected income for the 3-Waters as part of overall income for the organisation. If only considered as a percentage of rates income this then moves to 41%. Appendix 1 has a detailed breakdown of the individual waters.

2017/

18 2018/19

2019/20

2020/21

2021/22

2022/23

2023/24

2024/25

2025/26

2026/27

2027/28

Water / overall

REVENUE Fees, Charges and

Other Income 24% 17% 17% 16% 17% 17% 17% 17% 17% 17% 17%

External Subsidies 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%

Targeted Rates 58% 57% 57% 57% 56% 56% 55% 55% 55% 55% 55%

General Rates 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% 1%

33% 31% 31% 32% 31% 31% 31% 31% 31% 32% 32%

Adrian de Laborde Group Manager Engineering Services


of 14

Appendix 1 Budget Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast Forecast

2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28

$000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000

Water

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income 107 54 55 56 58 59 61 63 64 66 68

External Subsidies - - - - - - - - - - -

Targeted Rates 6,255 6,537 6,929 7,345 7,492 7,642 7,795 7,950 8,109 8,272 8,437

General Rates - - - - - - - - - - -

6,362 6,591 6,984 7,401 7,550 7,701 7,856 8,013 8,173 8,338 8,505

Waster Water

REVENUE



Targeted Rates 3,245 3,408 3,579 3,758 3,946 4,143 4,350 4,567 4,796 5,275 5,803

General Rates - - - - - - - - - - -

3,749 3,805 3,987 4,176 4,375 4,583 4,802 5,031 5,274 5,767 6,311

Storm Water

REVENUE



Targeted Rates 732 752 801 818 835 852 870 888 907 926 945

General Rates 129 133 141 144 147 150 154 157 160 163 167

1,074 992 1,051 1,074 1,097 1,120 1,145 1,169 1,195 1,221 1,248

All waters

REVENUE



Targeted Rates 10,232 10,697 11,309 11,921 12,273 12,637 13,015 13,405 13,812 14,473 15,185

General Rates 129 133 141 144 147 150 154 157 160 163 167

11,185 11,388 12,022 12,651 13,022 13,404 13,803 14,213 14,642 15,326 16,064


of 14

Overall

REVENUE

Fees, Charges and Other Income 3,446 3,358 3,453 3,552 3,636 3,726 3,821 3,915 4,019 4,124 4,236

External Subsidies 3,577 3,985 4,084 4,235 4,295 4,411 4,579 4,656 4,789 4,980 5,080

Targeted Rates 17,683 18,691 19,871 21,040 21,813 22,625 23,479 24,369 25,310 26,538 27,852

General Rates 9,349 10,270 10,784 11,332 11,614 11,843 12,078 12,315 12,558 12,803 13,057

34,055 36,304 38,192 40,159 41,358 42,605 43,957 45,255 46,676 48,445 50,225


of 14

Appendix 2 Dear Mayors, Chairs and Chief Executives. This update follows the recent LGNZ Sector Briefs here and here and a number of member meetings including the LGNZ’s Water Summit on 30-31 May and the LGNZ Rural and Provincial Sectors meetingwhere the Government’s Three Waters Review has been a key item on the agenda. LGNZ is writing to ensure that all councils are aware of and understand the potential nature of these reform proposals, and in particular the potential scope and implications. We are also writing to start to share some of the questions and issues that are being raised by members and early responses to these. Scope of the review The review is structured around four workstreams below, with advice under each currently scheduled to go to Cabinet in October 2018: 1. Effective oversight, regulatory settings and institutional arrangements; 2. Funding and financing mechanisms; 3. Capacity and capability of decision-makers and suppliers; and 4. Information for transparency, accountability and decision making. The Minister of Local Government has been quite open about both the scope, possible options and her desire to work collaboratively with local government on options. Possible policy options and implications for water service delivery Under the four workstreams above the Government also has presented aggregation of water services as being one of the policy options under consideration. The slides below refer to this. Members need to be aware that this is a “live” option, although it is LGNZ’s current view that discussion on “form” of any changes to water service delivery is premature until we consider the wider policy objectives and options under 1 and 2 above, particularly regulatory settings. LGNZ also has highlighted, as part of its Water 2050 work, that the Government’s central policy development and oversight are currently fragmented and that refinement should be made as part of work on regulation and oversight. We will be proposing this when we put publish further work on governance in the middle of this year. Next steps and developing a sector position – sector reference group Under National Council oversight, LGNZ has formed a 13-strong Three Waters Review LGNZ Reference Group and, with the Minister and officials’ agreement, this group is now receiving information and informing DIA’s development of policy options. The first meeting of this group was on Tuesday 12 June. The next meeting is scheduled for 6 July. The members of the LGNZ Reference Group (representative of all Sectors and Zones) are:

Brian Hanna (Chair), Mayor, Waitomo District Council;

Richard Kempthorne, Mayor, Tasman District Council;

Bede Carran, Chief Executive, Timaru District Council;

Clive Manley, Chief Executive, Ruapehu District Council;


https://client.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/OWA/redir.aspx?C=rGQWH0yih75rxxpsz39sJiVrDczLYxvp-iC7DN2TlLjCsYdcYNXVCA..&URL=https%3a%2f%2flocalgovernmentnz.createsend.com%2fcampaigns%2freports%2fviewCampaign.aspx%3fd%3di%26c%3d7AD5209B922F164D%26ID%3dFB72B88CA5F9F43E2540EF23F30FEDED%26temp%3dFalse%26tx%3d0

https://client.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/OWA/redir.aspx?C=Rkg0t2s9Px0HpRSJJyp8ZJQsNZ7b87rivLUwNKegLqrCsYdcYNXVCA..&URL=https%3a%2f%2flocalgovernmentnz.createsend.com%2fcampaigns%2freports%2fviewCampaign.aspx%3fd%3di%26c%3d7AD5209B922F164D%26ID%3d267C815A15CE88922540EF23F30FEDED%26temp%3dFalse%26tx%3d0

https://client.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/OWA/#DIA_slides

of 14

Don McLeod, Chief Executive, Matamata-Piako District Council;

Kevin Lavery, Chief Executive, Wellington City Council;

Mike Theelen, Chief Executive, Queenstown Lakes District Council;

Miriam Taris, Chief Executive, Western Bay District Council;

Monique Davidson, Chief Executive, Central Hawke’s Bay District Council;

Pat Dougherty, Chief Executive, Nelson City Council;

Rob Forlong, Chief Executive, Whangarei District Council;

Vaughan Payne, Chief Executive, Waikato Regional Council; and

Malcolm Alexander, Chief Executive, LGNZ. This group will also be used to inform a wider local government sector position, which ultimately will be referred to LGNZ’s National Council for decision. While the Reference Group will provide advice to officials, we have made it clear that LGNZ will, if necessary, take an alternative position to the Government on various matters. Some councils are approaching DIA directly to input their point of view. DIA has asked that to manage its workload within a challenging timeframe, that councils should wherever possible utilise the members of the LGNZ Reference Group to input your point of view. If a council chooses not to do so, DIA will do its best to interact with you and are doing so, but timing is pressing and the LGNZ Reference Group has been established as a mechanism to facilitate input, at least at this stage of policy development. DIA also will look to utilise all upcoming Sector and Zone meetings to ensure that as much engagement as possible occurs. LGNZ’s work underway through its Water 2050 project is also being used to support the sector’s input into the policy process. We will ensure we provide regular member communications on this and the Government’s policy development work. Discussing the information with your Council We strongly advise all councils to spend time understanding the review and any possible issues or implications. Background and information to enable this The Cabinet paper and minute relevant to the review of the delivery of the Three Waters services is located here. We have uploaded the video, along with the slides for the Water Summit on 30 and 31 May. The speech of the Minister of Local Government is particularly worth viewing. The presentations can be viewed here. DIA’s slides that were presented to the Rural and Provincial Sector are located here. Key matters The key matters for consideration, that we urge your council to discuss are: the future regulation of water including the potential for an independent regulator and whether its scope will be limited to drinking water or will also cover wastewater, stormwater and economic issues; and how can the Government’s outcomes achieved through the design of the regulatory framework; and what alternatives there may be to aggregation of service delivery. We will continue to keep members informed and if you have any questions, please contact me, Helen Mexted or Clare Wooding.


https://client.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/OWA/redir.aspx?C=Q5kbZxALiXy76_i_cQPidWHFwBli8GPY7_1VfdOXNZ8iE4pcYNXVCA..&URL=https%3a%2f%2fwww.dia.govt.nz%2fThree-waters-review

https://client.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/OWA/redir.aspx?C=m_qUgCaEOBQcWEy6p-JpyAcN9ye06Tzjd4xCsXz0yPoiE4pcYNXVCA..&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.lgnz.co.nz%2four-work%2four-policy-priorities%2f3-environment%2flgnz-water-summit-2018%2f

https://client.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/OWA/redir.aspx?C=LL2e0smgiJNTymRXiKePyHw9tPqfbxTw8bEaOKRYJVAiE4pcYNXVCA..&URL=http%3a%2f%2fwww.lgnz.co.nz%2fassets%2fUploads%2fRichard-Ward-Three-Waters-Slides-LGNZ-Rural-and-Provincial-7-June-2018.pdf

of 14

Kind regards, Malcolm Alexander Chief Executive Local Government New Zealand DDI 04 924 1201 M 021 737 681 E [email protected] W www.lgnz.co.nz


https://client.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/OWA/redir.aspx?C=aUCDkJi2h5jqS0Vuu4pvrFId94UsyAiN5EkmIjqM_O4iE4pcYNXVCA..&URL=mailto%3amalcolm.alexander%40lgnz.co.nz

https://client.hauraki-dc.govt.nz/OWA/UrlBlockedError.aspx

of 14

Appendix 3

30 MAY 2018

Water Summit

HON NANAIA MAHUTA

Local Government

Speech - Water Summit

Hon Nanaia Mahuta – Minister of Local Government

Thank you very much to all of the attendees and speakers who have come to be part of this Water Summit today and tomorrow.

I would like to take the opportunity to thank Local Government New Zealand, Water New Zealand, and the Institute of Public Works Engineering Australasia (IPWEA) for organising this event.

Our Government sees the three waters system as critical for the health, well-being, and prosperity of our communities. However, this system faces some significant challenges.

Over the next two day speakers will talk about these challenges in detail. Hon Lyn Stevens QC will talk about the findings of the Havelock North Inquiry. Helen Wyn and Malcolm Alexander will talk about the funding challenges.

We will also hear about possible solutions. Mr Marcus Rink will talk about the United Kingdom’s arrangements for regulation. We will hear from a number of speakers about different models for service delivery - from Wellington Water and Watercare in New Zealand to the Tasmanian model from Mike Brewster. I want to thank our overseas guests for coming here and sharing their expertise.

In working toward solutions, what is clear is that this is a conversation we need to have together. Neither central nor local government can address these challenges alone.

The conversation we will have over the next two days is essential to the journey we are about to take. If we engage in the right conversation with a strategic view in mind we may reach our destination in good order.

The three waters system as a whole is one of New Zealand’s critical sectors. It provides the fundamental building blocks for our towns, communities and cities.


https://beehive.govt.nz/minister/hon-nanaia-mahuta




https://beehive.govt.nz/portfolio/labour-led-government-2017-2020/local-government


of 14

We all need high quality, reliable drinking water and wastewater services. Our towns, roads and public spaces are not liveable without stormwater services. Our environment depends upon water infrastructure services these services, particularly our streams, rivers and beaches –future proofing of wastewater and stormwater is at the core of this.

The challenges facing drinking water, the environmental challenges, and the need to move to a new regulatory system are significant which is why we are here today.

The findings of the Havelock North Inquiry have been a sobering reminder of how, for the sake of our communities, we must make sure that drinking water services are high quality and safe. The drinking water in our cities is, by and large, world class. However, too many areas in New Zealand do not meet drinking water standards, and as our communities get smaller, the level of compliance drops to 25 per cent.

The Inquiry has made significant recommendations – both to overhaul regulation, and also to change how services are provided. This is an important conversation that we must have. We need a step change to minimise the risk of a repeat of the tragic outcome of Havelock North happening again.

The Department of Internal Affairs commissioned a report from Beca on the costs to upgrade drinking water infrastructure to meet key recommendations made by the Inquiry. This report is available on the Three Waters Review website.

Helen Wyn from the Department is going to speak about Beca’s report in more detail. What I would like to emphasise to you now is that this report shows that the costs are highest for our smallest communities. Our small towns and provincial areas have fallen behind, and the cost of upgrading their drinking water infrastructure will effectively be unaffordable for many of them.

It is clear from this work that the small communities cannot do it alone.

It is also clear that three waters services are facing significant environmental challenges in many areas across the country.

The Ministry for the Environment’s report Our Fresh Water 2017 shows that in urban areas, freshwater quality is significantly worse both for E. coli and nitrate concentrations than in rural farming areas.

The reasons are closely linked with wastewater and stormwater systems. Many wastewater and stormwater networks were built decades ago and have very long term resource consents. These are legacy issues, which we are now having to deal with as those consents come up for renewal.

Councils have just finished consulting with their communities about their long-term plans. Many are considering how to fund infrastructure upgrades to meet freshwater objectives under the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management. Many are considering how to meet community expectations about wastewater overflows into streams or at beaches.

These are challenges everywhere – in our cities, towns, and rural areas. In Auckland, for example, the Council has consulted on a targeted rate in its long-term plan to fund water infrastructure to clean up the city's harbours and beaches.


of 14

It will not be possible to improve freshwater quality, particularly in urban areas, without tackling waters infrastructure.

There are also significant challenges in the regulation of the three waters that we need to consider also.

The Havelock North Inquiry has called for significant reform of drinking water regulation. This includes a move to a dedicated drinking water regulator and much better monitoring, reporting, compliance and enforcement. The Inquiry has said that affordability should no longer be a reason for failing to meet drinking water standards.

The Three Waters Review, led by the Department of Internal Affairs, has found that regulation across the three waters system is inconsistent and patchy.

There are low levels of compliance, monitoring and enforcement across the system – particularly for environmental monitoring.

There is inadequate oversight and connections between key parts of the system. Information about three waters services is often not transparent, and does not promote

accountability or improvement. Many consumers have to dig deep into annual reports to find out what is happening in their

area.

We need to have a conversation about what a new regulatory system might look like. Changes to regulation – whether they involve better reporting, oversight, compliance, or transparency – have the potential to have significant funding implications for local government, which is largely responsible for three waters services.

As a country we are facing some tough questions relating to three waters services. For example:

How do we achieve our housing aspirations and meet the increasing demand for water infrastructure driven by urban growth?

How can we ensure communities and visitors everywhere have access to safe and high quality drinking water?

How can communities with small or declining rating bases fund renewals of ageing infrastructure? Or cope with the pressure placed on water services by tourists?

How can we meet community expectations and improve environmental outcomes – particularly for the quality of our freshwater and beaches? How can we ensure that wastewater and stormwater is properly treated?

How do we respond to climate change?

These are all questions that we need to answer. Many councils have been investing heavily in their water infrastructure, and deserve to be recognised for that. However, the challenges we are facing as a nation are too great for individual councils, communities, or the government to tackle alone.

The biggest question is whether we are brave enough to move away from the status quo and be open to do things differently for the good of the country and all our communities. The problems are system-wide. The solutions will require system-wide, collaborative change. Central government and local government will need to work together to find solutions that are appropriate for communities everywhere.


of 14

We will also need to consider how our larger urban populations can help the smaller towns and provincial areas, and how to spread resources, expertise and technology across the country.

We need to look at both regulation and service delivery arrangements if we are going to achieve system-wide improvements. Just targeting one side of the ledger will not be enough.

For regulation, we will be looking at options that improve public health, environment, and economic regulation for each of the three waters. We are looking overseas for examples of what has worked elsewhere. The solutions will however need to work for a New Zealand context. We can learn from other countries, but solutions need to be founded in our own context.

For service delivery, we will be focusing on two key areas – capability and funding.

Capability – will be looking for ways to lift capability and capacity everywhere. This is one of the biggest challenges facing our country. One of the key findings of the Three Waters Review was that many communities are struggling to attract and retain the highly specialist technical skills necessary to run water infrastructure and manage assets.

Here we are talking about people – the Drinking Water Assessors, the Council staff, the engineers and others who work “on the ground” throughout New Zealand. Many of you are here today. You are our most valuable asset, and I want to acknowledge that. We want to foster your specialist technical skills, and find ways to deliver you career paths so you have security, collegiality, and progression. New Zealand is a small country, and water infrastructure skills and technology need to be nurtured and rewarded.

Funding – we will be looking at options to meet the significant funding challenges that exist across the system. The infrastructure upgrades that are required are significant. In their 2015 long-term plans, local authorities had planned to spend $12.8 billion of capital on three waters infrastructure.

We also need to face the reality that these funding challenges are a feature of the three waters system. Climate change and population growth alone mean that, even if we address the challenges in front of us now, significant funding pressures will continue to arise for decades to come.

The key to success here will be to deliver a sustainable funding model. We need to move to a way of funding three waters services that gives all of New Zealand a world class system, both now and in the years to come.

The Havelock North Inquiry recommended aggregated, dedicated water providers, and this is something we’re exploring. This would be one way to lift capability and provide a more sustainable funding model, and it has been something that many overseas countries have adopted with very good results.

There are no predetermined solutions, however. There are a range of different options within this proposal, and we want to have an open conversation about how a solution like this might work.

There are some bottom lines for the Government that I want to be very clear about. All options will ensure continued public ownership of existing infrastructure assets.

We also need to investigate the full range of ways that we can ensure that local authorities and communities continue to be involved in whatever model we choose.


of 14

I would like to hear from local government in particular about this matter. A critical part of successful change will be determining how local government continues to be involved in the governance of water assets, and what the links are with broader council planning. We also need to have an open discussion about how local communities continue to be involved in services in their area. Responsive local service delivery will also be an important part of success.

I recognise that many councils will be concerned about what might happen if they have less of a role in water service delivery. We need to start thinking about what they might do instead. Again, I want us to be talking openly about this over the coming months.

We will continue to work closely with the sector. I have already met with the National Council of Local Government New Zealand and had a productive session. There will be many more opportunities for engagement over the coming months.

I want to thank the sector for taking up this opportunity. Central government, local government and the water industry all need to provide leadership in this area.

We have a real opportunity before us. With the right conversations, and the willingness to work together, we have the potential to achieve solutions that will be of lasting benefit for our communities and the country as a whole.

We have set up a reference group with LGNZ that will meet for the first time in a few weeks and then regularly after this.

Water New Zealand have been working with the DIA in a highly productive way and I want to thank all levels of Water New Zealand for that.

There will also be engagement with iwi and Māori over the coming months, as tangata whenua have a strong interest in this area.

From central government, I have convened a large group of Ministers with a broad range of interests in water infrastructure to lead this work. These Ministers are all invested in this. Many of the Government’s priorities are dependent on a well-functioning three waters system.

For timing, I want to emphasise that we are still at the conceptual policy stage. There are no predetermined solutions, and lots of work still needs to happen to identify and develop options.

Ministers are due to report back to Cabinet later this year on high-level options. The decisions may be hard ones, but we will work with you openly and transparently as we make them. Following these decisions, there will be further opportunities for engagement as we begin to work on the detail.

Thank you once again to all of you for taking part in this Water Summit.

I am happy to take questions. Taken from: https://beehive.govt.nz/speech/water-summit


https://beehive.govt.nz/speech/water-summit

Page of

Information Report


From: Infrastructure Systems & Planning Manager

Date: Friday, June

File reference: Document: M

Portfolio holder: Duncan Smeaton


Subject: Solid Waste ‐ Monthly Activity Report – May 2018

Recommendation:


Summary

This report summarises performance and issues in the Solid Waste work area. The body of the report

refers to May works.

General

More rain this month causing delays with collections across the three districts. Residents from all three

districts have reported broken glass left by the contractor during the collections and have also advised the

amount of time spent cleaning the mess. Reviewing the RFS report, the number of complaints regarding

broken glass has grown steadily since the peak period. This has been raised with senior managers from

SEL. The Contract Manager asked SEL's regional manager to check with the operators and remind them to

take care when sorting out glass bottles for the hopper.

Refuse transfer sites across the districts look okay but some need work to prevent them from falling below

the required percentage. The issue of resourcing at the RTS sites continues to be a concern. Efforts are

being made to address the problem and senior management within SEL have promised to resolve the

issue in the coming months.


Page of

RTS Audit

The May audit was carried out on different days by Kathryn Griffin using SEL's Vault programme. The

Contract Manager was unavailable for May’s audit. The audit results are as follows.

Audit Result:

Paeroa RTS ‐ There were three corrective actions issued for this site.

Refuse Pit ‐ Fall protection barriers are not installed as yet.

Gas Cylinders ‐ Gas cylinders need proper storage.

Security Fencing / Gates ‐ The fence has holes which have been there for some time.

Waihi RTS ‐ There were three corrective action for this site.

Fall Protection Barriers ‐ The barriers are damaged as it looks like a vehicle has reversed into the barrier pushing them over.

Operations ‐ Open top bins are not placed correctly. Debris has fallen on either side of the open top bins.

Security Fencing / Gates ‐ The fence is damaged in the scrap metal yard. Work is needed to repair the damage.

The performance has dropped since a recent staff change in Paeroa. The new staff member that still

learning and will take time to return the site to its former glory. Waihi needs work to improve the site.

Kerbside

Another area where the collections have improved. The contractor has kept the complaints of missed

properties very low which is good. The challenge now for the contractor is to maintain that level and to

ensure staff scheduled on alternative collections work to perform to the same level as the previous week.

Timing of collections in the Commercial centres remains an issue for operators. However, over the last

month the significance of the issue has subsided and I have not had another comment or email regarding

this issue.


Page of

RTS

Both sites have performed reasonably well with only one complaint from a resident regarding the closing

time of Waihi RTS.

HDC Monthly RFS Totals – April 2018

Good work from the contractor the numbers have stayed very low.

Transport Tonnages

Another significant increase in Paeroa. This is not due to any construction or build‐up of business waste.

This is a build‐up of offloads from kerbside collections.

Steve de Laborde

INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS & PLANNING MANAGER


Page of

Information Report


From: Infrastructure Systems and Planning Manager

Date: Friday, June

File reference: M

Portfolio holder: Councillor James Thorp


Subject: District Drainage Activity Report to May

Recommendation:


Summary

This report summarises the Land Drainage Activity for the period ending May .

May was generally uneventful, however, during this period the weather changed from autumn to winter.

There were some periods of rain and wind that hampered spraying the drains and as a result spraying has

stopped for the winter season. Mechanical cleaning is still on‐going as conditions allow.

Operations Notebook

. km of drains have been sprayed in the current year, and . have been machine cleaned.

Minor maintenance has been undertaken in all districts. The Stopbank was repaired on both sides at the Twin Bridges in Waitakaruru as well as at Miranda Hot Pools by the Floodgate there. A timber Weir has been installed in the new section of Campbell Drain.

Routine floodgate and pump station inspections have been completed.

Floodgates and culverts have been cleared as required. Both Karl’s and Smyth’s floodgates were de‐silted. Karl’s, Leonard’s, and Rawerawe East floodgates were cleared and the hanger bars on Smyth’s floodgate were replaced.

man‐hours were spent on pump screen cleaning during this reporting month and the PLC Unit in the Hopai West Pump was replaced.


Page of

Capital Works

Stopbanks

Most work is getting more difficult to carry out as the winter conditions set in. No major earthworks project will be done this year until ground conditions improve after winter. Some work will, however, be done on the Karito Canal. The lower portion of the canal will be dug out and the material stock piled for later raising and shaping of the stop bank.

Future Works:

In the immediate future, field staff will continue with drain maintenance as long as the budgets, weather and paddock conditions allow. More drain condition assessments are being planned for in the longer term, to ensure the maintenance regime is effective and optimal. Staff changes have been put in place which will provide more resources, or rather more of their time, to be devoted to Land Drainage & Flood Protection, that will allow better monitoring of the systems which in turn informs the annual maintenance program. These changes will take place after the st July. That concludes this report. Steve de Laborde INFRASTRUCTURE SYSTEMS AND PLANNING MANAGER


of 26

Information Report


From: Strategic Policy Planner


File reference: Document: 2385795 Appendix A: Third quarter non-financial performance results

Portfolio holders: Mayor and Councillors Adams, Milner, Thorp, Buckthought, Harris, Leonard, McLean, Smeaton, and Spicer.


Subject: 2017/18 third quarter non-financial performance (NFPT) results

Recommendation:


Summary

The purpose of this report is to present the Council with the non-financial performance target results (including mandatory measure results) for the third quarter of the 2017/18 year.

Background

Council staff are required to prepare the results to their non-financial performance targets (NFPT) and mandatory performance measures on a quarterly basis. These results are reported to the Council to provide an indication of how the organisation’s performance is tracking and to identify any areas of improvement. The end of year results are included in the Annual Report to provide the public with an overview of the Council’s performance against what we signalled they can expect from us in our 2017/18 Annual Plan.

Content

Appendix A to this report contains the non-financial performance results for the third quarter of 2017/18. These results show the performance for the third and final year of the 2015-25 Hauraki Long Term Plan. The results are attached as Appendix A. A summary of the results is shown in Figure 1. The current graph shows results for the year to date as well as the first three quarters.


of 26

Figure 1: Year to date non-financial performance results

Conclusion

This report provides the Council with an opportunity to review the third quarter non-financial performance results for the 2017/18 year. The end of year results will be presented to the Council in the draft annual report for 2017/18 in September. Sarah Holmes Strategic Policy Planner

77

79

76

6

11

9

9

69

9

7

6

19

27

29

33

30

1st quarter

2nd quarter

3rd quarter

4th quarter

Year to date

2017/18 non-financial performance results

Achieved On track Not applicable/unable to measure Not achieved/Not on track


of 26

Appendix A

Third quarter performance results (1 January 2018 – 31 March 2018)

#

suff

ix

Activity Current Levels of Service

Measure Method of measurement

Target 2017/18 Staff Results 3rd Quarter 1/1/18 to 31/3/18

Qu

arte

rly 2017/18 year to date

An

nu

al

stat

us

1.01 Democracy The Council will conduct all its business in an open and transparent manner.

Council and Committee meetings are conducted in accordance with legislative requirements.

Complaints received (upheld by the ombudsman)

No complaints are upheld by the ombudsman relating to Council and Committees meeting statutory processes.

Achieved: No complaints were received or upheld in the third quarter.

On track: No complaints have been received in the year to date.

1.02 Democracy The Council will conduct all its business in an open and transparent manner.

Agendas for meetings (other than extraordinary meetings) of Council and its Committees are publicly available at least two clear working days prior to the meeting date.

Council secretary’s checklist

100% of agendas are available on the internet and in the Council offices and libraries two clear working days before each meeting.

Achieved 100% (15/15) agendas were available two working days prior to each meeting in the third quarter. 0/0 Consultative Water and Waste Committee 1/1 Audit and Risk Committee 2/2 Community Services and Development Committee 4/4 Council 1/1 Hearings and Judicial Committee 3/3 Economic Development Committee 0/0 District Licensing Committee 2/2 Western Plains Drainage District Committee 1/1 Eastern Plains Drainage District Committee 1/1 Paeroa Rural Drainage District

On track: 100% (41/41) agendas were available two working days prior to each meeting in the year to date.

1.03 Democracy Elected members will provide governance and leadership for the Hauraki District Council community.

Customers are satisfied that Council makes decisions in their best interests.

Annual customer satisfaction survey

75% of customers are satisfied

Not achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 74% of residents were satisfied that the Council makes decisions in their best interests. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.

The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.

1.04 Democracy When making decisions the Council will consider community views.

In the event that any threshold is triggered in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, an engagement programme is adopted by Council.

Council minutes Engagement programme adopted for 100% of decisions that trigger a threshold

Achieved: No thresholds were triggered in the third quarter.

On track: No thresholds have been triggered in the year to date.

2.01 Iwi Liaison Mana Whenua Forum meets regularly to provide for ongoing dialogue between the Council and Iwi groups who hold Mana Whenua status in the District.

The Forum will meet four times per year.

Council minutes Four meetings of Forum held per year

Not achieved: No meetings were held in the third quarter. The Forum is suspended until new consultation protocols are discussed and agreed.

Not on track: No meetings will occur until post Treaty Settlements. Timeframes are yet unknown.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

2.02 Iwi Liaison The Council will continue to develop its relationships with Tangata Whenua.

Additional Memoranda of Partnership agreements are developed.

Number of Agreements

Develop Memoranda of Partnerships with Ngaati Whanaunga and Ngati Tara Tokanui

Not achieved: We are awaiting the final individual Treaty settlements to be signed. Discussions have commenced with some iwi.

Not on track: No new partnership agreements will be entered into until post Treaty Settlements. Timeframes are yet unknown.

2.03 Iwi Liaison Provide opportunities for Māori to be involved in Council decision making processes.

The Council will consult with Tangata Whenua on all Council applications for wastewater and water consents.

Reports to the Consultative Committee for Water and Waste

Tangata Whenua will be consulted on all relevant applications for consents.

Achieved: Discussions/consultation were held with iwi regarding proposed Turua wastewater plant upgrade.

On track: Discussions/consultation were held with iwi regarding proposed Turua wastewater plant upgrade in the year to date.

3.01 Policy Development

To plan the Council’s Policy Development in accordance with relevant legislative requirements.

All legislatively required policies, plans and strategies are adopted within statutory timeframes.

Council checklist on each issue

100% of all legislatively required documents are adopted within statutory timeframes.

Achieved: No legislatively required documents were required to be adopted within statutory timeframes in the third quarter that the Strategic Policy team are aware of or involved in.

On track: 100% of all legislatively required documents have been adopted within statutory timeframes in the year to date that the Strategic Policy team are aware of or involved in.


Significant decisions are made in a democratically accountable way.

All decisions that are subject to the special consultative procedure meet the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002.

Council checklist on each issue

100% successful completion of internal Special Consultative Procedure checklist.

Achieved: The Council’s long term plan decision-making is subject to the special consultative procedure but it is not due to be completed until end of July 2018.

On track: The special consultative procedure checklist has been successfully completely for 100% of decisions requiring it in the year to date.


Policy development is visible and accountable.

Key draft or proposed policy documents subject to consultation are available on the Council’s website by the notified date of availability.

Website electronic records

100% of all draft policy documents are available on the Council’s website on time.

Achieved: 100% of proposed policy documents subject to consultation were available on the Council website on time in the third quarter. Those documents were: 'We need to talk' consultation document (2018-28 LTP), Revenue and Financing Policy, Rates Remission and Postponement Policies.

On track: 100% of proposed policy documents subject to consultation were available on the Council website on time in the year to date. Those documents were the Statement of Proposals for the Draft Gambling Policy and Draft Alcohol Control Bylaw, 2016/17 Annual Report, the Alcohol Control In Public Places Bylaw and the Class 4 Gambling Venues and New Zealand Racing Board Gambling Venue Policy.


Policy development is visible and accountable.

Percentage of customers satisfied with the consultation and engagement of Council’s major policies and strategies.

Customer satisfaction survey

70% of customers satisfied

Not achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 66% of residents were satisfied with the consultation and engagement of Council’s major policies and strategies. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.



The Council will develop local legislation.

Bylaws are reviewed as required, with all bylaws to be reviewed by 2017/18.

Council minutes 2016/17: Commence review of all bylaws.

Achieved: No Parts of the Consolidated Bylaw underwent review in the third quarter.

On track: Clause 4 ‘Control over the possession and consumption of liquor in public places’ in Part 3 of the Consolidated Bylaw has been reviewed and adopted in the year to date.


The Council meets its statutory

All Changes and Variations to the District

Council records There are no successful appeals or judicial reviews

Achieved: There were no successful Appeals or Judicial Reviews on any Plan Change

On track: No changes or variations have been made


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

requirements under the Resource Management Act 1991.

Plan are processed within statutory requirements.

on any Change or Variation to the Plan as a result of administrative or process matters.

or Variation to the Plan as a result of administrative or process matters in the third quarter.

to the District Plan in the year to date.

4.01 Roading Access is provided to the network of local roads.

Time for road access to be restored to communities following a 1 in 10 year climatic event (10% probability).

Measured by network consultant

100% of arterial and collector roads providing access to communities open within 24 hours, all other roads within 72 hours

Not achieved: 90% of arterial and collector roads were open within the target timeframes in the third quarter. Front Miranda and East Coast Roads were closed to traffic for approximately 27 hours on 5 to 6 January 2018 after a significant king tide and high winds led to the roads being overtopped by waves from the Hauraki Gulf.

Not achieved: Front Miranda and East Coast Roads were closed to traffic for approximately 27 hours on 5 to 6 January 2018 after a significant king tide and high winds led to the roads being overtopped by waves from the Hauraki Gulf.

4.02 Roading The pavement life of sealed roads is preserved.

That the road pavement is in good condition.

The Sealed Pavement Condition Index (This index is a national formula for the New Zealand Transport Agency).

Maintain a level of less than or equal to 7 (fair condition)

Achieved: The Sealed Pavement Condition Index was 6.9 in the third quarter.

On track: The Sealed Pavement Condition Index was 6.9 at the end of the third quarter.

4.03 Roading The Council delivers a roading network that addresses safety and amenity issues.

Percentage of customers satisfied with the quality of roads in the District (excluding state highways).

Annual Customer satisfaction survey

≥70% of customers satisfied

Not achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 64% of residents were satisfied with the quality of roads in the District. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.



Traffic safety barriers are installed and maintained in a fully operative condition in accordance with NZ Standards.


100% of all traffic safety barriers meet NZ standards

Achieved: 100% of barriers meet NZ standards in the third quarter. No new traffic safety barriers were installed and no maintenance completed.

On track: 100% of barriers have met NZ standards in the year to date. No new traffic safety barriers have been installed in the year to date.


Damaged, missing or leaning signs are remedied on District roads within specified timeframes.


100% on: ¡ regulatory/ permanent/ warning signs within 7 days ¡ safety connected signs within 2 days ¡ all other signs within 6 weeks

Achieved: 100% (14/14) of regulatory sign issues were resolved within seven days. 100% (0/0) of safety sign issues were resolved within two days. All other signs (25/25) were resolved within 6 weeks.

Not achieved: Due to one warning sign not being replaced in the targeted timeframes in the first quarter and one chevron sign not being replaced in the second quarter, this target will not be achieved in the 2017/18 year.


All reported potholes on District roads are repaired within specified timeframes.


85% within 5 days for >100 vehicle per day (vpd) roads and within 14 days for <100 vpd roads

Achieved: 100% (4/4) potholes on >100 vpd roads were repaired within five days. 90% (9/10) potholes on <100 vpd roads were repaired within 14 days

On track: 91.7% (22/24) potholes on >100 vpd roads have been repaired within five days and 91% (20/22) potholes on <100 vpd roads have been repaired within 14 days in the year to date.


All programmed new footpaths are installed.


100% of annually programmed footpaths installed in accordance with the agreed programme

Not achieved: No annually programmed footpaths were completed in the third quarter. The project selection report was reviewed with the Wards and changes were requested. Amended reports under review before being resubmitted to the Wards for final approval. Construction

On track: A draft annual programme selection report was completed in the first quarter. Construction of footpaths is programmed for the fourth quarter. The project selection report was reviewed with the Wards and changes were requested. Amended reports under review


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

to commence in the fourth quarter.

before being resubmitted to the Wards for final approval. Construction to commence in the fourth quarter.


Issues reported to the Council regarding state highways are forwarded to the New Zealand Transport Agency.


>95% of all reported issues are forwarded within one working day

Not achieved: 91% (32/35) of state highway issues recorded in the third quarter were forwarded within one working day. Two issues were not clearly defined to be a NZTA responsibility from the SR wording. Reassigned immediately after a site validation. The third issue was initially assigned to the HDC maintenance contractor by a new team member new to the district who did not realise that Thames Rd is also SH26 This error was subsequently addressed by training.

On track: 92% (98/106) of state highway issues in the year to date have been forwarded within one working day. It is expected that this result will improve over the next two quarters following the request system solution.

4.09 Roading Mandatory measure

The change from the previous financial year in the number of fatalities and serious injury crashes on the local road network, expressed as a number

NZTA and police reports.

A reduction over three years of one fatality and one serious injury crash

On track: 2015/16: 0 fatal/6 serious 2016/17: 1 fatal/5 serious 2017/18 to date: 0 fatal/3 serious Average to date over 3 years: 0.3 fatal/4.7 serious. Reduction on track.

On track: 2015/16: 0 fatal/6 serious 2016/17: 1 fatal/5 serious 2017/18 to date: 0 fatal/3 serious Average to date over 3 years: 0.3 fatal/4.7 serious. Reduction is on track


The average quality of ride on a sealed local road network, measured by smooth travel exposure.

Measured by the network consultant

Smooth Travel Exposure is higher than 96%

Achieved: The smooth travel exposure for the 2017/18 year is 96%.

On track: The smooth travel exposure for the 2017/18 year is 96%.


The percentage of the sealed local road network that is resurfaced.


Between 5% and 10% of the sealed District road network is resurfaced annually

On track: No resurfacing was done in the third quarter. Another 15 km will be resurfaced in April 2018 which will bring the total resurfacing for the year to 32km (6%).

On track: 17km (3%) was resurfaced in the year to date. On track to resurface 32 km (6%) in this financial year.


The percentage of footpaths within a territorial authority district that fall within the level of service or service standard for the condition of footpaths that is set out in the territorial authority’s relevant document (such as its annual plan,

An annual survey sample of 2.5%, randomly selected across all ages of footpath within the network, of number of tripping hazards per km defined by cracks, irregularities, broken areas, etc., by the network consultant

100% of footpaths with a defect rating greater than 5 are isolated for safety and remedied within 7 days

Achieved: No footpaths were given a defect rating greater than 5 in the third quarter. A footpath rating survey was received in July 2017 and all rating 5 areas were marked and fixed in the second quarter.

On track: 75 metres of footpaths have been rated with a defect rating greater than 5 in the year to date. All defects were identified and marked out, and sites made safe within the required timeframes in the year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

activity management plan, asset management plan, annual works programme or long term plan).


The percentage of customer service requests relating to roads and footpaths to which the territorial authority responds within the time frame specified in the long term plan.


100% of requests are responded to within 10 working days*. * Replies will define the remedial work required and expected completion time.

Achieved: 100% (385/385) of service requests were responded to within 10 working days in the third quarter.

Not achieved: 99% (1043/1054) of service requests have been responded to within 10 working days in the year to date. While the third and fourth quarters may achieve 100% in isolation, the annual target of 100% will not be met for.

5.01 Water Supply The Council provides water supply services at agreed levels of service.

Customers are satisfied with the cost of water supplied by the Council.


Equal to or greater than 60% of customers satisfied

Achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 67% of residents were satisfied with the cost of water supplied by Council. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


5.02 Water Supply Water services meet regulatory requirements.

The water supply service is operated in compliance with regulatory requirements.

Number of abatement notices and enforcement notices received

No abatement or enforcement notices received.

Achieved: No abatement or enforcement notices were received in the third quarter.

On track: No abatement or enforcement notices have been received in the year to date.

5.03 Water Supply Good quality water is supplied to consumers.

Customers are satisfied with the water quality from Hauraki District Council networks.



Not achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 74% of residents were satisfied with the water quality from Council networks. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


5.04 a Water Supply Water is safe to drink.

Water treatment plants will comply with the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards (NZDWS) 2008.

The NZ Drinking Water Standards 2008

Kerepehi 2014/15 Achieved: The Kerepehi water treatment plant complied with the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards 2008 in the third quarter.

Not achieved: The Kerepehi water treatment plant did not comply with the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards 2008 in the first quarter due to a problem with the chlorine dosing equipment. The plant did comply in the second and third quarters. This results in the measure being not achieved for the year.

5.04 b Water Supply Water is safe to drink.



Waitakaruru 2015/16

Achieved: The Waitakaruru water treatment plant complied with the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards 2008 in the third quarter.

On track: The Waitakaruru water treatment plant has complied with the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards 2008 in year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

5.04 c Water Supply Water is safe to drink.



Waihi 2015/16 Achieved: The Waihi water treatment plant complied with the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards 2008 in the third quarter.

On track: The Waihi water treatment plant has complied with the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards 2008 in the year to date.

5.04 d Water Supply Water is safe to drink.



Paeroa 2015/16 Achieved: The Paeroa water treatment plant complied with the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards 2008 in the third quarter.

On track: The Paeroa water treatment plant has complied with the New Zealand Drinking Water Standards 2008 in the year to date.

5.05 Water Supply Protection is provided to the community and the environment.

Fire hydrants are provided to urban fire districts within a 135 metre radius of the closest property boundary.

Mapping done via GIS software

Equal to or greater than 95% compliance

Achieved: GIS analysis carried out in September 2015 shows 96.4% of residential properties within a gazetted urban fire district have a fire hydrant within 135 metre radius.

Achieved: GIS analysis carried out in September 2015 shows 96.4% of residential properties within a gazetted urban fire district have a fire hydrant within 135 metre radius.

5.06 Water Supply A reliable water supply is provided.

Number of customers whose water supply is interrupted more than twice in a 12 month period due to unplanned loss of supply incidents.

Service request database

<5 customers per 1000 connections

Achieved: 2 customers or 0.28 customers per 1000 connections had interrupted water supply more than twice during the third quarter.

On track: 10 customers or 1.4 customers per 1000 connections had interrupted water supply more than twice in the year to date.

5.07 a Water Supply Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests are responded to within target timeframes: Emergency call outs: resolved <1 hour


Emergency call-outs: 100%

Achieved: No emergency callouts were received during the third quarter.

On track: No emergency callouts have been received in the year to date.

5.07 b Water Supply Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests are responded to within target timeframes: Urgent customer requests: response <1 hour


Urgent customer requests: 80%

Not achieved: 50% (10/20) of urgent customer requests were responded to in less than 1 hour in the third quarter. Jan: 7/15 Feb: 2/4 Mar: 1/1 Staff encountered a high number of breaks in Paeroa in January. Most of the not achieved targets were relating to the same event.

Not on track: 69% (33/48) of urgent customer requests were responded to in less than 1 hour in the year to date.

5.07 c Water Supply Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests are responded to within target timeframes: Priority customer requests:


Priority customer requests: 80%

Not achieved:77% (129/168) of priority customer requests were assessed in less than 4 hours in the third quarter. Jan: 42/57 (74%) Feb: 38/50 (76%) Mar: 49/61 (80%) Targets have not been met.

Not on track: 78% (339/435) of priority customer requests were assessed in less than 4 hours in the year to date. With the additional staffing it is expected that this result can be achieved in the remaining quarters.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

assess <4 hours

This has been identified as an improvement area.

5.07 d Water Supply Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests are responded to within target timeframes: Routine customer requests: call back <3 working days


Routine customer requests: 85%

Not achieved:57% (30/53) of routine customer requests are called back in less than 3 working days in the third quarter. Jan: 7/14 (50%) Feb: 9/20 (45%) Mar: 14/19 (74%) This parameter relates to routine matters like water meters and pricing requests. These are only actioned when the urgent tasks have been resolved.

Not on track: 68% (115/170) of routine customer requests were called back in less than 3 working days in the year to date.

5.08 Water Supply Mandatory measure

The extent to which the local authority’s drinking water supply complies with: a) part 4 of the drinking water standards (bacteria compliance criteria), and b) part 5 of the drinking water standards (protozoal compliance criteria).

Extract from National Water Information New Zealand (WINZ) database

¡ Kerepehi – full compliance ¡ Waitakaruru – full compliance from July 2016, prior to that, full compliance with DWS 2000 ¡ Paeroa – full compliance from July 2015, prior to that, full compliance with DWS 2000 ¡ Waihi – full compliance from July 2015, prior to that, full compliance with DWS 2000 ¡ Kaimanawa – Rural Agricultural Standard applies and has not yet been produced by the Ministry of Health. As an interim measure, target is compliance with DWS 2000 ¡ All other supplies – compliance with DWS 2000 until decommissioned.

Not achieved: Kerepehi Bacteria – compliant Protozoa - compliant Waitakaruru Bacteria – compliant Protozoa - compliant Paeroa Bacteria – compliant Protozoa - compliant Waihi Bacteria – compliant Protozoa - compliant Kaimanawa Bacteria - compliant Protozoa - not compliant Mackaytown – not in use Karangahake - not in use Waikino – not in use Ohinemuri – not in use Huirau – not in use The Kaimanawa water treatment plant does not have the means to treat protozoa and is not expected to until the 2018/19 year, therefore this measure will not be achieved for 2017/18.

Not achieved: Kerepehi Bacteria – compliant Protozoa - compliant Waitakaruru Bacteria – compliant Protozoa - compliant Paeroa Bacteria – compliant Protozoa - compliant Waihi Bacteria – compliant Protozoa - compliant Kaimanawa Bacteria - compliant Protozoa - not compliant Mackaytown – not in use Karangahake - not in use Waikino – not in use Ohinemuri – not in use Huirau – not in use The Kaimanawa water treatment plant does not have the means to treat protozoa and is not expected to until the 2018/19 year, therefore this measure will not be achieved for 2017/18.


The percentage of real water loss from the local authority’s networked reticulation system (including a description of the methodology used to calculate this).

¡ Calculation methodology = Volume of water sold (sourced from water meter invoicing system, from rates department) versus volume of treated water produced by the water treatment plants (sourced from water treatment plant treated water supply meter(s)).

The percentage of unbilled water versus the volume of treated water produced is less than 30%.

This measure is calculated annually in the fourth quarter.

Unable to measure: This calculation is carried out annually in the fourth quarter.


Where the local authority attends a call out in response to a fault or unplanned interruption to

The Customer Service Request Database will be used to determine the time that the customer service request / complaint was logged.

Urgent call out: ¡ Median time for staff to arrive on site - less than 1 hour, anywhere within the district. ¡ Median time for staff to restore

Not achieved: For urgent call outs: • Median time for staff to arrive on site: 0 hours, 54 minutes. • Median time for staff to restore water supply: 2 hours, 24 minutes.70% of

Not on track: For urgent call outs: • Median time for staff to arrive on site: 0 hours, 25 minutes. • Median time for staff to restore water supply: 1 hours, 38 minutes. 89% of


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

its networked reticulation system, the following median response times measured: a) attendance for urgent call-outs: from the time that the local authority receives notification to the time that service personnel reach the site, and b) resolution of urgent call-outs: from the time that the local authority receives notification to the time that service personnel confirm resolution of the fault or interruption. c) attendance for non-urgent call-outs: from the time that the local authority receives notification to the time that service personnel reach the site, and d) resolution of non-urgent call-outs: from the time that the local authority receives notification to the time that service personnel confirm resolution of the fault or interruption.

The field-staff job-sheets will be used to determine the time to site, and time to resolve. The job-sheets are also used to record the details about the repair work carried out. The level of service reporting spreadsheet is used to collate the incoming data, and calculate and report on performance.

water supply - 99% or more of all water supply faults are resolved within 8 hours. Non-urgent call out: ¡ Median time for staff to arrive on site - less than 4 hours, anywhere within the district. ¡ Median time for staff to resolve fault - 99% or more of all water supply faults are resolved within 8 hours.

faults were resolved within 8 hours. Non-urgent call out: • Median time for staff to arrive on site: 1 hour, 9 minutes. • Median time for staff to resolve fault: 7 hours, 35 minutes. 50% of faults were resolved within 8 hours. Council encountered a higher than usual number of pipebreaks in January and that stretched resources.

faults were resolved within 8 hours. Non-urgent call out: • Median time for staff to arrive on site: 1 hour, 0 minutes. • Median time for staff to resolve fault: 4 hours, 20 minutes. 54% of faults were resolved within 8 hours.


The total number of complaints received by the local authority about any of the following: a) drinking water clarity b) drinking water taste c) drinking

The Customer Service Request Database will be used to determine the number of complaints received about the listed issues.

No more than 5 complaints per 1000 connections: ¡ Water quality issues: (clarity; taste; odour) ¡ Service quality issues: (poor response to a service request) ¡ Water pressure / flow issues: (pressure; flow;

Achieved: - Water and service quality issues: 1.5 per 1000 connections. - Water pressure / flow issues: 0.0 per 1000 connections. Total for the year to date: 8.14 per 1000 connections.

Not on track: There have been no more than 5 complaints per 1000 connections in the year to date. - Water and service quality issues: 6.15 per 1000 connections. - Water pressure / flow issues: 0.14 per 1000 connections. Total for the year to date is


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

water odour d) drinking water pressure or flow e) continuity of supply, and f) the local authority’s response to any of these issues expressed per 1000 connections to the local authority’s networked reticulation system.

continuity of supply) Total: No more than 10 complaints per 1000 connections.

6.3 per 1000 connections. Most of the complaints were due to the colour of the water on the Plains. This is caused by manganese in the water. Future budgets have allowed for this problem to be addressed.


The average consumption of drinking water per day per resident within the territorial authority district.

Census meshblocks have been used to calculate the population within the urban boundaries. Water billing records for customers’ water meters are used to calculate the volume of water sold to each property in the District. GIS analysis is used to identify which properties are located in an urban area, and thereby calculate the total volume of water sold to urban customers, and the urban population. The final calculation is: the volume of water sold divided by the population.

¡ Urban water use: less than 300 litres/ person/ day ¡ Agricultural water use: less than 300 litres/ hectare / day

This measure is calculated annually in the fourth quarter.

On track: This measure is due to be calculated in the fourth quarter.

6.01 Wastewater Council provides Wastewater services at agreed levels of service.

Percentage of users satisfied with the quality of wastewater services provided.



Achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 97% of residents were satisfied with the quality of wastewater services provided. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


6.02 Wastewater Protection is provided to the community and the environment.

Number of dry weather overflows from pump stations and/or the wastewater network.


¡ <1 pump-station overflow per 20 pump stations per year. ¡ <15 overflows from the pipe network per 100km of wastewater pipe length per annum.

Achieved for the third quarter: • 0.0 pump-station overflows per 20 pump stations • 0.63 overflows from the pipe network per 100km of wastewater pipe

On track: In the year to date: • 0 pump-station overflows per 20 pump stations • 1.27 overflows from the pipe network per 100km of wastewater pipe.

6.03 a Wastewater Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests are responded to within target timeframes: Emergency call outs:



Not achieved: 0% (0/1) of emergency callouts were resolved in less than 1 hour during the third quarter. Manhole lid was found open. This is classed as urgent but did not cause an eminent

Not achieved: 0/1 emergency callouts were resolved in time for the year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

resolved <1 hour

threat as it was in a paddock away from people etc.

6.03 b Wastewater Timely response to customer requests.




Achieved: No urgent callouts were received during the third quarter.

On track: No urgent callouts were received in the year to date.

6.03 c Wastewater Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests are responded to within target timeframes: Priority customer requests: assess <4 hours



Achieved: 100% (5/5) of priority customer requests were assessed in less than 4 hours in the third quarter. Jan: 1/1 Feb: 3/3 Mar: 1/1

On track 91% (20/22) of priority customer requests have been assessed in less than 4 hours in the year to date.

6.03 d Wastewater Timely response to customer requests.




Not achieved: 57% (4/7) of routine customer requests are called back in less than 3 working days in the third quarter. Jan: 1/2 Feb: 1/3 Mar: 2/2 Low priority tasks that required construction. Second one was a long term problem.

Not on track: 60% (9/15) of routine customer requests have been called back in less than 3 working days in the year to date.

6.04 Wastewater Mandatory measure

The number of dry weather sewerage overflows from the territorial authority’s sewerage system, expressed per 1000 sewerage connections to that sewerage system.

The Customer Service Request Database will be used to determine the number of customer service requests/complaints that have been logged in respect of overflows. The field-staff job-sheets will be used to determine the time to site, and time to resolve. The job-sheets are also used to record the details about the repair work carried out. The level of service reporting spreadsheet is used to collate the incoming data, to calculate and report on performance.

Less than 25 per 1000 connections per annum

Achieved: 4 complaints received, which equals 0.7 per 1000 connections in the third quarter.

On track: 7 complaints received, which equals 1.2 per 1000 connections in the year to date.


Compliance with the territorial authority’s resource consents for discharge from its sewerage system measured by the number of:

Notices will be received via the Council’s document management system and reported to the Council Operations Committee.

a) 0 abatement notices b) 0 infringement notices c) 0 enforcement orders d) 0 convictions

Achieved: a) no abatement notices b) no infringement notices c) no enforcement orders d) no convictions were received in the third quarter.

On track: No abatement, infringement, enforcement notices or convictions have been received in the year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

a) abatement notices b) infringement notices c) enforcement orders, and d) convictions received by the territorial authority in relation to those resource consents.


Where the territorial authority attends to sewerage overflows resulting from a blockage or other fault in the territorial authority’s sewerage system, the following median response times measured: a) attendance time: from the time that the territorial authority receives notification to the time that service personnel reach the site, and b) resolution time: from the time that the territorial authority receives notification to the time that service personnel confirm resolution of the blockage or other fault.

The Customer Service Request Database will be used to determine the time that the customer service request/complaint was logged. The field-staff job-sheets will be used to determine the time to site, and time to resolve. The job-sheets are also used to record the details about the repair work carried out. The level of service reporting spreadsheet is used to collate the incoming data, calculate and report on performance.

Attendance time: less than 4 hours after notification. Time to resolve problem: less than 4 hours after notification.

Achieved: Median attendance time: 43 minutes Median completion time: 3 hours, 13 minutes

On track: In the year to date: Median attendance time: 31 minutes Median completion time: 0 days 3 hours, 15 minutes.


The total number of complaints received by the territorial authority about any of the following: a) sewage odour b) sewerage system faults c) sewerage system blockages, and d) the

The number of connections has been determined by the number of properties paying for wastewater services in their rates. The Customer Service Request Database will be used to determine the number of complaints received about the listed issues.

No more than 30 complaints per 1000 connections

Achieved: Odour complaints: 0 per 1000 connections Fault complaints: 0.17 per 1000 connections Blockage complaints: 0.83 per 1000 connections Complaints about response: 0.17 per 1000 connections Total 1.16 per 1000 complaints for the third quarter

On track: Odour complaints: 0 per 1000 connections Fault complaints: 0.66 per 1000 connections Blockage complaints: 3.65 per 1000 connections Complaints about response: 0.17 per 1000 connections Total 4.48 per 1000 complaints for the year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

territorial authority’s response to issues with its sewerage system, expressed per 1000 connections to the territorial authority’s sewerage system.

7.01 Land Drainage

The Council provides Land Drainage services at agreed levels of service.

Percentage of affected customers satisfied with the land drainage services.



Not achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 61% of residents were satisfied with land drainage services. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


7.02 Land Drainage

Drainage services meet regulatory requirements.

The land drainage service is operated in compliance with regulatory requirements.


No abatement notices or enforcement notices received.

Achieved: No abatement or enforcement notices were received in the third quarter.


7.03 Land Drainage

Pasture protection is provided.

Drainage schemes reliably maintain pasture production on land that would otherwise flood after 38mm or less of rainfall over a 3-day period.

Service Request database

No verified customer complaints about flood duration of >3 days are received.

Not achieved: There was 1 verified customer complaint about flood duration of >3 days received in the third quarter. Due to a high intensity rainfall event in February (approximately 109mm of rain in 3 days) farmland along Wani Road in Netherton was under water for 5 days following the rain. The drains had not yet been cleaned for the year and there was a lot of weed stopping the pump. The drain was machine cleaned as soon as possible, and the pumpstation manned to keep it clear of weed. When cleared, the water subsided within hours.

Not achieved: 1 verified customer complaint about flood duration of >3 days was received in the third quarter.

7.04 a Land Drainage

Timely response to customer requests.



Emergency call outs: 100%


On track: No emergency callouts have been received in the year to date.

7.04 b Land Drainage





Achieved: No urgent callouts were received during the third quarter.

On track: No urgent callouts have been received in the year to date.

7.04 c Land Drainage


Customer requests are responded to within target timeframes:



Achieved: No priority callouts were received during the third quarter.

On track: No priority callouts have been received in the year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

Priority customer requests: assess <4 hours

7.04 d Land Drainage





Achieved: 100% (5/5) of routine customer requests are called back in less than 3 working days in the third quarter. Jan: 0/0 Feb: 3/3 Mar: 2/2

On track: 85% (11/13) of routine customer requests have been called back in less than 3 working days in the year to date.

7.05 Land Drainage

Mandatory measure

The major flood protection and control works that are maintained, repaired and renewed to the key standards defined in the local authority’s relevant planning documents (such as its activity management plan, asset management plan, annual works programme or long term plan).

GPS Survey of stopbank level. Design flood level from statistical analysis of tidal records, and hydraulic design of flood profiles

100% or more of the stopbank length, on inspection, is greater than the design flood level.

Not achieved: 98% of the stopbanks are at design level.

Not achieved: 98% of the stopbanks are at design level.

8.01 Stormwater Stormwater systems protect houses from flooding in urban areas.

Percentage of customers satisfied with the stormwater services.



Achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 80% of residents were satisfied with stormwater services. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


8.02 Stormwater A reliable stormwater service is provided.

The stormwater network is maintained to minimise the risk of blockages causing flooding.


<5 service requests relating to blockages per 1000 customers

Achieved: 0.91 service requests per 1000 customers relating to blockages were received in the third quarter. Year to date total: 1.82.

On track: 1.82 service requests per 1000 customers relating to blockages have been received in the year to date.

8.03 a Stormwater Timely response to customer requests.





On track: 100% (1/1) of emergency callouts have been resolved in less than 1 hour in the year to date.

8.03 b Stormwater Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests are responded to within target timeframes: Urgent customer



Achieved: No urgent customer requests were received during the third quarter.

On track: No urgent customer requests have been received in the year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

requests: response <1 hour

8.03 c Stormwater Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests are responded to within target timeframes: Priority customer requests: assess <4 hours



Achieved: no priority customer requests were received during the third quarter.

On track: 100% (2/2) of priority customer requests have been assessed in less than 4 hours in the year to date.

8.03 d Stormwater Timely response to customer requests.




Not achieved: 79% (11/14) of routine customer requests are called back in less than 3 working days in the third quarter. Jan: 7/7 Feb: 3/6 Mar: 1/1 The works identified through these service request required construction and took longer to plan and give a response to the complainant. One of the service requests was about a drain that is not on Council's asset register and it took time to research the ownership.

Not on track: 71% (30/42) of routine customer requests have been called back in less than 3 working days in the year to date.

8.04 Stormwater Mandatory measure

a) The number of flooding events that occur in a territorial authority district. b) For each flooding event, the number of habitable floors affected (expressed per 1000 properties connected to the territorial authority’s stormwater system).

Location of at risk properties is known, inspect during event. The number of connections has been determined by the number of properties paying for the storm water services in their rates.

a) 0 flooding events b) 0 habitable floors affected

Achieved: (a) 0 flooding events. (b) 0 habitable floors affected. A number of properties were flooded in the Kaiaua event. This measure measures the failure of a Council's stormwater system. The houses that got flooded was due to sea water intrusion and not the malfunctioning of the stormwater system.

On track: In the year to date: (a) 0 flooding events. (b) 0 habitable floors affected.


Compliance with the territorial authority’s resource consents for discharge from its stormwater system, measured by the number of: a) abatement notices b) infringement notices c) enforcement orders, and d) convictions,

Number of abatement/ infringement notices are counted.

a) 0 abatement notices b) 0 infringement notices c) 0 enforcement orders d) 0 convictions

Achieved: (a) 0 abatement notices (b) 0 infringement notices (c) 0 enforcement orders (d) 0 convictions

On track: No abatement, infringement, enforcement notices or convictions were received in the year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

received by the territorial authority in relation to those resource consents.


The median response time to attend a flooding event, measured from the time that the territorial authority receives notification to the time that service personnel reach the site.

The Customer Service Request database will be used to determine the time that the customer service request/ complaint was logged. The field-staff job-sheets will be used to determine the time to site, and time to resolve (if the problem could be resolved during the event). The job-sheets are also used to record the details about the repair work carried out. The level of service reporting spreadsheet is used to collate the incoming data, calculate and report on performance.

Less than 60 minutes after notification

Achieved: There were 0 flooding events in the third quarter. A number of properties were flooded in the Kaiaua event. This measure measures the failure of a Council's stormwater system. The houses that got flooded was due to sea water intrusion and not the malfunctioning of the stormwater system.

On track: No flooding events have occurred in the year to date.


The number of complaints received by a territorial authority about the performance of its stormwater system, expressed per 1000 properties connected to the territorial authority’s stormwater system.

The Customer Service Request database will be used to determine the number of complaints received about the issue.

No more than 5 complaints per 1000 properties

Achieved: 0.91 complaints per 1000 customers relating to blockages were received in the third quarter. Year to date total: 1.97 complaints received.

On track: 1.97 complaints per 1000 customers relating to blockages and faults have been received in the year to date. There has been a total of 13 complaints received in the year to date.

9.01 Solid Waste Collection systems and waste processing facilities are convenient and accessible.

Percentage of users satisfied with the kerbside collection service.


Equal to or greater than 85% of users satisfied.

Achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 91% of residents were satisfied with the kerbside collection services. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


9.02 Solid Waste Collection systems and waste processing facilities are convenient and accessible.

A transfer station will be open in the District every day except for public holidays.

Transfer station daily record summary

2015-25: 100% open every day (except public holidays)

Achieved: 100% of transfer stations were open in the District every day except for public holidays in the third quarter.

On track: 100% of transfer stations have been open in the District every day except for public holidays in the year to date.

9.03 Solid Waste Solid Waste services meet regulatory requirements.

The Solid Waste service is operated in compliance with legal requirements.


No abatement notices or enforcement notices received.

Achieved: No abatement or enforcement notices were received in the second quarter.



of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

9.04 Solid Waste Adverse effects of waste on the environment are minimised.

Percentage of waste diverted from landfill by recycling or composting within Council provided waste services.

Quarterly reports from contractor

>55% of waste diverted from landfill

Not achieved: 23% of waste has been diverted from landfill at refuse transfer stations and 49% has been diverted at the kerbside collection in the third quarter. This target is not expected to be achieved in the following quarter. This measure is split for the 2018 Long Term Plan to show: -the total quantity of waste sent to landfill is reducing, with a target of a 13% reduction in the total quantity of waste sent to landfill from 363kg per person per annum to 316kg per person by 2022, and - The quantity of kerbside rubbish collection per person is decreasing with a 5% decrease in kerbside household waste to landfill from approx. 78kg per person per annum to 74kg per person by 2022. An additional amount of funding has been allowed in the Long Term Plan budget to cater for further education campaigns courage recycling, and a performance measure on education campaigns has been drafted.

Not on track: 23% of waste has been diverted from landfill at refuse transfer stations and 49% has been diverted at the kerbside collection in the third quarter. This target is not expected to be achieved in the following quarter.

9.05 Solid Waste Reliable sold waste collection is provided.

Number of days that collection is not completed on the scheduled day for each collection area that resulted in complaints.


<30 complaints (that collection not completed) per 1000 customers per annum

Achieved: There were n0 legitimate complaints received per 1000 customers regarding missed collections in the third quarter.

On track: There have been no complaints received per 1000 customers that collections were not completed on scheduled days in the year to date.

9.06 a Solid Waste Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests, where the customer requests to be contacted, are responded to within target timeframes: Complaints about missed collections (responding phone call by end of day following complaint)


Missed collections: 100%

Not achieved: 38% (5/13) of missed collection service requests were responded to within target timeframes in the third quarter.

Not achieved: 49% (25/51) of missed collection service requests have been responded to within target timeframes in the year to date. The target of 100% will not be achieved for the year.

9.06 b Solid Waste Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests, where the customer requests to be contacted, are responded to within target timeframes: Illegal


Illegal dumping: 100%

Not achieved: 78% (7/9) of illegal dumping service requests were responded to within target timeframes in the third quarter.

Not achieved: 68% (21/31) of illegal dumping service requests have been responded to within target timeframes in the year to date. The target of 100% will not be achieved for the year.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

dumping is cleaned up (within 3 working days)

9.06 c Solid Waste Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests, where the customer requests to be contacted, are responded to within target timeframes: Recycle bins provided (delivered in time to miss no more than 1 collection day)


Recycle bins: 100%

Not achieved: 82% (28/34) of recycle bin service requests were responded to within target timeframes in the third quarter.

Not achieved: 54% (49/91) of recycle bin service requests have been responded to within target timeframes in the year to date. The target of 100% will not be achieved for the year.

9.06 d Solid Waste Timely response to customer requests.

Customer requests, where the customer requests to be contacted, are responded to within target timeframes: Routine customer requests (call back <3 working days)


Routine request: 85%

Not achieved: 83% (10/12) of routine service requests were responded to within target timeframes in the third quarter.

Not on track: 54% (14/26) of routine service requests were responded to within target timeframes in the first quarter. It is unlikely that this measure will be met for the year.

10.01 Libraries Library services are provided in a customer focused and effective way to support the recreational and educational needs of the community.

Percentage of library users satisfied with library services.

Customer satisfaction survey.

>95% of customers satisfied

Not achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 95% of residents were satisfied with the library services provided. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


10.02 Libraries Libraries attract a wide audience.

The number of library members is increasing.

Library Management System

>49% of District population are members

Achieved: As at 31 March 2018 membership totalled 9745, this is 55% of the district population.

On track: In the year to date the membership numbers totalled 9,745 which is 55% of the District population.

10.03 Libraries Libraries attract a wide audience.

The number of electronic and hard-copy books issued

Library Management System and Electronic Database

>140,000 electronic and hard-copy books issued per annum

On track: Total number of electronic or hard copy books issued in the third quarter was 34418. The end of year total is: 99870. Note: To achieve the target at the end of the year, the target for each quarter is 35,000 issues

On track: The total number of electronic and hard copy books issued in the year to date is 99870.

11.01 Swimming Pools

Council operated swimming pool facilities are safe for users and staff.

Number of accidents each year at Council operated swimming pools as a result of poor design or maintenance.

Monthly reports prepared by Pool Supervisor and Service Request Database

No accidents per operating season per pool

Not achieved: 6 accidents or incidents were recorded as a result of poor design or maintenance in the third quarter. All 11 accidents were small cuts and grazes. The majority are from broken tiles and these are being replaced during the off season. The remaining are from uneven concrete which will be addressed now that the pools are closed.

Not achieved: Eleven accidents/incidents were recorded as a result of poor design or maintenance for the pool season.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

11.02 Swimming Pools

Council operated swimming pool facilities are safe for users and staff.

Percentage of pool users satisfied with the operation of Council swimming pools.



Achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 91% of residents were satisfied with the operation of Council swimming pools. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


12.01 Sports Fields and Recreational Reserves

The Council will provide sports fields that meet the requirements of its users.

Number of justified complaints regarding sports fields playing surface condition.

Service Request Database

<6 recorded complaints per year

Achieved: There were no justified complaints regarding the condition of sports fields playing surfaces received in the third quarter.

On track: No justified complaints regarding the condition of sports fields playing surfaces have been received in the year to date.


Safe playground facilities are provided.

Playground facilities are regularly inspected to ensure they are safe and compliant with playground safety standards.

Playground audit reports completed by Construction & Maintenance (C&M) staff

Playground inspections are: ¡ weekly in primary school holiday periods ¡ fortnightly in high use sites ¡ monthly in low use sites.

Achieved: 100% (72/72) playground inspections in the third quarter were: 44/44 of weekly inspections in primary school holiday periods ŸŸŸ16/16 fortnightly inspections in high use sites Ÿ 12/12 monthly inspections in low use sites.

On track: 100% (195/195) of playground inspections have been undertaken in the year to date: Ÿ 116/116 of weekly inspections in primary school holiday periods Ÿ 46/46 fortnightly inspections in high use sites Ÿ 33/33 monthly inspections in low use sites.


Park facilities that are provided meet community expectation.

Percentage of users satisfied with services and facilities provided at the Districts Parks and Reserves.



Achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 92% of residents were satisfied with the services and facilities provided at the District Parks and Reserves. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


13.01 Sports Initiatives

Foster the participation of residents in sports, recreation and leisure.

Extent of Sport Waikato involvement in the coordination of training/ advisory sessions for sporting clubs within the District.

Sports Coordinator’s 6 monthly report

At least 15 sporting club training/advisory sessions per annum

Achieved: 20 sports club training/advisory sessions were held in the third quarter. On Target *Facilitated meetings between Sport N Action Waihi, HDC and Joe Sprengers from Te Awamutu Sports Club to work on operation plan for Sport N Action Waihi *This Is Me Exhibitors Meeting to give overview and guidance to Waihi’s This Is Me Festival *This Is Me festival Waihi to promote sport/ recreation and health options in Waihi *Infant Movement Workshop for parents/educators of Under Fives held at Waihi Plunket *Under Five Oral health Modelling and Interactive Display – sessions held at 11 ECC (Early Childcare Centres) *Independent chair for Thames Valley Hockey Association Junior Management Committee to work through strategies for leading Saturday morning hockey *FAB Reflexes workshop for parents/educators of Under

Achieved: 42 sporting club training/advisory sessions have been held in the year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

Fives held at Tamariki Station, Paeroa * Interactive Nutrition Modelling and Display at 2 ECC *Physical activity Modelling – Jumping, Landing, Static held at one ECC *12 sessions held at different primary schools in the district covering Water Safety, Bikewise, Physical Activity modelling, Leadership, Swimming, Team Building, Daily Fitness

14.01 Halls Council managed halls are clean and well maintained and meet the needs of the community.

Satisfaction of hall users with the cleanliness and maintenance standard of the halls.

Service Request Database, direct contact and written correspondence

<36 complaints per year

Achieved: 8 complaints were received in the third quarter regarding the cleanliness and maintenance of halls. Jan: 3 Feb: 3 Mar: 2

Not on track: 29 complaints have been received regarding the cleanliness and maintenance of halls in the year to date. To meet the end of year target, less than 7 complaints for the fourth quarter could be received. If the current trend continues the target will not be achieved.

15.01 Pensioner Housing

Pensioner housing units are affordable.

Elderly tenants can afford to continue occupying the Council pensioner units.

Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment website as at 1 February of previous year

Rental fees are no more than 85% of local current market rates.

Achieved: Rentals are $122 a week for a one bedroom unit and $116 a week for a bedsitter. Rental fees are/are not less than 85% of local current market rent of $190 per week. Market rate is $197 per week, sourced from Tenancy Services website data for the lower quartile for one bedroom flat.

Achieved: Rentals are $122 a week for a one bedroom unit and $116 a week for a bedsitter. Rental fees are less than 85% of local current market rent of $190 per week. The rent is proposed to increase by $6 per week from 1 July 2018.

15.02 Pensioner Housing

The Council’s pensioner units are maintained to a comfortable and safe standard.

Percentage of tenants satisfied with the comfort and safety of the units.

Annual tenant satisfaction survey

>85% of tenants satisfied with the comfort and safety of the units

On track: The next annual tenant survey was undertaken in early 2018, however the results have not yet been analysed.

On track: The next annual tenant survey will be undertaken in early 2018.

16.01 Public Toilets Public toilets are clean and maintained, meeting the needs of the community and the travelling public.

Number of justified complaints regarding whether public toilets are clean, maintained and sufficiently stocked with consumables.

Service Request Database and written correspondence

<50 complaints per annum

Not achieved: 21 justified complaints regarding public toilets were received in the third quarter. Jan: 13 Feb: 4 Mar: 4 The main subject of complaints was fouling of toilets and notifying of urgent cleaning required. There was a problem with the flush system at the Victoria St toilets . We have put new and a different type of flushes on all the toilets at Victoria St toilets. We are looking at doing the same at Haszard before the same problem occurs. There is not much we can do about the other complaints.

Not achieved: 59 justified complaints regarding public toilets have been received in the year to date.

17.01 Cemeteries The Council provides efficiently

Number of requests for general

Service Request Database

<10 requests collectively for general

Achieved: 3 requests for cemetery general

On track: Four requests have been received regarding cemetery


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

serviced and well maintained cemeteries.

maintenance at cemeteries per year.

maintenance across all Council cemeteries per year.

maintenance were received in the third quarter.

maintenance in the year to date.

18.01 Community Growth

The Council will work alongside others to recognise and develop opportunities for growth within the local business communities.

The Council is aware of business issues and encourages growth opportunities and events.

Business After 5 (BA5) meeting attendance

A Council representative will attend BA5 meetings 11 months of the year in Waihi and Paeroa, and quarterly in Ngatea. The Economic Development Manager will report on Council’s economic development activities at two BA5 meetings each year in Waihi and Paeroa, and one in Ngatea.

Achieved: At least one Council representative has attended 5 BA5 meetings held in Ngatea (did not have a BA5 this quarter), Waihi (3) and Paeroa (2) in the third quarter.

On track: At least one Council representative has attended 17 BA5 meetings held in Ngatea (1), Waihi (8) and Paeroa (8) in the year to date.


The community is aware of Economic Development initiatives.

The community is updated on economic development matters.

HDC news page, website electronic records

Quarterly articles published in the HDC news page and website.

Achieved: In the third quarter 1 article was published in the HDC news page on 9 March 2018.

On track: An economic development related article has been published in each quarter in the year to date.


The Council is working to implement its Economic Development Strategy.

Percentage of customers satisfied with the Council’s approach to Economic Development.


>70% of customers satisfied with approach

Achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 74% of residents were satisfied with Council’s approach to economic development. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report


19.01 Community Initiatives

To provide motivation in our District, the Council will recognise and acknowledge achievements of the community.

The Council, with the community, will celebrate community achievements towards social well-being at the Citizens and Young Achievers Awards ceremony held annually.

Report to Council Award ceremonies are held prior to November annually.

Achieved: The Citizen and Young Achiever Award ceremony was held on 25 October 2017 in the Ngatea War Memorial Hall.

Achieved: The annual citizen and young achiever award ceremony was held 25 October 2017 in the Ngatea War Memorial Hall.

19.02 Community Initiatives

The Council will work towards achieving improved community social well-being through its Social Initiatives Strategy.

The Council will work with others towards achieving the goals of the Hauraki Social Initiatives Strategy.

Report to Council The Council supports three initiatives from the Social Initiatives Strategy each year.

On track: The Social Initiatives Strategy has been approved by Council and the Social Wellbeing Working Party’s strategy action plans have been devised in preparation for implementation in 2018/19 term. Initiatives from the strategy have been supported, however will not be completed in 2017/18.

On track: The Social Initiatives Strategy has been approved by Council and the Social Wellbeing Working Party’s strategy action plans have been devised in preparation for implementation in 2018/19 term.

20.01 Resource Mgmt. Impl.

Resource consent applications will be decided and issued within Resource Management

Notified resource consent decisions issued within statutory timeframes.

Resource consents database

100% of decisions issued within statutory timeframes

Not applicable: There were no notified resource consents applied for in the third quarter that have reached a decision in this quarter.

On track: 100% (1/1) notified resource consents applied for in the year to date which have reached a decision in the year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

Act, 1991 timeframes.


Resource consent applications will be decided and issued within Resource Management Act 1991 timeframes.

Non-notified resource consent decisions are issued within statutory timeframes.


100% of decisions issued within statutory timeframes

Not achieved: 94%% (14/15) of non-notified subdivision and 100% (11/11) of non-notified land use applications were issued within statutory timeframes in the third quarter. The one subdivision consent that went over was due to the complexity of the application.

Not achieved: 99% (123/124) of non-notified resource consent decisions have been issued within statutory timeframes in the year to date. One subdivision consent was not issued within statutory timeframes in the third quarter.


Provide a monitoring service which ensures compliance with consent conditions.

All new land use consents are monitored within 12 months of being granted.


100% of new consents are monitored within 12 months.

Not achieved: 91% (20/22) of new land use consents were monitored in the third quarter (monitored within 12 months of being granted). Those that were not monitored were due to in part the consent not yet being activated.

Not on track: 73% (49/67) of applicable resource consents were monitored in the year to date.


All LIMs are issued within agreed timeframes.

Non-urgent LIMs issued within 10 working days and urgent LIMs issued within three working days

Applications database

100% issued on time

Achieved: 100% (34/34) of non-urgent LIMs were issued within 10 working days. Achieved: 100% (45/45) of urgent LIMs issued within 3 days.

Not achieved: In the year to date: 98% (153/156) of non-urgent LIMs have been issued within 10 days. 100% (109/109) of urgent LIMs have been issued within 3 days. The target of 100% will not be met by the end of the year due to three LIMs going over time in November 2017 due to a system error.


The public is satisfied with the Council’s provision of Resource Consent administrative services.

Percentage of customers satisfied with the service they receive during the resource consent process.


80% of customers satisfied

Not achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 74% of residents were satisfied with the resource consent services provided. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


21.01 Building Control

Commercial and public buildings are audited for compliance with the building Warrant of Fitness (WOF) requirements under the Building Act, 2004.

Commercial and public buildings that require a warrant of fitness (WOF) are audited for compliance with WOF systems.

Annual audit of records

10% of building WOFs are audited for compliance per year.

On track: 39% (9/23) WOFs were audited for compliance in the third quarter. Note: 10% of WOF = 23 audits.

On track: 39% (9/23) WOFs have been audited for compliance in the year to date


Building consent applications will be processed within the statutory timeframes of the Building Act, 2004.

Building consent applications are processed within 20 working days.

Building Consent Tracking Database

100% are issued within 20 working days of receiving the application, providing the application is complete.

Achieved: 100% (24/24) building consents not requiring further information were issued within 20 working days in the third quarter. 61 (60 in time) building consents in total were processed in the quarter.

Not achieved: 99% (82/83) building consents not requiring further information have been issued within 20 working days in the year to date. This target of 100% will not be achieved due to one consent not meeting timeframes in the first quarter.


The Council consistently delivers an effective and efficient

The Council maintains Building Consent Authority

Two yearly International Accreditation New Zealand (IANZ) audit

Maintain BCA accreditation with IANZ.

Achieved: The Council had its biennial audit of the BCA accreditation by IANZ in July 2017 and maintained its accreditation status and any

Achieved: The Council had its biennial audit of the BCA accreditation by IANZ in July 2017 and maintained its accreditation status and


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

building control service.

(BCA) accreditation standards.

improvements identified were corrected. The next audit is due in July 2019.

any improvements identified were corrected. The next audit is due in July 2019.


Privately owned swimming pools comply with the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987.

All properties with swimming pools on the Council’s register with a potential for non-compliance are inspected annually for compliance with the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act, 1987.

Quarterly audit of swimming pool register

100% of pools with potential for non-compliance are inspected.

Achieved: 146/135 audits completed in accordance with the Building Pools Amendment Act 2016. The Building (Pools) Amendment Act revoked the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act in mid 2017. All pools are now required to be inspected every 3 years. There is no distinction between potentially non-compliant (high risk) and compliant (low risk) pools.

On track: 108% (146/135) of pools with potential for non-compliance have been inspected for compliance in the year to date.


Privately owned swimming pools comply with the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987.

Properties with compliant swimming pools on the Council’s register are inspected for compliance with the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987.

Quarterly audit of swimming pool register

10% of compliant pools are inspected yearly, determined by random selection.

Achieved: 108% (146/135) audits completed in accordance with the Building Pools Amendment Act 2016. The Building (Pools) Amendment Act revoked the Fencing of Swimming Pools Act in 2017. All pools are now required to be inspected every 3 years. There is no distinction between potentially non-compliant (high risk) and compliant (low risk) pools.

Achieved: 108% (146/135) pools with potential for non-compliance have been inspected for compliance in the year to date.


The Council’s building consent administrative processes are satisfactory.

Percentage of customers satisfied with the service they receive during the building consent process.



Not achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey showed that 68% of residents were satisfied with the building consent services provided. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.


22.01 Community Protection

The Council will enforce the Food Act 2014.

All known food premises are monitored for compliance with relevant legislation.

Food premises database

100% of all food premises are assessed annually

On track: 22% (22/101) of food premises were monitored in the third quarter.

On track: 83% (84/101) of food premises have been monitored in the year to date.


The Council will enforce the NZ Standards for Public Pools.

Public and school pool monitoring records are audited for compliance with the New Zealand Standard 5826 for Public Pools.

Audit of inspection records for compliance

100% of public and school pools are audited during the swimming season.

On track: 40 % (6/15) of school pools were inspected in the third quarter. School Pools Year to date – 93% to 31 March 2018 Public Pools Year to date – 100% to 31 march 2018

On track: 93% (14/15) of school pools were inspected in the year to date and 100% (3/3) of public pools were inspected in the year to date.


The Council will implement the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

New and renewed Liquor Licence Managers’ Certificates are issued within one month of receiving the application, providing there are no objections and

Audit of application records

100% are issued within a month

Achieved: 100% (20/20) of licenses were issued within a month in the third quarter.

On track: 100% (61/61) of licenses have been issued within a month in the year to date.


of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

the application is complete.


The Council will implement the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

New and renewed On/Off and Club Liquor Licences are issued within three months of receiving the application, providing there are no objections and the application is complete.

Audit of application records

100% are issued within three months

Achieved: 100% (6/6) of licences were issued within three months in the third quarter. The end of year total is: 16.

On track: 100% (16/16) of licences have been issued within three months in the year to date.


Excessive noise complaints will be responded to by the Council.

All complaints regarding excessive noise are investigated within two hours of the complaint being received.

Contractor’s monthly report (taken from Service Request Database)

100% investigated within two hours

Achieved:100% (77/77) of excessive noise complaints received in the third quarter were investigated within two hours.

On track: 100% (238/238) of excessive noise complaints received in the year to date have been investigated within two hours.


The Council will issue fire permits for open air fires during a restricted fire season.

Applications for fire permits are issued within two working days, prior to the date of the fire.

Application records 100% of applications issued within two working days, prior to the date of the fire

Not applicable: Council is no longer involved in rural fire as from the 1 July 2017. The Council has been contracted to Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) to issue permits for this fire season and reporting on this is provided to FENZ.

Not applicable: From 1 July 2017 the Council is no longer involved in rural fire. The responsibility has been given to Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ).


The community is aware of fire bans and restrictions in place.

The Council, on behalf of the Rural Fire Committee, will provide information to the community on fire bans and restrictions within the District.

Information is available on website, and published in local community newspapers

>3 newspaper articles per annum >3 articles updated on website per annum

Not applicable: From 1 July 2017 the Council is no longer involved in rural fire. The responsibility has been given to Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ). FENZ will be placing all public notices relating to the fire season.

Not applicable: From 1 July 2017 the Council is no longer involved in rural fire. The responsibility has been given to Fire and Emergency New Zealand (FENZ). FENZ will be placing all public notices relating to the fire season.


The Council and the Community are ready for a Civil Defence emergency.

Information is provided to the community on being prepared for and what to do during an emergency.

Information is available on website, and published in the HDC news page

Relevant information is reviewed and updated on the website quarterly. Relevant information is published in the HDC news page quarterly.

Not achieved: No articles were published in the HDC News page in the third quarter. The website information regarding civil defence preparedness was reviewed in the third quarter and did not require updating.

Not achieved: While the website provided relevant information in the year to date, only one article has been published in the HDC News page. As the target requires quarterly articles in the HDC News page, this measure will not be achieved for the year.


The Council and the Community are ready for a Civil Defence emergency.

Members of the community are prepared for a Civil Defence emergency (i.e. have an emergency plan, emergency kit and can survive for three days).


45% are prepared Achieved: The 2017 satisfaction survey results show that 45% of residents are prepared for a civil defence emergency. The next satisfaction survey will be undertaken in June 2018 for the 2017/18 Annual Report.



of 26

#

suff

ix




Qu

arte


An

nu

al

stat

us

23.01 Animal Control

The Council will ensure compliance with the Dog Control Act 1996 and bylaw, and the Stock Impounding Act 1955, to provide for public safety.

Known dogs in the District are registered annually.

Registration records >97% of known dogs are registered

Achieved: 99.6% of known dogs are registered. Registered known dogs: 4463 Un-registered known dogs: 16 Total: 4479

On track: 99.6% of known dogs are registered in the year to date. Registered known dogs: 4463 Un-registered known dogs: 12 Total: 4479


The Council will ensure compliance with the Dog Control Act, 1996 and bylaw, and the Stock Impounding Act, 1955, to provide for public safety.

Complaints about wandering stock on public roads are responded to within three hours.

Contractor’s monthly report

100% of complaints responded to within three hours

Achieved:100% (15/15) of complaints were responded to within three hours in the third quarter. Complaints received: Jan: 5 Feb: 2 Mar: 8

On track: 100% (44/44) of complaints have been responded to within three hours in the year to date.


The Council will ensure compliance with the Dog Control Act 1996 and bylaw, and the Stock Impounding Act 1955, to provide for public safety.

Dog attack complaints are responded to within two hours.

Contractor’s monthly report

100% of complaints responded to within two hours

Achieved: 100% (16/16) of complaints were responded to within two hours in the third quarter. There were 6 dog bites on a person and 10 on animals in this quarter.

On track: 100% (39/39) of complaints have been responded to within two hours in the year to date. Complaints received: First quarter: 9 on animal, 4 on person Second quarter: 8 on animal, 2 on person Third quarter: 10 on animal, 6 on person.


Dog and stock owners are aware of their rights and responsibilities.

Education articles regarding dog and stock ownership are published in public news media.

HDC news database Four articles published per year

On track: No articles were published in the third quarter.

On track: Three articles have been published in the year to date regarding dog registration responsibilities and the Magic of the Microchip: 14 July, HDC News page (Hauraki Herald) 27 July, Waihi Ward Reflections page (Waihi Leader). 22 December, HDC News page (Hauraki Herald


A G E N D A - Hauraki District...C Daley, Cr R Harris, Cr G R Leonard, Cr M McLean, Cr P A Milner,...

Documents

Transcript of A G E N D A - Hauraki District...C Daley, Cr R Harris, Cr G R Leonard, Cr M McLean, Cr P A Milner,...