Agenda of Council - 9 March 2016

Council

9 March 2016

sdclogo

Southland District Council Submission on Resource Management Act Amendment Bill 2015

Record No: R/16/2/2183

Author: Rebecca Blyth, Senior Policy Analyst

Approved by: Bruce Halligan, GM - Environment and Community

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 To approve the attached submission on the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill 2015.

Executive Summary

2 This report outlines the recommended approach to Council’s submission on the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 and highlights some key changes for Council.

3 The Resource Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 is currently open for public comment, closing on 14 March 2016. This amendment bill introduces a large number of amendments to the Resource Management Act with an overarching purpose of “creating a resource management system that achieves the sustainable management of natural and physical resources in an efficient and equitable way.”

4 Council’s submission in general supports the proposed amendments.

5 Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) has prepared an extensive draft submission and Southland District Council has in general supported that submission, commenting only where Council staff had additional comments or has concerns not expressed by LGNZ in their submission.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Southland District Council Submission on Resource Management Act Amendment Bill 2015” dated 22 February 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

c) Determines that it has complied with the decision-making provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 to the extent necessary in relation to this decision; and in accordance with Section 79 of the Act determines that it does not require further information, further assessment of options or further analysis of costs and benefits or advantages and disadvantages prior to making a decision on this matter.

d) Approves the attached Submission on the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 for submission to the Local Government and Environment Select Committee.

Content

Background

6 The Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA) is New Zealand’s main resource management legislation and is the overarching Act that the Council’s District Plan and Resource Management processes are governed by. The RMA has been the subject of a number of amendments in recent times with the main focus being simplifying and streamlining the planning processes contained within it. This particular amendment bill has been signalled since 2013 although not all of the amendments signalled originally have been incorporated.

7 Minor amendments are also proposed to the Public Works Act 1981, Conservation Act 1987, Reserves Act 1977 and the Exclusive Economic Zone and Continental Shelf (Environmental Effects) Act 2012 to achieve the overarching purpose of creating a resource management system that achieves sustainable management in an efficient and equitable way.

Issues

8 There are over 40 amendments proposed to the RMA aimed at delivering substantive system-wide improvements to the Resource Management system. Given the extent of the changes the Council has relied on the submission prepared by LGNZ as the base document for its comments. The attached Council submission provides comment on those matters where staff have an alternative or further view to that within the LGNZ draft submission.

9 The general comments section highlights the main points of concern to Council including concern around moving from local decision making to greater control by central government, additional complexity within planning processes and the high level of uncertainty that these changes introduce.

10 The amendments appear to be giving greater control to central government to intervene in local governance of resources by widening the scope of what regulations can cover. These regulations may result in central government setting national level direction on how certain activities are to be dealt with in district plans, how fees are set and standardising how councils write parts of their plans.

11 Provisions relating to compensation are proposed to be amended to enable the Environment Court to be more directive around addressing plan provisions that impact on the ‘reasonable use’ of land. This includes the option of compensation to that land owner. The submission comments that this raises concerns for Southland District Council with regard to biodiversity matters. For example, we are directed by Section 6 of the RMA to protect areas of significant indigenous vegetation, and yet at the same time, may be required to consider compensating those affected land owners for loss of use of their land. This would place a significant burden on the District’s rate payers.

12 It is also proposed to remove the ability to take financial contributions as conditions of consent to address environmental effects generated by a specific development. Council’s submission opposes this and the detail of that is outlined in the attached document.

13 While the submission focuses on those matters of concern to Council there are a number other changes that staff wish to highlight to Councillors for their information.

New Plan Making Processes

14 As part of the amendments two new plan making processes are being proposed. The first is termed the “collaborative planning process” and involves the development of a working party style approach to plan development. Once you have entered this process you are unable to revert to the standard plan making process. This is often termed “front loading” as it is expected that most of the energy and resourcing is focused on this part of the plan making process rather than at appeal or mediation stage.

15 The Minister for the Environment can nominate a person to represent him on the hearings panel and this may include the role of chair. The advantage to selecting this process is that the right to appeal has been significantly limited. The decision can only be challenged on a question of law or through a rehearing on certain matters.

16 The second is termed the “streamlined planning process” and involves making an application to the Minister for the Environment to run a different plan making process than the standard one. The Minister approves the process (which could involve amendments of his own). It is unclear what parts of the process could be short circuited by this proposal as there is still a duty to consult in some form. One possibility for streamlining is the potential for a reduction in the extent of submission rounds, ie removal of further submissions or submissions phase if it can be demonstrated to be unnecessary.

17 The main advantage of selecting this process is that there are no rights for appeal. However, given the extent of information required to be prepared and presented to the Minister in the application, and the length of time before a decision is released on that application, it is likely that following the standard process would achieve a similar timeframe.

18 Given the level of risk and uncertainty associated with these two alternative plan making processes it is likely that councils will continue to opt to use the existing process. It is possible that central government will consider that it has provided responsive and sophisticated planning processes to address the cost and timeliness issues of plan making. If these processes are not utilised and plan making continues to become “bogged down” in court then it may consider more directive approaches to the type of plan making processes used.

Changes to Resource Consent Processes

19 Along with a range of amendments to strengthen the ability for central government to intervene and direct what is addressed in local plans and policies, there are also a number of changes to the resource consent process proposed. These changes seek to reduce the number of consents required for lower level developments and introduce the following new approaches:

- Boundary Activities Permitted

Those buildings that cannot meet the “bulk and location” requirements in relation to things like setbacks from boundaries and height in relation to boundaries could be permitted activities as long as the written approval of the relevant neighbour and plans etc are provided to Council. This means they do not need resource consent, however the person must supply all the required information to Council, who then issues a notice in writing to the person. It does not appear that this new provision would be limited to residential breaches only. For example, it could therefore apply to industrial or business activities that do not meet setbacks whether they are adjacent to residential activities or not. There may be an ability to set fees under Section 36 of the RMA to recover these administration costs.

- Waiver for Minor Breach of Rules

If an activity breaches the rules of the plan but is deemed by the relevant Council officer to have only minor or temporary effects on people or the environment, then resource consent can be waived. This process also requires that notice in writing be given demonstrating consideration of certain matters. As mentioned above there may be an ability to set fees under Section 36 of the RMA to recover these costs. Council already takes this pragmatic approach, however the documentation and recording of such decisions would need to be standardised.

- “10 Day Consents”

If an activity meets certain criteria it is required to be processed and decision notified within 10 working days. This applies to all controlled activity resource consents (with the exception of subdivision). A controlled activity cannot be declined and must be granted, with conditions if deemed necessary by the District Plan. To be able to accommodate this new timeframe many consenting teams will require “latent” or spare capacity to be available at any stage to ensure that when such applications are received they are given priority. This raises significant concerns regarding resourcing for councils, as in some cases this may require the additional purchasing of external resource if none exists in-house, to make sure consents can be processed within time.

This approach also raises additional concerns for the wider community, in regard to equity matters. Normally consents are processed within the team on a first come first served basis. However, with the introduction of a fast track process would mean those consents would need to be treated on a priority basis.

Wider Implications of RMA Amendments

20 Many of the staff comments have related to the implications of the proposed RMA amendments for the Southland District Council. It is important to note that these amendments will also impact our communities. Many of the amendments are being promoted as “getting rid of red tape”, and reducing the level of local government intervention in development.

21 However most of the processes that have been amended will still require information to be submitted, a consideration process and a decision recorded. This will still be required to be undertaken prior to someone being able undertake their activity. This may not look much different to a resource consent process, from an applicant’s perspective. It is possible that these purported improvements may not eventuate in practice as completely as is being promoted. For example, to meet the prescribed level of detail to qualify for fast tracking etc the applicant may need to have the application prepared by a consultant and meet the costs of that, versus a slightly longer timeframe and being able to prepare an application themselves.

22 In addition reducing the involvement of Council in development has the flow-on effect of reducing the community’s ability to have input into planning processes.

23 The ability for people to become involved in the planning process is significantly altered or reduced through many of the amendments to the resource consent process. This may result, in some cases, of restricting parts of the community from being considered as part of the consent process would have had an opportunity of being involved previously.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

24 The Amendment Bill introduces a number of amendments that will affect the manner in which Council undertakes its planning processes. The amendment bill will introduce new legal and statutory requirements. It is important for Council to provide feedback on what is proposed given the implications for its processes and the wider community.

25 The development of new legislation provides for comments on what is proposed, these comments are due with the Select Committee by 14 March 2016.

Community Views

26 Any party within Southland District communities currently has an opportunity to make a submission on the amendment bill if they wish to do so. There is no requirement for the Council to consult its communities in relation to this submission, and the timeframe for submissions does not provide for this either. However, the submission process provides the Council with an opportunity to input into this legislative review on behalf of its communities.

Costs and Funding

27 Costs associated with drafting the submission have only related to staff time. However as noted above there may be cost implications arising once the Amendment Bill has passed into legislation.

Policy Implications

28 As noted above the proposed amendments have the potential to have a substantial impact on the Resource Management documents drafted by councils. At this stage the full implications are unknown and will be assessed at a later date once the Amendment Bill has passed into legislation.

Analysis

Options Considered

29 The Council has two options regarding the Amendment Bill. The first is to submit as per the attached document. The second is to rely solely on the LGNZ submission and comments put forward by other councils.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Make a Submission

Advantages	Disadvantages
· Enables the Southland District Council’s specific concerns to be placed before the Select Committee.	· None.

Option 2 - Do not make a Submission

Advantages	Disadvantages
· None.	· Southland’s unique context with regard to matters such as financial contributions may not be highlighted to the Select Committee.

Assessment of Significance

30 The approval of a submission on the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill is not a decision that will have a major or longer term effect on an individual town, or the district, cultural impact or level of service. Nor will it have a financial impact that will exceed the threshold of 10% of total revenue.

Recommended Option

31 Option 1 is recommended, to make a submission on the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill as per the attached submission, or incorporating any such amendments to this draft submission as Council may direct.

Next Steps

32 The closing date for submissions to the Select Committee is 14 March 2016.

Attachments

a DRAFT - Feedback on Resource Legislation Amendment Bill 2015 View

Council

09 March 2016

Submission on Resource Legislation Amendment Bill 2015

Southland District Council in general supports the amendments proposed within the Resource Legislation Amendment Bill 2015. Council’s submission is to be in conjunction with the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) submission. Southland District Council supports in general the (LGNZ) submission. Outlined below are those aspects of the submission where Council either has some additional comments to be made in support of LGNZ or raises issues not addressed in the LGNZ submission.

Clause	Comments
General Comments	Overall the changes to the Resource Management Act (RMA) appear to be giving central government greater control over local government through the ability for central government to create an increasing number of regulations relating to: · Activity status · Notification · Setting fixed fees or costs · Planning templates / formatting. While Council understands the intent of some of these changes and supports some standardisation, it questions whether these regulations would introduce further complexity into the plan making and consenting processes, thereby having the opposite effect of that intended. It is also difficult to comment in some instances on whether these changes are supported or opposed, given the effect will only be realised if/when government introduces any of those new regulations. Council has concerns around this uncertainty with the government being able to implement such a prescriptive approach.
11 - Sections 30 and 31 amended	Functions of regional and territorial authorities - hazardous substances This clause proposes to delete reference to hazardous substances as a function of both regional and territorial authorities. While Council agrees there is some duplication between the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms (HSNO) Act and the RMA, there are some matters which HSNO does not currently address such as the location and proximity to sensitive land uses. Council would support the removal of the reference to hazardous substances in Sections 30 and 31 if consequential amendments were made to the HSNO Act to address those matters. Development capacity Council does not oppose the introduction of provisions in Sections 30 and 31 to address development capacity in relation to residential and business land, however the proposed provisions impose the same requirements on both regional and territorial authorities. Therefore there is potential for ambiguity over who deals with what aspects of land development planning.
13 - Section 32 amended	Requirements for Section 32 reports This clause introduces the requirement to summarise advice from iwi authorities on the proposal that is the subject of the Section 32 report. Council does not oppose providing such a summary but suggests that the Section 32 report is not the place for it, and that this would be more appropriate in the plan change or plan background documentation.
16 - Section 34A amended	Appointing hearing commissioners This clause requires local authorities to consult with iwi when appointing a hearing commissioner, to determine whether a commissioner with an understanding of tikanga Māori and the perspectives of local iwi is required. Council supports this in principle, however questions whether this should be a requirement in every instance. Council suggests this should only be required, where there is a matter of relevance to iwi, or the Iwi Participation Agreements (as provided for elsewhere in this Bill) could set out when iwi should be contacted regarding the appointment of a commissioner.
17 - New section 34B	Fixing fees for hearing commissioners Council has a concern that, as with fixing any fees, care would need to be taken in setting a range of fees to cover the differing complexity of applications. There is the potential for over and under-charging with implications for either the applicant (if fees are set too high) or the ratepayers (if fees are set too low). These comments apply across the proposed provisions relating to fixing fees, including the ability for central government to set regulations requiring fees to be fixed.
37 - New Sections 58B-58D	National planning template While Council supports some standardisation of planning documents concerns remain about the approach proposed in the National Planning Template provisions. The original intent behind the National Planning Template was to effectively “staple” together all the National Policy Statements (NPS) and National Environmental Standards (NES) and create a merged document. These documents cover a range of topics and are written in very different styles. It is doubtful that a coherent and useable document could be achieved. It is also doubtful that a useful template could be derived from the existing documents. Concern exists regarding the scope of the proposed provisions and how these would be worked out in practice. Very little detail has been given to determine how much this would affect Southland District Council’s District Plan and the provisions within it.
54 - Section 85	Amended compensation for land subject to controls Council has concerns regarding how these amendments take into account the clear direction for intervention set out in Section 6 of the RMA. Any Section 6 Matters are considered sufficiently important to provide within plans restrictions that will affect the ability to use certain land.
Section 85 – Environment Court may give directions in respect of land subject to controls	How is it intended to reconcile these two approaches? In addition, the amendment to this provision, while considered to generally reflect case law in terms of the tests to be met, may have the unintended effect of changing the framework within existing decisions due to a subtle shift in emphasis. This could create the need to establish new case law to interpret the amendment itself as it appears to be a change to the intent behind the section. Council is concerned that this amendment will mean those matters in Section 6, ie the protection of significant indigenous biodiversity on private land, can only be met through compensation from local government funding. This undermines the intent of Section 6 and places a significant burden on the ratepayers of the local authority. Southland District Council opposes any amendment that has such a result. Given the extent of indigenous biodiversity within the Southland District this would have far reaching impact on communities with limited ability to bear such costs.
105 - new Sections 360D and E	Regulations that permit or prohibit certain rules Council supports the LGNZ submission which specifically opposes these proposed amendments. These provisions introduce the ability for regulations to be passed to permit a specific land use, or prohibit a local authority from making specified rules or types of rules. It provides for this short term interference with local planning until such time as the National Planning Template (discussed elsewhere in this submission) is established. Council questions the need for such intervention, and the complexity this creates within the planning framework, for both Council staff who have to interpret and apply the rules and the consultants and communities who have to comply with these rules. There are already opportunities for the government to establish regulations through the National Policy Statement, National Environmental Standards, and now the Proposed National Planning Template (NPT), therefore this additional power seems to be unnecessary. These regulation powers exist until shortly after the NPT comes into effect, so has a much shorter timeframe, with no clear process that has to be followed, so the ability of local authorities to provide input or influence these regulations appears limited.
153-155 - Section 108 amended, Section 110 and 111 repealed	Removal of financial contributions Council opposes the repealing of these sections. Financial contributions are still an appropriate and essential tool for those councils that have low or no growth districts. Southland District Council has a Development Contributions Policy that is in remission until a certain percentage of growth across the District is evidenced. The Proposed District Plan has established a methodology for taking financial contributions towards adverse effects on roading and reserves infrastructure.
	If these provisions were removed the ratepayers of the District would have to absorb the costs of mitigating adverse effects generated by private individuals. This is not considered equitable or sustainable for smaller rural districts with dispersed development patterns. Little consideration appears to have been given to those areas that are not experiencing high growth, yet still have development that requires effects on infrastructure to be mitigated.
Schedule 1 New Parts 4 and 5	Collaborative and streamlined planning processes Council wishes to express its concern regarding the two proposed new plan making processes to be inserted into Schedule 1 of the RMA. These two tools introduce a higher level of uncertainty and risk to the Council than the current First Schedule process. While the Council supports the concept of collaborative planning and reducing the length of time plans can be sitting in an appeal phase, the proposed processes have significant limitations which would render them impractical for use by Southland District Council. With the collaborative approach the inability to exit from that process once initiated reduces the options for Council if the process does not prove to be successful. Such an approach could impose significant costs on Council and its ratepayers and create further uncertainty given the length of time it may take to complete such a process. With regard to the streamlined process Council has concerns over the level of uncertainty associated with ministerial approach and amendment of proposals. Given this level of uncertainty it becomes a less appealing approach when compared to the existing First Schedule process. Given the level of uncertainty and risk, it is likely that the existing process will continue to be utilised by Southland District Council.

Council

9 March 2016

sdclogo

Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Project Plan

Record No: R/16/2/2246

Author: Susan Cuthbert, Strategy and Policy Manager

Approved by: Rex Capil, Group Manager, Community and Futures

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 The purpose of this report is to brief Councillors on the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 (LTP) project and to seek approval of the Project Plan.

Executive Summary

2 Councils are required to produce an LTP every three years. The next LTP 2018-2028 must be adopted by 30 June 2018. The attached Project Plan sets out a 30 month work programme to allow for integrated decision-making. The LTP process involves identifying issues that are important for the Council and District over the next 10 years, setting strategy through the development of a Financial Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy, reviewing Council’s Activity Management Plans, engaging with the community around these issues and publishing a 10 year plan.

3 Council is asked to provide feedback on the attached Project Plan. Due to the interdependent nature of the LTP work streams, it is important that any issues that are likely to affect the plan are identified as early as possible so the required work can be scheduled.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Long Term Plan 2018-2028 Project Plan” dated 22 February 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Approves the attached Project Plan for the Southland District Council Long Term Plan 2018-2028.

Content

Background

4 Every three years the Southland District Council must produce a Long Term Plan which sets out the priorities for the following 10 years that have been agreed between the Council and the community.

5 The purpose of the Southland District Council LTP 2018-2028 (LTP) is to:

• Describe the activities of the Council.

• Describe the community outcomes desired for the District.

• Provide integrated decision-making (between Council and the community) and
co-ordination of resources.

• Provide a long term focus for Council’s decision and activities.

• Provide a basis for accountability to the District community.

• Provide an opportunity for community participation in planning for the future.

6 Although the LTP is produced every three years (with Annual Plans being produced in years two and three), it is good practice to start the preparation of the plan as early as possible so thorough planning can be undertaken.

7 A draft Project Plan sets out a work programme for the next 30 months. It has been prepared in alignment with the guidance material that was issued by SOLGM for the 2015 LTP and with regard to the report published by the Auditor General on the Matters arising from the 2015-2025 local authority long term plans. No new SOLGM guidance material has been issued at this stage. It has also had regard to the results of the LTP Staff Survey that was completed by Council staff at the end of the 2012 LTP project.

8 The Project Plan sets out the scope of work for the LTP which includes:

• Preparation of position papers on key LTP components, to provide for certainty of decision-making.

• Reporting to Council on the process and approval.

• General management of the community, stakeholder and iwi consultation process (including public hearings), responding to correspondence and phone enquiries.

• Preparation of a consultation document for public consultation.

• Audit review.

• Preparation of the final LTP.

9 The Project Plan also includes broad timeframes for completion of the key items. The dates beyond the 2016 elections will need to be revised once Council meeting dates have been set.

10 The development of the LTP 2018-2028 will be subject to any upcoming legislative changes that impact on the LTP process. At this stage, apart from the possible development of further mandatory benchmarks, it is not known whether there is likely to be further reform of the Local Government Act 2002.

11 Two workshops have been recently held with Council staff who are involved in the LTP to debrief the past LTP and discuss the timing of key deliverables and the opportunities for improvement. As a result of these discussions, it was agreed that the LTP project would take into account the following:

• The timeline for the LTP would be brought forward as much as possible.

• The Activity Management Plan templates would be improved to make the documents easier to edit throughout the duration of the planning process.

• There would be better use of targeted data to inform planning of the activities.

• Earlier workshops with Councillors will be held to talk through the strategic and policy issues.

• Council will undertake pre-consultation with the community at an early stage.

• Policy review will occur at an earlier stage, separate from the LTP consultation process.

• Time will be built into the working timeline to undertake a more robust quality assurance process.

12 In discussing the possibility of bringing the timeline as forward as possible, it became apparent that there are two major areas of unknown:

• The development of the Transport Activity Management Plan will be subject to timeframes imposed at a regional level for developing a regional strategy and also to NZTA timeframes for local funding; and

• The development of the Water and Waste Activity Management Plan will be involved with the level of service changes that are a result of initiatives driven at a national and regional level.

13 Other key themes/issues that have been highlighted and which will be a focus for research and planning, include:

• Affordability: How local authorities with declining and ageing populations fund renewal of infrastructure when they have fewer ratepayers/more ratepayers on fixed incomes.

• The expected ‘tsunami of tourists’ and the impact on the District’s infrastructure.

• Haast Hollyford Road.

• Earthquake-prone buildings.

• Impact of rising sea levels.

• Whether to district fund libraries, rubbish collection and stormwater.

• Whether Council should develop a consistent approach to the standardisation of services across the District to be reflected in all Activity Management Plans.

• The potential removal of financial contributions from the Resource Management Act 1991.

• Whether to develop a tourism rate.

14 There are a number of other work streams occurring across Council during the development of the LTP including the Core Systems Review (and upgrade of the budget application), a review of the governance structure, service delivery reviews, development of new asset management thinking, new processes for project planning, contract management and business case development as well as the Community Futures Project focusing on options for Ohai and Nightcaps. Council staff have discussed the LTP timeline set out in the Project Plan in light of these projects.

15 As part of developing the LTP, it is important that the development of strategy occurs early on in the timeline. Any ‘blue sky’ type thinking needs to occur in 2016/early 2017 rather than later on. The plan is for the new Council to reconfirm the developing strategic direction in early 2017 following the local government elections.

16 It is important to complete the Financial Strategy and Infrastructure as early as possible so that the Activity Management Plans can be developed within the set framework. While the development of the strategies will be an iterative process to a certain extent, the Project Plan aims to complete the strategies by early 2017. The Financial Strategy will be informed by results of the Financial Sustainability Review.

17 A Council workshop will be held on 9 June 2016. This will be a key deliverable for Council staff as it will provide an opportunity for activity managers to discuss strategic issues with Councillors. As part of this workshop, feedback will be provided to Councillors around the Community Futures Project as well as the public engagement exercise that will take place in May 2016.

Issues

18 It is important that Councillors are fully involved in the development of the LTP as it is their document and needs to reflect their vision for Southland District.

19 The issue is whether Councillors would like to change any aspect of the process for developing the LTP 2018-2028, or would like to raise further LTP issues.

20 Council staff strive to support Councillors in their decision-making by providing robust information and analysis. As LTP issues are often complex and require extensive input in the form of background research, it would be preferable if any issues could be raised at an earlier stage in the process.

21 Councillors will get to discuss the broader LTP issues at a Council workshop to be held on 9 June 2016.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

22 Council is required to produce an LTP every three years in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act), and it must cover a period of not less than 10 financial years.

23 The LTP must include the information required in Part 1 of Schedule 10 of the Act including significant forecasting assumptions, a financial strategy and infrastructure strategy, a revenue and financing policy and a significance and engagement policy.

Community Views

24 Council must undertake formal consultation with the community through the use of a consultation document. The consultation document sets out and identifies and explains to the people of the District the significant and other important issues and choices facing the local authority and the District and the consequences of the choices.

25 There is no requirement to undertake further consultation with the community on issues if they are to be included in the consultation document, although it is good practice to work with the community during the early development stages of the LTP. Some issues will be of local rather than District interest, and while they may not be addressed through the formal consultation process, the issues may be included in the Activity Management Plans.

26 The Project Plan provides for additional rounds of community engagement to be held in May 2016 and May or June 2017.

Costs and Funding

27 The budget for the development of the LTP is $62,000 over three years. It is funded through the General Rate 10% and Uniform Annual General Charge 90%.

Policy Implications

28 A number of policy work streams will arise during the development of the LTP.

29 LTPs are required to include the Revenue and Financing Policy and Significance and Engagement Policy so these policies will be reviewed. In addition, it is good practice to review Council’s broader financial and treasury policies.

30 Due to the review of the Resource Management Act 1991, there are likely to be changes required to the Development and Financial Contributions Policy.

Analysis

Options Considered

31 Approve the LTP Project Plan, with amendments as required.

32 Do not approve the LTP Project Plan.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Approve the LTP Project Plan, with amendments as required

Advantages	Disadvantages
· Early adoption of a Project Plan allows for the LTP project to progress and take full advantage to undertake quality planning.	· There are no disadvantages but be aware that any setting of strategy by Council will need to be reconfirmed by the newly elected Council.

Option 2 - Do not approve the LTP Project Plan

Advantages	Disadvantages
· There are no advantages in not approving the Project Plan as amendments can be made during the development of the LTP as directed by Council.	· Not approving the Project Plan will delay the implementation phase of the project.

Assessment of Significance

33 While the LTP is an important process for Council, the adoption of the Project Plan has a low level of significance and there is no requirement for communication consultation.

Recommended Option

34 It is recommended that Council adopt the Project Plan, with amendments as required.

Next Steps

35 The next step is to start implementing the Project Plan. The Strategy and Policy team will develop an environmental scan document which involves compiling important statistical information for the District. An early engagement process will be undertaken in April 2016. This will involve a number of meetings throughout the District to engage with the community around a number of arising issues.

Attachments

a Project Plan Southland District Council Long Term Plan 2018-2028 View

Council

09 March 2016

PROJECT OVERVIEW

Project Sponsor:	Chief Executive
LTP Coordinator:	Corporate Planning and Performance Advisor
Project Name:	Long Term Plan 2018-2028
Project Start Date:	February 2016
Project End Date:	July 2018

Purpose

Every three years the Southland District Council must produce a Long Term Plan which sets out the priorities for the following 10 years that have been agreed between the Council and the community.

The purpose of the Southland District Council Long Term Plan 2018-2028 (LTP) is to:

· Describe the activities of the Council.

· Describe the community outcomes desired for the District.

· Provide integrated decision-making (between Council and the community) and
co-ordination of resources.

· Provide a long term focus for Council’s decision and activities.

· Provide a basis for accountability to the District community.

· Provide an opportunity for community participation in planning for the future.

Objectives

The Long Term Plan must be based on robust technical information and a clear understanding of economic, environmental, social and cultural aspirations of the community.

Objectives for this project plan are:

· To establish the scope, schedule and requirements for development of the LTP.

· To ensure the process for preparing the LTP complies with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002.

· To ensure that councillors and other elected representatives are involved and kept updated throughout development of the LTP.

· To ensure that there are opportunities for the community of the Southland District to be involved in the development of the LTP.

· To ensure that all financial reporting standards are GAAP compliant.

· To ensure that the adoption and audit of the LTP is completed before the statutory date of 30 June 2018.

Project Scope

The scope of this project is to develop and produce a comprehensive LTP that will provide long-term guidance for decision-making around the operations of the Council for at least
10 years.

The LTP has three functions:

· It provides a vision for what the community aspires to be.

· It outlines key goals and indicators that will inform Council’s corporate planning.

· It provides the grounds on which the community and other stakeholders can base future endeavours.

The scope of work to prepare the LTP includes:

· Preparation of position papers on key LTP components to provide for certainty of decision-making.

· Reporting to Council on the process and approval.

· General management of the community, stakeholder and iwi consultation process (including public hearings), responding to correspondence and phone enquiries etc.

· Preparation of a consultation document for public consultation.

· Audit review

· Preparation of the final LTP.

Key Deliverables

The key deliverables for the LTP project are:

· Environmental scan.

· Corporate Reference Document (containing Community Outcomes, rationale for service delivery, activity groups, stocktake of strategies, policies and plans).

· Community en

· Council workshop 9 June 2016.

· Revised Significance and Engagement Policy.

· Revised Investment Liability Policy.

· Revised Remission and Postponement of Rates (no statutory requirement to review).

· Revised Remission and Postponement of Rates on Maori Freehold Land (no statutory requirement to review).

· Revised Development and Financial Contributions Policy.

· Strategic Retreat.

· Financial Sustainability Review.

· Infrastructure Strategy.

· Financial Strategy.

· District Customer Satisfaction Survey.

· Activity Management Plan Part A.

· Activity Management Plans (Part B).

· Water and sanitary services assessment summary.

· Waste Management Plan summary.

· Objectives for Council Controlled Organisations.

· Performance Management Framework.

· Council workshop 30 August 2017.

· Revenue and Financing Policy.

· Revised Roading Rate Model.

· Long Term Plan consultation document.

· Long Term Plan.

Assumptions

This project plan has been prepared on the following assumptions:

· Staff will be available to work on the LTP as required.

· There is sufficient ‘in-house’ knowledge to deliver the LTP.

· There will be adequate and appropriate resources available to support preparation of the LTP.

· Key information necessary to progress preparation of the LTP will be received on time and in the appropriate format.

· The draft consultation document and Supporting Information documents, as well as the final LTP will require minimal adjustment in order to satisfy Audit NZ requirements.

· The final LTP is approved on or before the 30 June 2015 statutory deadline.

· The elected members will participate in the process and as decision makers, will be decisive.

Constraints

The following constraints may create some limitations to the scope of the work done in relation to the LTP:

· Conflicting work priorities for required staff or staff turnover may create limitations to the capacity of staff to take on the LTP work.

· Ability to access key information (eg, specific demographic information) may constrain the ability to fully comply with statutory requirements.

· New policy or legislative developments may necessitate a review of a particular aspect of the plan.

· Availability of key stakeholders for engagement in the LTP process.

· Scheduling of workshops and consultation may affect the ability of the local community to effectively engage in the LTP process.

Success Criteria

The following table is a checklist of measures:

Criteria	Responsibility	Target
Diversity and depth of engagement	Project Working Group LTP Coordinator	All demographic groups and localities are represented equitably in consultation process reflecting the demographic profile and geographic composition of the District. Variety of mechanisms inviting people to take part in the process over an extended period of time. Diversity of stakeholders participating in all stages of the process.
Whole of Council commitment to process	LTP Coordinator Council staff ELT Councillors Project Working Group	Council staff engaged in all stages of the process. Councillors engaged in all stages of the process.
Consultation Document captures significant and other important issues and choices facing the Council	Project Working Group ELT Councillors	Diverse range of stakeholders making submissions, including community boards and CDAs.
Project completed within statutory timeframe	LTP Coordinator Project Working Group	Consultation document and draft LTP completed by end of December 2018 ready for audit opinion Final LTP adopted and completed by 30 June 2018.

Key Milestones

Milestone	Completion date
Finalisation of LTP project plan	Early March 2016
Early engagement with public	By mid May 2016
Council workshop to commence direction setting	Early June 2016
Completion review of policies: Significance and Engagement, Asset Management, Investment Liability, Remission and Postponement of Rates, Remission and Postponement of Rates on Maori Freehold Land.	Mid Dec 2016
Strategic retreat: Reconfirmation of strategic direction.	Late Jan 2017
Adoption Financial Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy	Late Jan 2017
Council workshop to review findings of financial sustainability review, draft Financial Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy, arising policy issues, draft performance management framework	April 2017
Engagement with public	May/June 2017
Adoption of draft Activity Management Plans	June 2017
Review of all outstanding LTP policies completed including Development and Financial Contributions Policy and Revenue and Financing Policy.	Sept 2017
Audit Opinion (Audit of Consultation Document) and those documents that form the basis of the consultation document)	Jan 2018
Adoption of LTP consultation document	February 2018
Public consultation on Consultation Document (statutory minimum - four weeks)	March 2018
Council hearing submissions	April 2018
Council deliberations	May 2018
Audit of final LTP	June
Adoption LTP	June 2018

PROJECT STRUCTURE AND RESPONSIBILITIES

Key Decision-Makers

The key decision makers for the LTP project include the following:

· Project Coordinator.

· Project Sponsor.

· LTP Project Working Group (and any sub-groups).

· Executive Leadership Team (and any sub-group).

· Councillors.

Project Coordinator

The role of the Project Coordinator is to coordinate:

· Key tasks and ensure they are completed in accordance with the key milestone dates.

· All information necessary to prepare the LTP is received in the appropriate format.

· Preparation of the LTP - draft and final - for auditing.

Project Sponsor

The role of the project sponsor is to champion the LTP project throughout the organisation and provide expertise and guidance to the LTP Coordinator and Project Working Group The Project Sponsor has overall accountability for the project:

LTP Project Working Group

The LTP Working Group will provide the core management of the LTP development and preparation process. It will be led by the Project Coordinator and will include staff from each Council department responsible for key LTP components. Staff will be included as appropriate depending on the LTP timetable. Sub-groups will be formed to progress particular work streams as required.

The following sets out the key LTP components for which each team is responsible:

Community and Futures Group:

· Coordination of the LTP.

· Environmental scan.

· Corporate Reference Document (containing Community Outcomes, rationale for service delivery, activity groups, stocktake of strategies, policies and plans).

· Council workshop 9 June 2016.

· Revised Significance and Engagement Policy.

· Revised Investment Liability Policy.

· Revised Remission and Postponement of Rates.

· Revised Remission and Postponement of Rates on Maori Freehold Land.

· Revised Development and Financial Contributions Policy.

· Strategic Retreat.

· District Customer Satisfaction Survey.

· Activity Management Plan Part A.

· Objectives for Council Controlled Organisations.

· Performance Management Framework.

· Council workshop 30 August 2017.

· Revised Revenue and Financing Policy.

· Long Term Plan consultation document.

· Long Term Plan.

· Community engagement and consultation.

Finance:

· Financial Sustainability Review.

· Rates review.

· Financial Strategy.

· Review Fees and Charges Schedule.

· Funding Impact Statement.

· Technical input into financial policies.

· Review of fees and charges.

Services and Assets:

· Infrastructure Strategy.

· Services and Assets Activity Management Plans, including review of levels of service and performance measures:

o Water Supply,

o Sewerage and the treatment and disposal of sewage,

o Stormwater drainage,

o The provision of roads and footpaths.

· Water and sanitary services assessment summary.

· Waste management plan summary.

· Roading Rate model review.

Environmental Services:

· Environmental Services Activity Management Plans, including review of levels of service and performance measures.

Information Management:

· Financial budget application and reporting.

· Corporate Activity Management Plan.

Customer Support:

· Customer Support Activity Management Plan.

Executive Leadership Team

The role of the Executive Leadership Team (ELT) is to guide the development of strategy and policy and ensure that officers in the respective departments are able to meet the workload and deadlines required in the LTP.

Councillors

The Councillors are responsible for the setting of strategic priorities and policy, the approval of Activity Management Plans and overall LTP prior to audit in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002.

It is the role of the Mayor to lead the development of Council’s plans (including the LTP), policies and budgets for consideration by the other councillors.

Reporting and Monitoring

Quarterly reports will be provided to ELT on the progress of the LTP and will address the following information:

· Stage of the process.

· Key milestones met or missed.

· Gaps in information.

· New information.

· Recommendations for the Project Working Group and Councillors for the next stage of the project.

Monthly status reports will be provided to ELT and the Project Working Group from
June 2017.

Risk Management

The following table lists potential project risks, probabilities and responses.

Probability:

· High - a greater than 60% chance of occurring.

· Medium - a 40-60% chance of occurring.

· Low - a less than 40% chance of occurring.

Potential Risks	Impact	Probability	Priority Response	Response
Data, trends and analysis are weak	High	High	Reduce	Ensure adequate lead up time and clear understanding of requirements
Limited internal resources due to competing priorities	High	Medium	Prevent	Project included in operational planning
Lack of support	High	Medium	Prevent	Get buy in and support from the respective managers and process owners
Council staff may not participate in planning process	High	Medium	Prevent	Discuss with all involved time lines for completion and get buy in
Council may not commit to LTP planning processes and outcomes	High	Medium	Prevent	Workshop scope of project to gain commitment and reinforce the imperative for Councillor participation
People not available	High	Medium	Prevent	Discuss with all involved time lines for completion and get buy in
Low community take up and support	Medium	Medium	Prevent	Build engagement processes into the development of the LTP which will drive community take-up and implementation
Low Community Board and CDA take up and support	Medium	Medium	Prevent	Build engagement processes into the development of the LTP which will drive take-up and implementation.
Project not completed on time	High	Medium	Reduce	Project milestones to be realistic and monitored by Project Co-ordinator.
New Council adopts a new strategic direction to that approved by Council in June 2016.	Low	Medium	Accept	Additional work will be undertaken to realign developing work with new strategic direction.

Issues Management

An Issues Register will be maintained to record issues that have arisen during the course of the project, what has been done to address them and by whom. Issues are risks and unforeseen problems that have eventuated.

Budget

It is expected that the following financial costs will be incurred during the LTP project:

· Engagement and consultation (information packs, stakeholder meetings).

· Communication requirements (printing of consultation document and final LTP and distribution, promotional materials, media advertising).

· Administrative and overhead expenditure.

· External consultants (including peer review).

It is anticipated that the following 10060 budget will cover these costs:

	16/17	17/18	18/19
Long Term Plan	0	$47,272	$9,667
Levels of Service	$5,125

The Strategy and Policy Manager manages the budget for the LTP and is responsible for the expenditure.

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND CONSULTATION

Stakeholder Engagement and Communications Plan

A Stakeholder Engagement Plan and Communications Plan will be developed to support the LTP development process.

The Stakeholder Engagement Plan and Communications Plan will use communications channels and the processes that best meet the needs of stakeholders and the community.

Internal Stakeholders

· Council staff and contractors.

External Stakeholders

· Community Boards and Community Development Area Subcommittees.

· Venture Southland

· Community organisations.

· Business community.

· Industry/sector agencies - farming, dairy, forestry, tourism.

· Iwi.

· Neighbouring local governments.

· Central government agencies.

· Youth, disability and seniors sectors.

PROCESS

Project Programme

The project programme covers a 30 month period.

Timing
Early 2016	Project Working Group Established Prepare Project Plan Discuss Plan with Audit Council engagement Environmental Scan Strategic Activity Planning and Review
Mid 2016	Stocktake Existing Plan and Strategies Review Forecasting Assumptions Community Outcomes Review Early Engagement Level of Service Review Asset Activity Plan Review
Late 2016	New Council induction Financial Sustainability Review Financial Strategy Infrastructure Strategy Engagement Strategy Policy Review
Early 2017	Council Direction Setting
Mid 2017	Audit Self Assessment Policy Review Preparation of Draft LTP Document
Late 2017	Financial Forecasts Peer Review, Quality Control and Assurance Preparation of Consultation Document and Consultation Approach
Early 2018	Formal Audit Adoption Consultation Document and Supporting Information Formal Special Consultative Procedure
Mid 2018	Formal Audit Final LTP Document Project Debrief

Key Project Dependencies

Activity	Depends On
Completion of Activity Management Template and Infrastructure Strategy	Appointment of external consultant.
Preparation of Activity Management Plans	Provision of corporate information and data, completion of templates and Infrastructure and Financial Strategies.
Preparation of Financial Strategy	Completion of Financial Sustainability Review.

Key Tasks

Task	Completion date	Teams responsible
Agreement on the LTP project plan	9 March 2016	Strategy and Planning
Completion of environmental scan for ELT review	Mid April 2016	Strategy and Policy
Completion Stakeholder Engagement Strategy/ Communications Plan	Mid April 2016	Communications
Completion activity planning framework for ELT review including community outcomes, strategic priorities, development of the rationale for service delivery and activity groups	Mid April 2016	Strategy and Policy
Completion Part A & Part B Activity Management Plan templates for ELT review	Mid May 2016	Strategy and Policy
Completion scope for reviewing levels of service and performance management framework for ELT review.	Mid May 2016	Strategy and Policy
Completion financial and non-financial forecasting assumptions for ELT review	Mid May 2016	Strategy and Policy/ Finance
Completion stocktake of existing strategies, policies and plans	Mid May 2016	Strategy and Policy
Early engagement with public	By mid May 2016	Communications
Council workshop Approval point for setting strategic direction (community outcomes, strategic priorities, core services, key LOS issues, first draft infrastructure strategy and financial strategy)	9 June 2016	Strategy and Policy
Discuss LTP with community boards and CDAs	Nov/Dec	Strategy and Policy/ Governance
Completion review of policies: Significance and Engagement, Asset Management, Investment Liability, Remission and Postponement of Rates, Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori Freehold Land (including any public consultation)	16 Dec 2016	Strategy and Policy
Strategic retreat Reconfirmation of strategic direction Approval point for financial strategy and financial strategy for input into the LTP.	27 Jan 2017	Strategy and Policy/ Governance
Confirmation Mayoral Policy priorities	30 Jan 2017	Strategy and Policy/ Chief Executive
Completion Residents’ Survey	30 March 2017	Strategy and Policy
Council workshop Financial sustainability review, arising policy issues, draft performance management framework	6 April 2017	Strategy and Policy, Finance, Activity Managers
Completion Financial Sustainability Review	30 April 2017	Finance
Public engagement on arising issues	May/June 2017	Finance/ Assets and Services
Completion review of objectives for CCOs	30 June 2017	Strategy and Policy
Completion water and sanitary services assessment summary	30 June 2017	Assets and Services
Completion waste management plan summary	30 June 2017	Assets and Services
Council adoption draft Activity Management Plans	30 June 2017	Strategy and Policy
Council adopts draft performance management framework	30 June 2017	Strategy and policy
Council workshop - roading rate model, any outstanding policy issues	30 August 2017	Strategy and Policy
Completion review of outstanding policies including Development and Financial Contributions and Revenue and Financing Policy	30 Sept 2017	Strategy and Policy
Review of roading rate model completed	30 Sept 2017	Strategy and Policy/ Transport
Approval draft 10 year financials	1 Dec 2017	Finance
Local estimates completed	23 Dec 2017	Finance/ Community Partnership Leaders
Completion of consultation document and draft LTP	Late Dec 2017	Strategy and Policy/ Communications
Audit Opinion (audit of Consultation Document and those documents that form the basis of the consultation document)	Jan 2018	Finance/ Strategy and Policy
Council adoption of LTP consultation document	Mid February 2018	Strategy and Policy
Public consultation on Consultation Document (five weeks)	March 2018	Strategy and Policy/ Communications
Council hearing submissions	Late April 2018	Strategy and Policy
Council deliberations	Early May 2018	Strategy and Policy
Final LTP preparation following hearings and deliberations	Late May	Strategy and Policy/ Finance
Audit of final LTP	Early June	Finance/ Strategy and Policy
Council adoption LTP	30 June 2018	Strategy and Policy

A more detailed working timetable will be made available to assist staff in meeting deadlines.

Council

9 March 2016

sdclogo

Proposed Upgrade of Real Journeys Building on Te Anau Lakefront

Record No: R/16/3/3150

Author: Kevin McNaught, Strategic Manager Property

Approved by: Ian Marshall, GM - Services and Assets

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 To consider a request from Real Journeys to amend the termination notice period in its existing roadline licence agreement to support the business case for the considerable expenditure planned for the existing building on the site.

Executive Summary

2 The building on the lakefront at Te Anau, currently owned by Real Journeys, has been in situ since 1954. The land is currently managed by way of a roadline licence at the pleasure of Council with a 12 month notification period for termination.

3 The situation whereby a privately owned building is constructed on land that is road is very irregular. The situation in the case of the Real Journeys building on the shores of Lake Te Anau is that the company occupies a prime location on publically owned land that no other person or company has the chance to compete for.

4 Real Journeys are proposing an upgrade of the building, which does not include extending the footprint, however to help justify the significant expenditure, it is requesting an alteration to the notification period to an initial term of 10 years then reducing to five years.

5 The Te Anau Community Board supports the building upgrade and the changes to the notification period as requested.

6 Given the nature of the change this is referred to Council for consideration.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Proposed Upgrade of Real Journeys Building on Te Anau Lakefront” dated 2 March 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Resolves to agree to amend the termination period of the roadline licence on the Te Anau Lakefront held by Real Journeys from 12 months to an initial period of 10 years then reducing to a five year period after 10 years from the date of amendment.

Content

Background

7 The building on the Te Anau Lakefront currently owned and operated by Real Journeys has existed onsite site since 1954. The site is currently managed by way of a roadline licence at a rental determined by a registered valuer at commercial rates and has a 12 month termination notification period.

8 Real Journeys has recently approached Council with its proposed plans to significantly upgrade and modernise the building. To support this large investment it has also requested that the current notification period be amended to 10 years then reducing to five years after that.

Issues

9 Given that land is road, licences are issued at the pleasure of Council, with a termination notification period. In reality it is the notification period that determines the term of the licence.

10 Given this location, if any alterations to this location were envisaged, the current notification period, LTP process, consent process and the public consultation required, would mean it would take five years to effect any change anyway. Because of this changing the notification period in the licence, as requested, is not seen as a significant issue

11 The site of this building on the shores of Lake Te Anau is quite unique. It is a prime site from a location perspective and Real Journeys are in a very privileged position through having this agreement with Council. It is important to note that there is currently no process whereby any other business or private person can propose to create a similar arrangement on the foreshore or compete for the site that Real Journeys occupy.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

12 The licence agreement sets out the terms of occupation, and was put in place for the benefit of both parties given that the building was constructed in 1954. Normally the notification periods are much shorter, but as set out above the requested changes are not seen as significant in this location.

13 The presence of a privately owned building on a Council road is a very unusual situation. There have been many instances across the country where buildings have had to be removed or demolished because they have been built on road. The mechanism for regularising the occupation is a Road Licence. It is not legally possible to create a lease over road.

14 The Building Code requires evidence of ownership or right to occupy the land that a building consent is being applied for. If Real Journeys are applying for a building consent they will need to present such evidence. The Roadline Licence Real Journeys have with the Council covers the Building Code requirement in this instance.

Community Views

15 The Te Anau Community Board at its meeting on 27 January 2016 supported the request. The Board also felt that investment in upgrading the building is a positive sign for the economy and the town.

16 The Board also requested that a 2.5 m minimum walkway be left between the building and the lake.

17 The point made in paragraph eleven (11) is worth noting here. The community at large has not had an opportunity to comment on or bid or compete for this desirable site, not will they in the term of this licence. This is not a factor that prevents the Council making a decision in line with the recommendation but it is important to be informed of the unique situation Real Journey’s are in.

Costs and Funding

18 No issues identified as the costs are that of Real Journeys and the site rental will still be determined by a registered valuer on commercial basis.

Policy Implications

19 The building footprint is not to be enlarged therefore what is proposed is in line with Council expectations of the building owner to repair and maintain the building. Granted however this is greater than that expectation, however that is not seen as a reason as the landowner to object to the proposal.

Analysis

Options Considered

20 These are to agree or decline the request to amend the notification period:

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Agree

Advantages

Disadvantages

· The building project goes ahead.

· Good investment and support for the town.

· A reliable business occupies and enhances the site

· Investment in higher quality tourist facilities is encouraged and enabled.

· The existence of a private building on land that is road is perpetuated for at least the term of the licence

· The site is exclusively occupied by the current licence holder

· No opportunity exists for any competition to occupy the site.

Option 2 - Decline

Advantages

Disadvantages

· The site could be cleared of all buildings

· The site could be put up to the open market

· The occupation of this site could be reduced or totally eliminated over time.

· Building upgrade may not proceed

· Building is left as is showing signs of being dated.

· Private investment in a higher quality tourist facility could be stifled.

Assessment of Significance

21 Not considered significant.

Recommended Option

22 Approve the request.

Next Steps

23 Notify Real Journeys and get licence conditions amended.

Attachments

a Request from Real Journeys - Increase of termination notification period - Licence to Occupy Part of an Unformed Road on the Te Anau Lakefront View

Council

9 March 2016

sdclogo

Request from the South Catlins Charitable Trust for a Council Loan

Record No: R/16/2/2829

Author: Anne Robson, Chief Financial Officer

Approved by: Steve Ruru, Chief Executive

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 For Council to consider advancing to the South Catlins Charitable Trust (the Trust) an internal loan for the completion of an ablution block including laundry and kitchen facilities at the Council owned Curio Bay Camping Ground.

Executive Summary

2 Council owns the Curio Bay Camping Ground. A lease was entered into with the South Catlins Charitable Trust in 2006 to run the camping ground. As part of the lease, the trust has the responsibility to establish new toilet facilities at the camping ground, which once commissioned, will become the property of Council.

3 In January 2016, Cr Duffy on behalf of the South Catlins Charitable Trust, approached officers regarding the possibility of Council providing a guarantee to SBS. This was to enable the Trust to borrow the balance of funds required to develop a new ablution block including laundry and kitchen facilities at the Curio Bay Camping Ground.

4 Officers, in reviewing Council’s policy, are recommending an alternative which would see Council advance the $100k to the Trust for a period of 10 years at its applicable annual internal interest rate with security over the Trust’s land at the cnr of Waikawa Curio Bay Road and Mair Road.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Request from the South Catlins Charitable Trust for a Council Loan” dated 26 February 2016.

b) Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

d) Approve a loan to the South Catlins Charitable Trust for $100,000 for a term of 10 years at Council’s annual internal rate of interest with repayments quarterly.

e) Authorises the Mayor to sign the appropriate loan documentation on behalf of the Council.

f) Endorse the registering of a charge against the land owned by the trust on the corner of Waikawa Curio Bay Road and Mair Road when the loan becomes unencumbered by the current registered security.

g) Recognises that it has no security for the loan from the date of advancement of the loan monies to the registering of the charge, described in clause f above and that from the time of registering the charge until the commissioning of the ablution block, Council only has partial security for the loan.

Content

Background

5 Council owns the Curio Bay Camping Ground.

6 In 2006, the South Catlins Development and Environmental Charitable Trust (now called the South Catlins Charitable Trust (the Trust)) entered into an agreement with Council to lease the Curio Bay Camping Ground.

7 As part of the Agreement to Lease that was signed the Trust agreed to construct new public toilets, with the toilets becoming the property of the Lessor (Council).

8 In January 2016, Cr Duffy on behalf of the South Catlins Charitable Trust, approached officers to say that the Trust was in discussions with SBS for a loan to allow for the completion of the new ablution block, which incorporates kitchen, laundry and toilet/shower facilities. SBS indicated to the Trust that given the building would be on Council land they would be looking for Council to provide a guarantee for the loan.

9 In reviewing Council’s Investment and Liability Management Policy it was noted that although the policy appeared to allow for guarantees, the only actual reference in the policy to guarantees was Council requesting them as security for loan advances it might make rather than for the provision of a guarantee. However, the policy clearly allowed for the advance of a loan to community organisations providing community services.

10 To date, the Trust has purchased a building in Invercargill that will be transported to the camping ground once the majority of the fit-out is complete. The fit-out is being undertaken on its current site before being transported to Colac Bay. This approach has resulted in competitive prices as it has eliminated potential travel and accommodation costs of contractors. Once the building is onsite the finishing touches including service connections will occur. Connection to wastewater services will happen if the Council approves the procurement and construction of the Council wastewater system.

11 The Trust is looking at the following timeline to complete the project and commission the ablution block.

Activity	Completion Date
Purchase of the building	November 2015
Fit-out completed	Mid April 2016
Transportation to the camping ground	End April 2016
Connection of services and completion of fit-out	During May 2016, however connection to wastewater systems will be delayed until the completion of Council’s wastewater system
Commission date	Estimated to be October 2016, if approval to procure the wastewater system is approved by Council.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

12 Council has entered into a lease agreement with the Trust for the purposes of the Trust operating the Curio Bay Camping Ground.

13 The rental of $1 per annum charged to the Trust is on the basis that the Lessee undertakes the public good activities listed in Clause 14 of the lease at its own expense. Clause 14 activities include the provision and maintenance of amenity buildings and facilities and the maintenance of public conveniences.

14 Clause 16 of the lease agreement states that

The Lessee shall, to the satisfaction of the Lessor, construct and have operational new public toilets by 22 October 2007 with such toilets remaining the property of the Lessor……

Due to issues with effluent disposal this has been mutually extended as Council, the Department of Conservation and the Trust looked at various options to promote the area by providing additional services and at the same time undertake discussions with and obtain pricing for a wastewater disposal system.

15 Clause 35 of the lease agreement states

Upon the commissioning of the new public toilets and camping amenities on the Land pursuant to Clauses 15 and 16 herein the public toilets and camping amenities existing on the Land shall become the property of the Lessor and the Lessee shall as soon as possible arrange for the demolition and removal of the existing facilities.

Community Views

16 Although formal community views have not been sought on the advancement of any loan, the community benefits from the attraction of tourists and visitors to the area. The attraction for visitors to stay will be greatly enhanced by the provision of a high standard of accommodation amenities.

17 With the prolific use of the internet to review and comment on tourist accommodation providers, it is important that the facilities provided encourage the maximum stay of visitors to the area. The provision of a high standard of amenities will greatly enhance this.

Costs and Funding

18 The Trust is looking for funds to complete the ablution block. The overall cost, including contingencies, is budgeted at $278,300 (incl GST). The Trust has $151,000 to contribute towards the project and is seeking a loan of $100,000 over a term of 10 years to fund the balance. Cr Duffy has indicated the trust would be able to make quarterly repayments with the possibility of lump sum repayments as funds are available.

19 The Trust is looking for the release of loan funds around the end of April 2016.

20 Repayment of the loan will be from fundraising undertaken and profits from the operation of the camping ground. A copy of the last audited financial statements to 31 March 2015 is attached.

21 For Council, funding of the internal loan will be from operational cash balances.

22 Council costs incurred for the granting of any loan or guarantee will depend on the option approved by Council. Approval to grant a loan will result in costs to draft up a loan agreement and any security sought. Approval to provide a guarantee, will involve legal costs in review of that guarantee. Overall, costs may be up to $5,000.

Policy Implications

23 Councils Investment Policy and Liability Management Policy (the Policy) states the following:

Loans, Advances and Guarantees

Nature of Investment

3.33 The Council is not a lender and therefore is not generally involved in providing loans or advances.

Rationale for Holding Investment

3.34 From time to time, Council has provided a loan or advance to a community organisation to facilitate the ongoing provision of community services or recreational opportunities.

The loans/investments are not made for financial investment purposes.

3.35 Council sets the criteria to apply for any other loans or advances as they are granted. It is normal that Council secures loans and advances against the assets of the organisation and obtains guarantees where appropriate.

Disposition of Revenue

3.36 Generally these loans are to the benefit the local community and not for financial investment purposes. As such these loans are usually interest free. Any revenue would be applied to reduce external debt or offset general rates.

Risk Management

3.37 Council reviews performance of its loan advances on a regular basis to ensure strategic and economic objectives are being achieved.

24 Under the policy the use of the term “guarantees” exists in the heading but clause 3.35 only refers to these as guarantees received by Council for loans advanced rather than Council giving a guarantee.

25 This does not mean that Council cannot resolve to give the trust a guarantee, for the purposes of external loan funding. The process Council would need to follow in its resolutions would be to acknowledge the decision is inconsistent with the policy (section 80 of the Local Government Act 2002), the reasons why and whether the Council intends to amend the policy.

Issues

26 The policy states that it is normal for Council to obtain security for the loans given. The Trust has indicated that the only asset that they own is a piece of land at the corner of Waikaia Curio Bay Road and Mair Road. In the latest QV valuation the property was valued at $60,000. Currently, the property has a first mortgage secured against it by the Community Trust of Southland who gave the Trust an interest free loan some years ago to assist in purchasing the property. The balance remaining of $55,000 on this loan will be repaid in June 2016, when funding from NZ Lotteries is received. At this time the land will become unencumbered.

27 In regards to security, the ablution block becomes an asset of Council on commissioning. Therefore the only time that Council does not have adequate security for the loan is from the time the loan is advanced, currently expected to be the end of April until the time the block is commissioned, estimated as the end of October 2016, but this is subject to the completion of the Council wastewater scheme.

28 In regards to the completion of the Council wastewater scheme. Council in its October 2015 resolved that officers undertake further investigations into the procurement of a wastewater plant and report back to Council for approval. Officers are expecting to bring that report back to Council including proposed overall costings in April. Should Council not approve the scheme then the date of the commissioning of the ablution block would extend and the term of inadequate security would also extend. Council at that stage would also need to consider if alternative wastewater facilities would be provided for the camping ground ablution block.

29 Officers recommend registering a charge against the land when it becomes unencumbered. However, it is important for Council to realise that in doing so between the advancement of the loan, expected to be the end of April and the registering of the charge, the end of June, Council has no security. Additionally, when the charge is registered the value of the security is potentially still less than the loan itself eg: the QV value is $60,000 compared to the potential loan at $100,000.

30 One of the potential risks over this period is that of damage/destruction of the building during renovation or transportation. Enquires made to Cr Duffy, confirmed that the trust has insurance for the building during construction and he is certain that the transport company has insurance for the building during transportation, but he will confirm this. This does not mitigate all potential risks but does cover the significant risks.

Analysis

Options Considered

31 Council’s Investment and Liability policy allows for a loan to benefit the local community, which this request meets.

32 The Investment and Liability policy does not clearly allow for the provision of a guarantee and it would be the recommendation of officers that if Council chooses to undertake this that it undertakes a review of its policy to clearly allow this to happen. Such a review can, however, be undertaken after the Council resolution to approve the granting of a guarantee.

33 The policy also states that these loans are usually interest free. Although the policy allows for an interest free option, given that any internal business unit, committee or subcommittee that borrows from Council to undertake Council projects does so knowing that they are required to pay interest at Council’s internal interest rate, officers recommend that loans to community organisations be subject to the same rules as Council entities and hence that interest be applied.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Advance the South Catlins Charitable Trust a loan of $100,000 for a term of 10 years at Council’s annual internal interest rate.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· The commissioning of the toilets will provide a much needed improvement to the provision of services to tourists and visitors alike.

· We are supporting a community group who are undertaking a service on an asset that Council owns and when commissioned the toilet block will form part of Council assets.

· Given all other internal loans are advanced with interest charged at Council’s internal interest rate it will be fair.

· There will be a short period during which Council will not have security for the loan.

Option 2 – Advance the South Catlins Charitable Trust a loan of $100,000 for a term of 10 years at zero percent interest

Advantages

Disadvantages

· The commissioning of the toilets will provide a much needed improvement to the provision of services to tourists and visitors alike.

· We are supporting a community group who are undertaking a service on an asset that Council owns and when commissioned the toilet block will form part of Councils assets.

· Given all internal loans are advanced at Council’s internal interest rate it may be perceived unfair to provide 0% interest.

· There will be a short period during which Council will not have security for the loan.

Option 3 – Do not advance the South Catlins Charitable Trust any funds and instead provide a guarantee for them to find appropriate external funds

Advantages

Disadvantages

· For the Trust, an advantage is that it may be able to source funding at a lower interest rate.

· Council still bears the risk of default whether it gives a loan or a guarantee.

· Given that the lease agreement stipulates that the asset will revert to Council on commissioning some funding organisations may not consider funding.

Assessment of Significance

34 This decision is not significant in terms of Council’s significance policy.

Recommended Option

35 That Council adopt Option 1 – Advance the South Catlins Charitable Trust a loan of $100,000 for a term of 10 years at Council’s annual internal interest rate.

This recommendation is made because the Trust is undertaking a service for Council on an asset that the Council owns. Additionally, the ownership of the ablution block will become a Council asset on commissioning.

Next Steps

36 The South Catlins Charitable Trust will confirm in writing their request for a loan and their commitment to the terms noted including the registration of a charge against the land owned by the Trust.

37 Officers will work with Council’s legal representative to prepare a loan agreement on the terms agreed by Council.

38 The loan document will be sent to the South Catlins Charitable Trust for signing.

39 Council’s legal representative will register a charge against the South Catlins land when the loan to CTOS is repaid.

Attachments

a South Catlins Charitable Trust Financial statements to 31 March 2015 View

Council

9 March 2016

sdclogo

Management Report for Council Meeting 9 March 2016

Record No: R/16/2/1904

Author: Steve Ruru, Chief Executive

Approved by: Steve Ruru, Chief Executive

☐ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☒ Information

Chief Executive

Te Anau Wastewater

1 The Te Anau Wastewater Discharge Project Committee met in mid-December to receive a briefing from Pattle Delamore Partners (PDP) on the findings included in its draft peer review report.

2 The draft peer review report confirms that the consented Kepler option is viable and has estimated costs that are broadly in line with the projections developed by MWH. It also identifies, however, two other reasonably practicable options which appear to have a net present value that is less than the Kepler option.

3 The Committee held a two day workshop in early February. As part of the workshop process the Committee also undertook site visits for the two identified alternatives. The session was beneficial in terms of allowing the Committee members to develop a better understanding of both the current consented option at Kepler and the two alternatives that had been identified by PDP.

4 A report is now being developed to go to a formal meeting of the Committee in March.
At this meeting the Committee will need to make a formal decision on continuing with the Environment Court appeal lodged by Fiordland Sewage Options (and two of their Executive) and seeking further funding from Council to enable further consideration of possible alternatives.

5 Given the work that Council has underway Environment Southland has delayed flood defence work on the Upukerora River downstream of the state highway bridge until the outcome of the review is known.

6 A short term consent for continued discharge to the Upukerora has been granted by Environment Southland.

Local Government Reform

7 In her July 2015 speech to the Local Government New Zealand conference in Rotorua,
Local Government Minister, Paula Bennett, made it clear that central government expected to see the local government sector make a concerted effort to lift its performance via a process of continuous change. The messages sent by the Minister in July have been reconfirmed by the new Minister of Local Government, Sam Lotu-liga.

8 As part of the broader reform process the Local Government Commission have been tasked with working with the local government sector to develop a number of models or options that could be used to lift the performance of local government in different regions. As part of this process the Local Government Commission are initiating a series of regional conversations with Mayors, Chairs and councils about the issues they and some of the options that could be used to address them. The conversations will also provide the Commission with a better understanding of the issues affecting particular regions.

9 The Local Government Commission have now written to the Southland Mayors and Chair indicating that they would like to initiate a Southland regional conversation in April 2016.
The Commission have also indicated that they have a particular interest in hearing about the work that is being progressed as part of the Southland Regional Development Strategy and the CDA governance arrangements used within Southland District. Given the focus on governance arrangements it is proposed that Council should also provide the Commission with an overview of the Community Governance Project.

10 The Commission is currently involved in reorganisation processes in Wellington, Northland, West Coast and North Rodney. The Commission is adopting a proactive and constructive approach to engaging with the local authorities in these regions as they look to fine sustainable long term solutions in these areas.

Local Government Excellence Programme

11 In response to the reputation survey work that was undertaken in 2014 LGNZ have now made significant progress in developing a new Local Government Excellence Programme.

12 The programme, which will be the subject of a regional briefing on 17 March, provides a basis for independently assessing the performance of each local authority. The measures will cover four broad areas, viz; Leadership, strategy and governance, Financial decision-making, Asset Management, infrastructure and service provision and Communication and engagement with public and businesses.

13 Officers see merit in the proposal being put forward by LGNZ. It will also support the benchmarking work that we have progressed as part of the SOLGM/PWC benchmarking programme.

2016 Local Authority Elections

14 In the lead up to the 2016 elections LGNZ are running a national campaign (Vote 16) to increase the level of public awareness, interest and participation in the upcoming triennial elections.

15 Historically, the level of voter turnout and overall level of public interest has been somewhat lower than what might be considered ideal with the level of voter turnout declining at a national level to a point at which less than 50% of voters participate. As a result the campaign will focus on raising awareness about the work of local authorities, what is involved in becoming an elected member and the importance of members of the public exercising their right to vote.

16 Officers are also advancing, internally, work needed to support the election process.
This includes development of the Pre-Election Report, planning for the new Council induction process and ensuring that arrangements are in place for managing the election process itself.

Health and Safety Update

17 The annual review meeting was held in February where the Safety and Management Improvement Plan for 2016 was tabled. There are a number of goals for the 2016 year including completing the four councils joint Health and Safety Manual, meeting the requirements of the new Health and Safety at Work Act, completion of the Contractor evaluation and renewal programme and development of the three big health and safety risks for Council. A new Health and Safety Policy has been adopted.

18 Council will also be briefed on a regular basis on their due diligence requirements including the hazards and the plan for the induction of the new Councillors.

19 There were no serious harm accidents for January 2016.

People and Capability Update

20 The final organisational design was finalised in early December 2015. Recruiting is now underway for all our new positions with appointments continuing to be finalised.

21 The new Group Manager Customer Support has been appointed. Trudie Hurst is currently the Regional Manager at Westpac and brings in a passion and significant experience in customer service.

Environment and Community Group

Overview

Libraries

22 The Libraries Service Delivery Review, being undertaken in accordance with Section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002, is progressing with a draft due by the end of February. A specialist external Libraries consultant has been engaged to provide external input and recommendations as part of this process, with staff also providing input into the current state and key current and emerging issues for the delivery of the service.

Ease of Doing Business

23 The first meeting of the Southland Regional Development Strategy Ease of Doing Business working group took place on 1 February 2016. This was a productive discussion, with the next meeting scheduled for 23 February, which will be focusing on what the desired future state may look like.

Freedom Camping

24 Various localities throughout the District have reported considerable freedom camping activity, with a number of campers making use of approved sites established through the 2015 Bylaw approved by Council on 9 December 2015. Council is currently advertising for a warden for the Waikawa/Curio Bay area, as approved by Council at its January 2016 meeting.

District Plan

25 District Plan variation as approved by the Council at its meeting on 26 January 2016 have now been publicly notified on 13 February, with submissions closing on 11 March 2016.

Resource Management

26 Resource Management staff are participating in the Around the Mountains Cycle Trail hearing representing the Council as the regulatory authority. They have also been involved in preparing a draft submission on the proposed RMA amendments for Council consideration at the 9 March meeting.

Building Control

27 Building consent numbers granted were weak for January 2016 as expected. Incoming consent numbers have slowed quite significantly from an end of 2015 rush, plus one of our processors was on leave for two weeks of the New Year period. This equated to less consents going out the door during a shorter calendar month.

28 Total income is running at 13% behind budget at the moment, which is reflected with consent numbers being 15% behind those for the end of January period of 2014/15. To a degree this reduction will be offset by cost reductions achieved through a reduction in the overall level of staffing. This reduction has been made easier by an upcoming retirement.

Food Act

29 The new Food Act 2014 is coming into force on 1 March 2016. It applies to all new food businesses from that date but existing food businesses will transition between 2016 and 2019 according to a transition timetable. The most important groups in the District that are in the first stage of transition are all premises with alcohol on-licenses, having to be operated under a food control plan by 30 June 2017. A number of our on-licenses are already operating under food control plans under a voluntary arrangement, and so we have a good head start.

Environmental Health/ Animal Control

30 Multiple Dog Licensing: Council’s new Dog Control Bylaw 2015 requires all dog owners with more than two dogs to obtain a multiple dog licence by 30 June 2016. There are some exceptions, such as working dogs in non-residential areas, or properties larger than 50 hectares. Dog owners that require these licenses have been written to, and the Dog Control team will work with these dog owners.

31 Dog Attacks on Kiwis: Last December, Council considered the concerns of DOC and locals about dog attacks on kiwis. Council made various recommendations, including a one-off door to door educational programme on the Island, and to make an annual donation of $300 in support of the Kiwi Avoidance training programme. Dog Control staff met with DOC staff on the Island in February to discuss the implementation of Council’s recommendations.
Action points coming from the meeting include:

· Production of a map that clearly shows the local DOC and SDC dog access rules. This map can be used for education, such as a leaflet to visitors, handed out while doing the door to door visits, and on the notice board;

· DOC will check their dog signage, and SDC is in the process of updating its signage; and

· Increased monitoring at Horseshoe Bay.

Policy and Community

Community Futures Project

32 An extensive Community Engagement Plan has been developed to assist in taking this project to the next stage. A summary engagement document has been prepared as a handout for a stakeholder workshop held on 24 February and community forums to be held in Ohai and Nightcaps on 10 March.

Community Governance Review

33 Input has been provided at a staff level on the future opportunities associated with this project. Further feedback is sort and then an extensive engagement process will be undertaken over the next nine months to further advance the project.

Milford Opportunities Project

34 Continued discussions held with stakeholder agencies including Department of Conservation and Milford Development Authority. The project terms of reference and project scope are continuing to be refined.

Governance

35 Developing project plans and project teams to advance various initiatives relating to the Election 2016 - including Councillor Induction programme, Briefing Papers, District Tour. Also, introductory work underway on Council Committee Structure review with the current structure ceasing to exist at the end of this triennial.

Governance Department

36 The revamped Governance Team came into being on 1 February 2016. The team will be led by Chris Dolan who has relocated to the Invercargill office from the Winton office. The team will comprise one Committee Advisor (Fiona based in Invercargill), five Committee Advisors/Customer Support Partners (namely Alyson at Riverton, Jenny at Te Anau, Kirsten at Stewart Island, Kelly at Otautau and Rose at Lumsden). Kelly will be with us until 7 March when she takes up her new role of Community Partnership Leader. At time of writing interviews are in place for the newly established position of Mayoral Support/Committee Advisor. Also part of the Governance Team is our very important Catering Co-ordinator, Alice.

37 It was encouraging to see 25 members of the public turn up at the recent Lumsden CDA meeting where the main topic of discussion in Public Forum was Freedom Camping. Lumsden has experienced significant growth in this area with up to 50-60 freedom campers parked up at the former railway station at times. The township is abuzz and very vibrant with these campers, and is being welcomed by the majority of the local people. In addition the campers are making full use of the Wi-Fi available from our Lumsden Office/Library.

38 Another issue worth noting comes from the recent Ohai and Nightcaps CDA meetings where the two CDAs considered a report on the future of the former Ohai Railway Board assets. The Nightcaps CDA were keen to relocate the Board table and chairs to the Nightcaps Hall and was supportive of an interested party in securing the diesel locomotive and two carriages for a static display at Nightcaps. One member of the Ohai CDA was very keen to have the assets retained in Ohai, however, other Ohai CDA members were less enthusiastic and almost resigned to the assets being relocated elsewhere. The issues of the ORB assets will be discussed further at a Community Futures Form in Otautau on 24 February 2016.

39 Some of the upcoming projects for the Governance Team include;

- Review of the Milford Community Trust Workshop

- Creation of Working Parties for the post-election 2016-19 Council induction programme, district tour, Committee structure, roles and responsibilities etc.

40 LGNZ hosted a Community Board Chairs Workshop at Gore District Council on Saturday 20 February 2016. There were six Chair/Deputy Chairs from our CBs/CDAs who attended along with the Team Leader Governance.

Section 17A Service Delivery Review - Community Development

41 The Section 17A service delivery review draft Terms of Reference has been prepared for consideration and is awaiting discussion by the Shared Services CEO Subcommittee at its meeting in March. This will assist in fine tuning and further defining the project terms of reference if it is to be undertaken as a joint regional initiative.

Southern Field Days at Waimumu

42 Another successful Southern Field Days was held at Waimumu, near Gore on February 10 to 12. Council had a great site in the top paddock and feedback from the public and from staff and Councillors was very positive. Staff and elected members were kept busy talking to ratepayers and visitors on various topics with roading being the most popular conversation subject.

Finance

Forecasting of the 2015/16 Financial Results

43 The second and final financial forecasting round is due to be completed by budget managers by 11 March. This will then be reviewed and summarised by finance staff before going to ELT for review (28 March) and Council for review and approval on 27 April.

Insurance Renewal and Review

44 Council’s Insurance covers 1 July to 30 June each year. Council’s Insurance broker,
Shaun Sellwood from JLT, is undertaking the pre-renewal discussion with Finance staff on 14 March. Additionally, this year Shaun is undertaking the following:

- A meeting with Council staff on 26 February to outline what insurance Council has and what insurance responsibilities staff have in their roles. As well as answer any questions staff may have.

- A workshop/meeting with Council to summarise Council’s policies and answer any questions you may have.

Underground and Roading Infrastructure Review

45 As you are aware Council has no insurance for its underground or roading assets, choosing instead to manage its risk by self-insuring. In an emergency, self-insurance means that Council will use any existing reserves it has tagged for emergency funding and/or borrow externally to fund its share of the costs of asset repair/replacement. The decision to self-insure was previously made based on the fact that Council’s underground and roading assets are spread over a large geographical area, with low risk of it all being affected at the same time and the level of funding previously indicated to be available from Central Government and NZTA.

46 Given the review of the 60/40 funding by Central Government/Council in a national disaster and the increasing value of Councils underground and roading infrastructure, it is prudent that Council’s reviews its approach to self-insure. To do this, Council staff are currently preparing a report to be presented Council in the coming months outlining the current situation. This report will also include options and an analysis of risks for consideration by Council.

47 As part of the options, Council staff are discussing with and have forwarded to Council’s Insurance broker and the Council controlled infrastructure insurance organisation LAPP, information in regards to Council’s infrastructure value, location and known risks identified as part of the lifelines project, previously undertaken by the Southland councils.

48 As part of the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan, a discussion document will be prepared assessing Council’s financial sustainability. As this document will influence decisions made as part of the long term plan it is proposed it complete this review this year. A timetable will be drafted for this project in due course for Council’s initial consideration.

Information Management Group

Digitisation Project

49 Council officers are to finalise the Request for Proposal (RFP) that will be available to the open market during March and April. The successful vendor will be required to complete a pilot project of a set number of files as a proof of concept. Based on the outcome of the pilot project, the full contract will be awarded.

50 The vendor will need to provide a level of experience and process that will be able to provide Council with an end-to-end process including the packaging and transportation of the file to the vendors facility; scanning and OCR (optical character recognition) of all the records; provide the crucial component of quality assurance (QA) of all the records.

51 Council has a number of records series that will be included in the process:

- All current Council property files,

- Wallace Country Council Building Permits,

- Wallace Country Council Field Sheets,

- Wallace Country Council Plumbing and Drainage Permits,

- Southland County Council Building Permits,

- Southland County Council Plumbing and Drainage Permits,

- Southland County Council Aperture Cards,

- Southland County Council Microfiche Building Permits.

52 Council is expecting approximately 6-8 respondents to the RFP. Council will also be recruiting for a fixed term (2 years) Digitisation Project Officer.

Recruitment

53 Council has successfully recruited for two of the three positions available following the organisation review last year. The role of Team Leader ICT Service Delivery and Business Test Analyst will start during March. Between the 3 roles Council received over 200 applications.

Telecommunication-as-a-Service (TaaS) All of Government Contract

54 Council has entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Government to enable/review various products and services to Council.

55 TaaS services include traditional areas of WAN, LAN, Wi-Fi, Voice (Mobile, PABX and public network access), Unified Communications, Contact Centre and Managed Security services (including firewalls). All services are provided “as a service”, and do not require investment in capital expenditure. There are no minimum terms or volumes.

Services and Assets Group

General

Around the Mountains Cycle Trail (ATMCT)

56 At its December 2015 meeting the Activities Performance Audit Committee (APAC) approved a proposal to initiate a review of the ATMCT.

57 Following the drafting of terms of reference and completion of an invited tender process Deloitte have now been appointed as the independent reviewer. A verbal update on the expected timing for completion of the review will be provided at the meeting.

58 The Environment Court hearing for the appeal against the consent for the Upper Oreti section of the trail started on Wednesday 17 February. Progress at the hearing has been very slow; the first three days were predominantly about legal submissions on the status of the road, the land on which the road is to be built, the Operative District Plan and the Proposed District Plan. There are a number of complex issues to be considered by the Court.

59 The hearing is set down to continue on 7 March for one more week. Given the progress to date it is likely more time will be necessary.

Te Anau Airport - Manapouri

60 There has been higher than normal large aircraft movements. Landings have been average compared to previous years with a small increase in small aircraft movements from the previous three months again possibly due to more settled weather over the majority of January. Financially this should provide a slightly better result than last year for this time of the year. Our statistics show the following trends for January:

· Large aircraft movements are up by 46%.

· Large aircraft income has increased by 42% for January up from an average $3,491 over the last four years to $8,380 for January.

· Small aircraft movements are down 27%.

· Small aircraft income has decreased by 31% for January down from an average of $560 over the last four years to $386 for this January.

Assets

61 The Airport Manager will re-engage with Airways New Zealand to work on improvements and further integration of the GNSS approach into the Airways system.

Safety and Security

62 There have been a few minor infringements due to unleashed dogs on the apron.
These have been reported via the Operations Managers Reports to the Airport Manager and discussion with the owners has been held. Further monitoring will continue over the next month to ensure this has ceased. Notices are erected in prime locations informing airside users that dogs must be on lead.

SIESA (PowerNet)

63 PowerNet is installing a high voltage underground cable as part of improvement works to the SIESA network. This will assist with network reliability by adding some redundancy to the network and by avoiding the vegetation problems that the overhead lines suffer from.
The cable will run from the powerhouse along Horseshoe Bay Road towards Oban. It will join into the overhead lines just south of Mill Creek. This will also allow the new number five generator to be connected into the network.

64 The electrical generation system, distribution and retail service for SIESA was generally good during January. The sold (electricity) units for January were significantly up on December, partly due to the influx of holiday makers over the Christmas period and the meter reading being undertaken early in December making for a longer billing month.

Forestry (IFS)

Safety

65 There were nil health and safety incidents reported by any staff or contractors for this period.

66 Operators within the estate have included one silviculture crew, an aerial operator, two maintenance contractors, pest monitoring and control contractors on behalf of TB free. All of these contractors have been inducted to the specific health and safety requirements for each site. In particular, all registered forest hazards and their controls have been communicated, emergency response locations and general safety considerations discussed.

Assets

67 The 2015/16 harvesting programme, of approximately 38,000 tonnes is expected to start during February.

Asset Management Improvement Plan Update

68 The Forestry Committee is currently working through clarifying the strategic purpose of the Forestry business unit. An outcome of this work will be to align this strategy to new asset improvement goals. Areas of improvement may include: recreational use, asset sale and acquisition, local support, research support, and urban forest management.

Property

Assets

Public Conveniences

69 Work has commenced on the project to construct the two new public toilets at Dipton and Ivy Russel Reserve at Winton.

70 The Mossburn, Garston and Athol projects are completed.

Community Centres

71 External Painting at Browns completed, Lumsden external painting commencing.

72 Winton Memorial Hall Contract let and starts 1 March.

Council Offices and Other Buildings

73 Winton grandstand upgrade is underway. Te Anau library upgrade project ongoing to be completed after busy summer period and Otautau library upgrade project commenced.

Water and Waste

Curio Bay

74 Council is currently working with Department of Conservation and the South Catlins Development and Environmental Charitable Trust to implement a sustainable long term wastewater treatment solution for the Curio Bay reserve. This work is part of a wider project to help improve the overall visitor experience at the reserve.

75 Resource consent has been granted for an upgrade of the wastewater treatment facilities for the reserve with the long term goal of also connecting the wider community. The treatment solution based on membrane technology would treat the effluent to a high standard which is in keeping with the unique status of the area.

76 Opus International Consultants has been engaged as Project Manager for the upgrade work. To date initial survey work has been undertaken and Opus is developing and finalising information on pipeline routes etc. Discussions were also held with potential suppliers and will lead into the development of an overall business case outlining a proposed procurement plan.

77 Tenders have now closed for the infrastructure work and are currently being evaluated. Further negotiations are ongoing with suppliers of the wastewater treatment plant.

Riverton Water Supply

78 Work has now been completed on the installation of a new borehole for the Riverton water supply. Following this a contract has been awarded to upgrade the treatment plant so as to meet new Drinking-water Standards.

79 Stage one of chlorine dosing and aeration to correct pH and remove iron has now been completed. Further testing is being undertaken to enable finalisation of detailed design for stage two.

80 Stage two scope has been agreed and work on the membrane filtration plant has started in early February.

Stormwater Consenting

81 Environment Southland is currently processing consent applications for 17 of Council’s stormwater schemes. Site visits for all schemes have been undertaken and at a follow up meeting officers tabled what is believed to be an appropriate monitoring regime and consent conditions consistent with the scale of the activities and the potential financial implications for a small ratepayer base.

Wastewater Resource Consent Renewals

82 Applications have been lodged at Environment Southland for the following wastewater resource consents:

· Ohai - currently seeking affected party written approval.

· Riversdale - pre-hearing meeting held February 2015, suggested draft conditions submitted to Environment Southland. While the current application is being progressed an alternative proposal is also being developed to help ensure that value for money can be demonstrated.

· Nightcaps - pre-hearing meeting held 28 April, draft conditions currently being drafted. Feedback from draft conditions has been provided to Environment Southland. Once conditions are accepted by both parties the final affected party sign-off will be sought.

· Riverton Rocks - consent granted January 2016.

Wastewater Projects

83 Two significant wastewater treatment projects are currently underway.

84 Te Anau and Winton inlet screens - all earthworks complete and screens installed with some outstanding electrical work at both sites and remaining pipework at Te Anau.

85 Regional desludging - preliminary work to construct watertight, lined earth bunds at Winton and Te Anau largely complete with actual desludging, having started at Winton in August and Te Anau in November/December.

Health and Safety

86 Nothing new to report.

Community Services

87 Recruitment for a new Team Leader Community Engineers is underway. In the interim the Community Engineers act as a self-managed team and continue to carry out the roles of ‘Area Engineers’. This will continue until the Community Partnership Leaders and Team Leader Community Engineers are appointed and the new roles and responsibilities start to be performed.

Work Schemes

Projects

· Tuatapere and Riverton Community housing maintenance and repairs.

· Browns Hall repairs.

· Noxious control throughout District.

· Woodlands Cemetery, tidy and spray.

· Mowing throughout District.

Recommendation

That the Council:

a) Receives the report titled “Management Report for Council Meeting 9 March 2016” dated 2 March 2016.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Council

09 March 2016

Application Number	Applicant	Address	Ward	Description of Application	Working Days (from receipt of all information)	Total Costs Incurred	Processing Officer	Decision Date
2014/53251	P S Webb and K R Webb	32 Kiwi Burn Place Te Anau	Mararoa Waimea	Urban Subdivision - Two lots - split consent - land use consent to identify a 30x25m building platform for a future dwelling	72	3,259.20	Jennifer Green	30/11/2015
2014/53252	P S Webb	32 Kiwi Burn Place Te Anau	Mararoa Waimea	To create a building platform 30x25m for a future dwelling - split consent see 360/10/14/251	72	3,259.20	Jennifer Green	30/11/2015
2015/53032	Southland Serpentine Limited	214 Hillas Road Acton	Mararoa Waimea	Earthworks - Rock extract and process up to 250,000 m³per annum from existing quarry	135	18,272.18	Marcus Roy	30/11/2015
2015/53064	C R Strang and R G Strang	41 Kilmarnock Street Wallacetown	Winton Wallacetown	Construct new shed onto existing shed	19	675.00	Kelwyn Osborn	16/11/2015
2015/53192	Greenvale Station Limited	360 Cainard Road Fairlight	Mararoa Waimea	Erect two overheight towers associated with a grain system	19	500.00	Olivia Krielen	19/11/2015
2015/53203	Milford Sound Infrastructure Limited	19 Pembroke Drive Milford Sound	Mararoa Waimea	Construct an accommodation block and garage	0	500.00	Theresa Cameron – application withdrawn	27/11/2015
2015/53206	R A Dynes	170 Collinson Road Ryal Bush	Winton Wallacetown	Rural subdivision - two new allotments	15	740.00	Jennifer Green	3/11/2015
2015/53207	T S Law and V A Law	13 York Street Mossburn	Mararoa Waimea	Convert existing shop/dwelling into accommodation unit for up to 20 beds	18	1,437.00	Jennifer Green	26/11/2015
2015/53209	L J M Crooymans	599 Papatotara Coast Road Papatotara	Waiau Aparima	Extension of time to Resource Consent 360/10/10/100	22	360.00	Theresa Cameron	17/11/2015
2015/53211	Bob's Concrete & Building Limited	12 Park Street Winton	Winton Wallacetown	Construct a shed one metre from the east boundary and exceeding the recession plane	5	500.00	Kelwyn Osborn	23/11/2015
2015/53212	Avon Downs Limited	213C Seaward Downs Gorge Road Seaward Downs	Waihopai Toetoes	Redpath steel framed Ultraspan stand- off shelter	17	500.00	Olivia Krielen	9/11/2015
2015/53214	Edendarvie Farm Limited	125B Davidson Road Tuturau South	Waihopai Toetoes	Rural Subdivision - six lots	20	660.00	Marcus Roy	17/11/2015
2015/53215	S R Casey and S L M Casey	641 Ryal Bush Wallacetown Road Branxholme	Winton Wallacetown	To extend the existing dwelling that breaches the front yard setback	18	500.00	Kelwyn Osborn	18/11/2015
2015/53216	W R Harper and D G Harper	4 Waterford Drive Winton	Winton Wallacetown	Construct a new garage	19	500.00	Theresa Cameron	23/11/2015
2015/53217	C D Donald and H E Donald	1924 Edendale Woodlands Highway Edendale	Waihopai Toetoes	Rural Subdivision - boundary adjustment	19	740.00	Olivia Krielen	24/11/2015
2015/53218	A B O'Loughlin	20 Caswell Road Te Anau	Mararoa Waimea	To construct a dwelling within the Te Anau Industrial Zone	16	643.00	Marcus Roy	24/11/2015
2015/53220	Horizon Flowers NZ Limited	1482 Lorne Dacre Road Grove Bush - Mabel Bush	Winton Wallacetown	Transportable house on same location as existing building for workers	1	N/A – Sec 88(3)	Dianne Williams	4/11/2015
2015/53222	P Clearwater	9 Mabel Woodstock Road Grove Bush - Mabel Bush	Winton Wallacetown	Rural Subdivision - Two new allotments	3	740.00	Jennifer Green	27/11/2015

Council

09 March 2016

Application Number	Applicant	Address	Ward	Description of Application	Working Days (from receipt of all information)	Total Costs Incurred	Processing Officer	Decision Date
2015/53036	Mataura Licensing Trust	2469 Tokanui Gorge Road Highway Tokanui	Waihopai Toetoes	Erect a sign on either side of Tokanui township	14	675.00	Jennifer Green	1/12/2015
2015/53049	Coastal Minerals Group Limited	1473 Orepuki Riverton Highway Colac Bay - Pahia	Waiau Aparima	Develop and operate alluvial gold mine - undertake earthworks and reinstatement	55	2,517.53	Marcus Roy –Limited Notified	17/12/2015
2015/53114	Ryal Bush Transport Limited	125 Viner Road Branxholme	Winton Wallacetown	Earthworks - Gravel extraction 1,000,000 m³ and 250,000 m³ of cleanfill	29	4,200.00	Theresa Cameron	15/12/2015
2015/53171	Herberts Transport Limited	110 Seaward Road Edendale	Waihopai Toetoes	Retrospective consent for earthworks occurring onsite	16	750.00	Olivia Krielen	18/12/2015
2015/53173	M Krevalek	905 Pioneer Highway Brydone	Waihopai Toetoes	Section 127 - Two allotments, change to accessway	13	360.00	Theresa Cameron - Withdrawn	4/12/2015
2015/53204	A R McIntyre and J M McIntyre	34 Clyde Street Winton	Winton Wallacetown	Erect a garage to store cars	12	500.00	Kelwyn Osborn	4/12/2015
2015/53205	C L Ross and M B Black	20 Tither Road Riversdale	Mararoa Waimea	To build a dwelling which breaches the 150 metre separation	19	378.00	Olivia Krielen	7/12/2015
2015/53208	Ministry of Transport	Milford Sound Highway	Mararoa Waimea	Earthworks in an Outstanding Natural Feature and landscape area and Hail site	12	1,153.00	Theresa Cameron	16/12/2015
2015/53213	J B Scully and D C McCann	69 Derby Road Limehills	Winton Wallacetown	To use existing building as a plant and vehicle maintenance workshop and depot	19	1,350.00	Marcus Roy	14/12/2015
2015/53219	I P King	1032 Pyramid Waiparu Road Waiparu - Wendon	Mararoa Waimea	Rural Subdivision - Three new allotments	18	630.00	Theresa Cameron	3/12/2015
2015/53221	C L Ross and M B Black	20 Tither Road Riversdale	Mararoa Waimea	Variation of an existing consent notice - split consent see 360/10/15/205	19	378.00	Olivia Krielen	7/12/2015
2015/53223	T R Gow and P C Gow and K E Gow	140 Belmont Road Wairaki - Blackmount	Waiau Aparima	Rural Subdivision - Boundary adjustment	20	500.00	Olivia Krielen	7/12/2015
2015/53224	G B Lange and J M Lange	86 Rocks Highway Riverton Rocks	Waiau Aparima	Urban Subdivision - Two allotments	20	661.20	Olivia Krielen	14/12/2015
2015/53225	Calderwood Properties Limited	37 Northview Avenue Winton	Winton Wallacetown	New dwelling that breaches the side yard rule	16	500.00	Kelwyn Osborn	2/12/2015
2015/53226	C A McRae and K M McRae and Thomson Dairying Trust	135 Kean Road Thomsons Crossing	Winton Wallacetown	Rural Subdivision - Boundary adjustment	19	600.00	Theresa Cameron	14/12/2015
2015/53227	T W Egan	1563 Otautau Wreys Bush Road Wreys Bush	Waiau Aparima	Subdivision - Two new allotments	14	810.00	Marcus Roy	2/12/2015
2015/53228	Fiordland Rowing Club Incorporated	96 Manapouri Te Anau Highway Te Anau	Mararoa Waimea	To build a storage shed	16	500.00	Jennifer Green	9/12/2015
2015/53229	Te Anau Scout Group	154 Manapouri Te Anau Highway Te Anau	Mararoa Waimea	Construct a new scout hall in FRZ with associated earthworks	12	780.00	Theresa Cameron	21/12/2015
2015/53230	Steepdown Partnership	349 Gillespie Road Whare Creek - The Key	Mararoa Waimea	Rural Subdivision - two lots	12	500.00	Marcus Roy	4/12/2015
2015/53233	Sylvias Trust	(TEMPORARY ADDRESS) 95 Lochiel Branxholme Road	Winton Wallacetown	Encroaches on the 150 metre rule between dwellings	8	500.00	Theresa Cameron	11/12/2015
2015/53236	A J Clegg and C J Clegg	194A Milford Road Te Anau	Mararoa Waimea	Covert flats to motel accommodation	15	500.00	Olivia Krielen	15/12/2015
2015/53237	W J Davis and A T J Davis	1263 Mossburn Lumsden Highway Mossburn	Mararoa Waimea	Variation of existing consent notice	3	285.00	Marcus Roy	3/12/2015
2015/53238	ExpedtionX Limited	197 Milford Road Te Anau	Mararoa Waimea	Packraft guiding operations	13	500.00	Kelwyn Osborn	21/12/2015
2015/53240	W J Davis and A T J Davis	1263 Mossburn Lumsden Highway Mossburn	Mararoa Waimea	Cancellation of existing easement 243(e) - Split consent - see 360/10/15/237 - variation of existing consent notice	3	285.00	Marcus Roy	3/12/2015
2015/53241	M Krevalek	905 Pioneer Highway Brydone	Waihopai Toetoes	Rural Subdivision - boundary adjustment	0	740.00	Theresa Cameron	7/12/2015
2015/53245	Fiordland Lobster Company Limited	13 Caswell Road Te Anau	Mararoa Waimea	Construct new office addition	1	500.00	Kelwyn Osborn	14/12/2015
2015/53246	Mendip Hills Limited	38 Dunearn Road Dunearn	Waiau Aparima	Wintering and calving shed	7	500.00	Olivia Krielen	23/12/2015
2015/53250	E M Hay	114 Wallacetown Lorneville Highway Makarewa West	Winton Wallacetown	Rural Subdivision - Two new allotments	3	740.00	Jennifer Green	18/12/2015
2015/53251	B C Stevens	27 Towack Street Riverton Rocks	Waiau Aparima	Extend the existing dwelling which breaches the side yard boundary	4	500.00	Jennifer Green	18/12/2015

Mayor	Mayor Gary Tong
Deputy Mayor	Paul Duffy
Councillors	Lyall Bailey
	Stuart Baird
	Brian Dillon
	Rodney Dobson
	John Douglas
	Bruce Ford
	George Harpur
	Julie Keast
	Ebel Kremer
	Gavin Macpherson
	Neil Paterson

Version	Date updated	Document	By Who
Draft	19 February 2016	LTP Project Plan	Susan Cuthbert

		No.	2015 $	No.	2014 $
1.	Dwellings	16	2,868,500	17	4,833,500
2.	Additions to Dwellings	14	407,300	11	219,500
3.	Commercial/Industrial Buildings	10	1,909,000	10	5,018,500
4.	Swimming/Spa Pools	1	15,000	0	0
5.	Heating Units	10	34,600	10	38,100
6.	Garages	10	237,500	5	132,466
7.	Farm Buildings	9	2,024,000	20	1,565,419
8.	Houses for Removal	1	50,000	3	55,000
9.	Cowsheds	0	0	4	1,293,600
10.	Miscellaneous	3	50,000	4	17,200
11.	Certificates of Acceptance	1	50,000	1	1,500
	TOTAL	75	7,645,900	8585	13,174,785

	2015	2014	Variation %
Total consents for month	75	85	11.76-
Total consents for year	500	576	13.19-
Total project values for month	7,645,900	13,174,785	41.97-
Total project values for year	44,984,901	63,910,398	29.61-

Average Residential Cost	179,281	284,323
Average House Area (m²)	228.63	209.29

Number of Inspections Carried Out	352	377

		No.	2016 $	No.	2015 $
1.	Dwellings	7	1,745,600	14	4,844,118
2.	Additions to Dwellings	8	785,000	13	746,500
3.	Commercial/Industrial Buildings	10	1,426,300	8	1,271,000
4.	Swimming/Spa Pools	0	0	0	0
5.	Heating Units	7	27,200	6	22,000
6.	Garages	1	0	5	137,020
7.	Farm Buildings	12	873,563	18	516,997
8.	Houses for Removal	1	10,000	2	3,000
9.	Cowsheds	0	0	3	600,650
10.	Miscellaneous	2	15,000	2	6,500
11.	Certificates of Acceptance	2	5,000	1	40,000
	TOTAL	50	4,887,663	72	8,187,785

Chief Executive	Steve Ruru
Committee Advisor	Fiona Dunlop

Advantages	Disadvantages
· Allows significant building upgrade to include kitchen as well.	· None identified.

Advantages	Disadvantages
· None identified as being funded from reserves.	· Building will after upgrade be left with old dated kitchen.