Agenda of Activities Performance Audit Committee

sdclogo

Activities Performance Audit Committee

OPEN MINUTES

Minutes of a meeting of Activities Performance Audit Committee held in the Council Chambers, 15 Forth Street, Invercargill on Wednesday, 8 June 2016 at 9am.

present

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

IN ATTENDANCE

Chief Executive, Steve Ruru, Group Manager Policy and Community Rex Capil, Group Manager Environment and Community Bruce Halligan, Group Manager Services and Assets Ian Marshall, Chief Financial Officer Anne Robson, Chief Information Officer Damon Campbell, Strategic Manager Property Kevin McNaught, Manager Communications Louise Pagen and Committee Advisor Alyson Hamilton, Press.

1 Apologies

An apology for non-attendance was received from Councillor Dobson and an apology for lateness from Councillor Duffy.

Moved Cr Kremer, seconded Cr Patterson and resolved:

That the apology for non-attendance lodged by Councillor Dobson be sustained and the apology for lateness from Councillor Duffy be accepted

2 Leave of absence

There were no requests for leave of absence received.

3 Conflict of Interest

There were no conflicts of interest declared.

4 Public Forum

Moved Cr Ford, seconded Cr Paterson and resolved:

That the Activities Performance Audit Committee go into public forum to allow members of the public to speak.

Murray Dowling

Mr Dowling addressed the Committee outlining his objection to his dog receiving a dangerous dog classification.

Mr Dowling presented a written report outlining his concerns and stating the reasons for his objection for this proposed classification for the Committee to peruse.

Cr Douglas in referring to the report queried the proposed relocation of the dog to Gore.

Mr Dowling responded he plans to relocate the dog to Gore in due course and confirmed the property is fenced.

Cr Bailey queried whether the dog has shown a tendency to bite/bark at other dogs.

Mr Dowling responded his dog did not bite other dogs, however did bark at them when passing his property.

The Chair expressed appreciation to Mr Dowling for his attendance at the meeting and presentation to the Committee.

NOTE: Cr Duffy arrived at this point 9.15am

Moved Cr Ford, seconded Cr Kremer and resolved:

That the Activities Performance Audit Committee moves out of public forum.

5 Extraordinary/Urgent Items

There were no Extraordinary/Urgent items.

6 Confirmation of Minutes

Resolution

Moved Cr Dillon, seconded Cr Macpherson and resolved:

That the minutes of Activities Performance Audit Committee meeting held on 18 May 2016 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Reports

7.1	Objection to Dangerous Dog Classification Record No: R/16/5/7905
	Report by Michael Sarfaiti, Environmental Health Manager, regarding an objection received from Mr Murray Dowling to a dangerous dog classification, was tabled. Mr Bruce Halligan, Group Manager Environmental Services, and Mr Michael Sarfaiti, Environmental Health Manager, spoke to this report. Mr Halligan reported Mr Murray Francis Dowling has objected to his dog being classified as a dangerous dog. Mr Halligan advised the dog was classified because of 2 attacks and proceeded to outline the Search Warrant process advising the warrant was applied for from the District Court in Invercargill and this was approved accordingly. The Committee noted that as per the requirements of a Search Warrant police escort was arranged and impounding of the dog “Duke” was undertaken in accordance of the Dog Control Act 1996, section 57(5)(a) on Friday, 22 April 2016. The Committee was advised Mr Dowling would not hand the dog over at this time, when the search warrant was executed and the dog was not found. Members queried if the dog shifts to Gore as Mr Dowling has indicated, does this change the dangerous dog classification. Mr Halligan responded the dangerous classification stays with the dog regardless which district he lives in. Councillor Baird queried if the dog undertakes the necessary training can the dangerous classification be lifted. Mr Halligan responded that legislation does not allow for this classification to be lifted, he added it is for the dog’s life.

	Resolution Moved Cr Ford, seconded Cr Douglas and resolved: That the Activities Performance Audit Committee: a) Receives the report titled “Objection to Dangerous Dog Classification ” dated 31 May 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) Upholds the decision to classify “Duke” as a dangerous dog, owned by Mr Murray Francis Dowling, and gives notice of this decision and reasons for it to Mr Dowling.

7.2

Results of the Community Housing Survey 2015/2016

Record No: R/16/5/7432

Report by Kevin McNaught, Strategic Manager Property, regarding the results of the Community Housing survey 2015/2016, was tabled.

Mr Kevin McNaught, Strategic Manager Property, spoke to this report.

Mr McNaught advised the Community Housing targeted survey is to identify areas for improvement in the Community Housing activity, and to monitor whether levels of service as outlined in the Council’s 10 Year Plan (LTP) are being achieved.

The Committee noted the Council owns 69 housing units, which are distributed in Edendale, Lumsden, Nightcaps, Ohai, Otautau, Riversdale, Riverton, Tuatapere, Winton and Wyndham.

Mr McNaught advised the units offer good quality affordable housing to groups with specific needs who are mainly elderly residents, who can remain living in their local communities when changes in their circumstances may have otherwise meant they could no longer do so.

Mr McNaught explained Council has a responsibility to ensure the units are safe and fit for residents to live in.

Members enquired as to whether the units are self supporting relative to rentals received.

Mr McNaught confirmed there are reserves available when required however implementing new health and safety regulations are proving expensive.

Resolution

Moved Cr Harpur, seconded Cr Macpherson and resolved:

That the Activities Performance Audit Committee:

a) Receives the report titled “Results of the Community Housing Survey 2015/2016 ” dated 31 May 2016.

Public Excluded

Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

Resolution Moved Cr Keast, seconded Cr Baird and resolved: That the public be excluded from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting. C8.1 Digitisation - Approval to negotiate with vendor C8.2 Risk Register - Quarterly Update June 2016 The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution
Digitisation - Approval to negotiate with vendor	s7(2)(b)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information. s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)..	That the public conduct of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists.
Risk Register - Quarterly Update June 2016	s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).	That the public conduct of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists.

That the Chief Executive, Steve Ruru, Group Manager Policy and Community Rex Capil, Group Manager Environment and Community Bruce Halligan, Chief Financial Officer Anne Robson, Manager Communications Louise Pagen and Committee Advisor Alyson Hamilton

be permitted to remain at this meeting, after the public has been excluded, because of their knowledge of the items 8.1 Digitisation - Approval to negotiate with vendor, 8.2 Risk Register - Quarterly Update June 2016.

This knowledge, which will be of assistance in relation to the matters to be discussed, is relevant to those matters because of their knowledge on the issues discussed and meeting procedure.

The public were excluded at 9.45am.

The meeting concluded at 10.15am CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD AT A MEETING OF THE Activities Performance Audit Committee HELD ON 7 JUNE 2016

DATE:...................................................................

CHAIRPERSON:...................................................

Activities Performance Audit Committee

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Financial Report for the period ended 30 April 2016

Record No: R/16/6/9075

Author: Susan McNamara, Management Accountant

Approved by: Anne Robson, Chief Financial Officer

☐ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☒ Information

Background

1. This report outlines the financial results to 30 April 2016. At 30 April 2016, 83% of the financial year is complete.

2. The monthly and year to date actual result is being compared to a budget based on the forecasted year end result provided by budget managers at the end of February. Any variances between the actual result and the forecast will be different to the variances shown in the Annual Report as the Annual Report will compare the actual result to the Budget included in the Long Term Plan. The Budget from the LTP is shown in these reports as the Full Year Budget.

Overview

3. The financial commentary centres on the attached summary sheet which draws the totals from each of the key groups together. Commentary provided focuses on the year to date (YTD) results.

4. More detailed variance explanations for each group can be found in the attached detailed commentary report.

5. As part of the monthly review, Finance staff check the phasing/timing of the budgets with the budget manager and revise where appropriate. Where specific phasing of the budgets has not occurred, one twelfth of budgeted cost is the default to establish the monthly budget.

6. The financial tables include the forecasting data discussed at the Council’s April meeting. In summary:

· The monthly and annual budget columns are the phased full year projection.

· The FY Budget is the LTP budget for the year.

· The FY Projection is the forecasted year end result.

7. Staff will continue to refine the format of this report, with additional features being added to enhance the financial information given. Any feedback or suggestions on further amendments that could be made to this report are welcome.

8. Results at a glance, compared to forecast year to date. Budget year to date is the phased forecast budget.

INCOME YTD			OPERATING EXPENDITURE YTD
Actual	Forecast		Actual	Forecast
$53.9M	$54.5M		$41.0M	$41.9M
Variance	$0.6M	1%	Variance	$0.9M	2%
NET SURPLUS YTD			CAPITAL EXPENDITURE YTD
Actual	Forecast		Actual	Forecast
$12.9M	$12.6M		$10.3M	$11.5M
Variance	$0.3M	3%	Variance	$1.2M	11%

Income

9. Overall for the YTD, income is 1% ($0.6M) under forecast ($53.9M actual v $54.5M forecast).

10. The forecasted income at the end of June is expected to be $5.1M lower than was budgeted in the LTP for these District activities. The reduced forecasted income is the result of $1.7M less income expected from NZTA with the deferral of the sealing of the Scenic Route along with a $2.9M reduction in grants and subsidies and $0.4M from other revenue. The reduction in grants and subsidises relate to the Around the Mountains Cycle Trail. The reduction in other revenue is predominately due to reduced income for building regulation and resource consent processing due to lower consents being received throughout the year.

11. Services and Assets income is over forecast by $87K due to a number of items.

12. The largest being forestry revenue which is currently $309K over forecast with harvesting activities commencing in February. Initial harvesting has resulted than higher yield and log prices than was anticipated. All harvesting in the Dipton forest is expected to be completed in late June. There is also some roadline harvesting to occur in Waikaia as preparation for next season harvest. Additionally, as explained in previous months, due to a change in accounting methodology, forestry income is expected to be approximately $1.2M higher than budget at year end. Previously sales income was recorded net of harvesting costs; under the new methodology sales income and harvesting costs are now recorded separately. This change will also result in total forestry expenditure being over budget by approximately $1.2M at year end (please note that this has not been reflected in the “Projection” column of the attached reports, this issue will be corrected in the May financial report).

13. As a result of less expenditure being incurred to date in the Area Engineers and Engineering Consultants business units internal revenue required to balance these business units are also less than forecasted ($107K). This is the result of vacancies throughout the year and is expected to remain below budget at year end.

14. Work scheme revenue is $130K under budget as a result of less work being completed overall due to having one less supervisor. This is partially offset by a reduction in staff costs and material purchases. At year end the business unit is anticipated to be in a deficit.
The extent of this deficit will depend on whether approval for probation funding of an estimated $32K per annum is secured. If it is the deficit is likely to be $12K. However, staff anticipate that this deficit can be made up next year once the supervisor position is filled.

Operating Expenditure

15. Overall for the YTD, operating expenditure is 2% ($0.9M) under budget ($41.0M actual vs $41.9M budget).

16. The forecasted expenditure at the end of June is expected to be $0.3M lower than was budgeted in the LTP for these District activities. The significant items contributing to this lower forecast are reduced employee costs and the deferral of further significant work on the district plan in the current year. There is also a number of smaller savings across most groups. These have been offset by increased consultants costs and costs relating to the Appeal process for Around the Mountains Cycle Trail.

17. Environment and Community expenditure is $404K under budget. This is mainly in the regulatory areas of Building Regulation ($109K), Resource Consent Processing ($34K) and Resource Planning ($90K). Current market conditions has resulted in less building and resource consent activity resulting in lower than budgeted income and expenditure in these areas. The District Plan mediation processes have been delayed at the direction of the Environment Court due to the status of Environment Southland’s Regional Policy Statement. Until the Regional Policy Statement is progressed the amount of expenditure on the District Plan during this year is uncertain. Overall it is expected that the business units will be in deficit at year end. The anticipated deficit at year end $296K will be funded from the district operating reserve. The District Library ($39K) and Customer Services ($43K) are also under budget for the year due to reduced staff and communication costs.

18. The Chief Executive group is currently under budget by $154K. Around the Mountains Cycle Trail is on budget at the end of April as a result of an updated forecast for the Consent cost. However, the consent appeal costs at the end of the year will be higher than was forecast as the process is requiring extra detail than was anticipated in March. The Chief Executive’s business unit is currently under budget $169K mainly related to professional services/consultants costs. Costs incurred in relation to the Around the Mountains Cycle Trail review will be paid from this budget.

19. Financial Services and Information Management are under budget $84K YTD due to vacancies within the departments. It is projected that the business units will remain under budget at year end by $192K. This saving will be used to fund the cost of any overspend at year end in the Chief Executive business unit.

Capital Expenditure

20. Overall for the YTD, capital expenditure is 11% ($1.2M) under budget ($10.3M actual vs $11.5M budget).

21. Information Management capital expenditure is under forecast by $160K. Included in the budget are costs associated with the core systems review and digitisation project. Work has been planned for the digitisation project in the second half of this financial year. There has been $97K spent to date on both projects with a forecasted year end budget of $310K. The balance of these projects will be carried forward into the 2016/2017 year with Council’s approval.

22. Services and Assets capital expenditure is under budget year to date, $390K due to less capital work being undertaken to date beyond the purchase of Hansen software.
The Curio Bay sewerage project is still in progress, latest estimations suggest a cost of $155K will be incurred in this year instead of the original $970K, the difference of $815K has been included 2016/2017 Annual Plan. The actual capital cost will be less than the budgeted cost overall. Public convenience upgrades in Winton (Ivy Russell Reserve) and Dipton are currently being undertaken with units to be delivered onsite in late May. Colac Bay toilets at Surfies Corner and Athol have been completed, with Waikaia upgrades being built as part of the museum rebuild.

Roading and Transport

23. The seasonality of the capital works programme directly affects the level of income received from NZTA along with any changes to the programmed works. Overall roading costs were less than what was budgeted resulting in NZTA also paying actual cost less than budgeted.

24. Operational expenditure is in line with the long term plan budget and the NZTA approved budget for 2015/16 even though weather events over winter put a strain on the budgets over early days of the year. Any further adverse weather events could affect the final outcome of the current financial year.

25. The Roading and Transport team have forecasted that capital expenditure will be under budget at the end of the year. This variance is principally due to the Southern Scenic Route extension and the Mararoa Bridge projects being deferred to the 2016/2017 financial year ($2.48M). This is offset by additional rehabilitation projects, changes in scope and market prices $321K.

Balance Sheet

26. Council’s financial position as at 30 April 2016 is detailed below and is only for the activities of Council. The balance sheet as at 30 June 2015 represents the audited balance sheet for activities of Council and includes SIESA and Venture Southland.

27. At 30 April 2016, Council had $8M invested in five term deposits ranging from one to two month maturities. These have now all matured with recent re-investments achieving 2.64% to 3.31%.

The details at 30 April 2016 are:

Amount	Where Invested	Interest Rate	Term of Investment	Date of Expiry
$5,000,000	ANZ	3.04%	92 days	10 Jun 2016
$1,000,000	BNZ	3.30%	121 days	18 May 2016
$2,000,000	Westpac	3.39%	119 days	10 Jun 2016

28. Funds on call are the result of Council rates received at the end of April and held to ensure there is enough cash available to meet commitments as they fall due.

Balance at 30 April	Where Invested	Interest Rate
$796,120	BNZ	0.75 %

29. External borrowings have still not been required, with internal funds being used to meet obligations for the year to date. The borrowings shown in current liabilities is the outstanding amount of assets funded by finance leases for computer equipment.

Recommendation

That the Activities Performance Audit Committee:

a) Receives the report titled “Financial Report for the period ended 30 April 2016” dated 21 June 2016.

Attachments

a Summary Financial Report View

b Detailed Commentary View

Activities Performance Audit Committee

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Interim Management Report from Audit New Zealand for the year ended 30 June 2016

Record No: R/16/4/5600

Author: Sheree Marrah, Finance Manager

Approved by: Anne Robson, Chief Financial Officer

☐ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☒ Information

Summary of Report

1 As part of the audit process, Audit New Zealand provides Council with a report at the conclusion of the interim stage of its Annual Report audit, outlining the work that was performed and any recommended areas for improvement.

2 Attached is the management letter received from Audit New Zealand (Audit NZ) in relation to the interim audit (Appendix A) for the year ended 30 June 2016.

3 Audit New Zealand did not identify any significant or material issues during Council’s interim audit for the year ended 30 June 2016.

4 This meant that Audit New Zealand did not find any significant issues in the systems and process that support the activities of Council. However, during the process Audit NZ did identify a number of areas for improvement.

5 The table below outlines the recommendations made by Audit NZ in these reports, in the form of an action list.

6 Council staff will work to implement/resolve the recommendations identified by Audit NZ, in accordance with the self-imposed timelines. April 2017 is the primary self-imposed deadline as this is the anticipated date that Audit NZ will visit to undertake their interim procedures for the 2017 audit.

Matters from Interim Management Report	Responsibility	Status	Due Date
Credit notes We are aware the Council is currently reviewing and updating the delegation policy and recommend the revised policy include guidance on credit notes.	Sheree Marrah	Not started	December 2016
Creditor masterfile changes All masterfile changes should be independently reviewed and signed off.	Sheree Marrah	Complete
Independent review of journals A report be developed listing all journals which have been both prepared and posted by the same user (similar to that created for similar reasons for purchase orders). This report should be reviewed on a monthly basis.	Sheree Marrah	In progress	July 2016
Super user access to network The list of users with access to the domain administrator group should be reviewed and limited only to those systems and user accounts that require this access to perform their functions. The administrator account password should be changed every six months for good practice.	Damon Campbell	Not started	April 2017
Non-financial reporting We recommend as part of the quality assurance process prior to tabling the Corporate Performance Report to Council that all targets reported against are aligned with targets set in the Long Term Plan or Annual Plan.	Susan Cuthbert	In progress	December 2016
Fraud policy As part of the Fraud policy review, we recommend the policy be updated to include an element requiring regular review of areas susceptible to fraud.	Susan Cuthbert	Not started	April 2017

Matters from Previous Management Reports	Responsibility	Status	Due Date
NCS purchase order system Complete an independent review of purchase orders raised and authorised by the same person. Review core data changes made by administration users.	Sheree Marrah	Complete
Policies Ensure all policies are up to date and periodically reviewed.	Susan Cuthbert	In progress	Ongoing
Contract management Develop a formal approach to contract management. Develop a contract management policy.	Ian Marshall	In progress	December 2016 (framework) December 2017 (policy)
Legislative compliance Develop a formal system for legislative compliance.	Susan Cuthbert	Not started	June 2017
Formal IS Agreement Develop a formal agreement with Invercargill City Council should the Council retain the IS services provided by the Invercargill City Council.	Damon Campbell	Not started	April 2017

Recommendation

That the Activities Performance Audit Committee:

a) Receives the report titled “Interim Management Report from Audit New Zealand for the year ended 30 June 2016” dated 15 June 2016.

Attachments

a Interim management report on the audit of Southland District Council
for the year ending 30 June 2016 View

Activities Performance Audit Committee

29 June 2016

Results

Question 1 - Please specify the number of jobs undertaken annually for you/your organisation by Work Schemes?

^{Graph 1 - Please specify the number of jobs undertaken
annually for you/your organisation by Work Schemes?}

Please specify the number of jobs undertaken annually for you/your organisation by Work Schemes?
Answer Options	Response Percent	Response Count
1 - 5	15%	2
5 - 10	15%	2
10 - 15	8%	1
15 - 20	23%	3
Over 20	39%	5
Other (please specify the number )		0
*answered question*		13
*skipped question*		0

^{Table 1} ^{- Please specify the number
of jobs undertaken annually for you/your organisation by Work Schemes?}

Trends

In 2015/2016 of the 13 respondents, 2 (15%) had 1-5 jobs undertaken, 2 (15%) had 5-10 jobs undertaken, 1 (8%) had 10-15 jobs undertaken, 3 (23%) had 15-20 jobs undertaken and 5 (39%) had over 20 jobs undertaken. The results show an increase in the frequency of jobs from the previous survey.

In 2014/2015 of the 11 respondents, three (27.3%) had 1-5 jobs undertaken, one (9.1%) had 5-10 jobs, one (9.1%) had 10-15, two (18.2%) had 15-20 jobs and four (36.4%) had over
20 jobs undertaken.

Question 2 - Please specify the type of job undertaken?

^{Graph 2 - Please specify the type of job undertaken?}

Please specify the type of job undertaken
Answer Options	Response Percent	Response Count
Outside Maintenance	20%	2
Inside Maintenance	10%	1
Reserves Maintenance	10%	1
Administration/Enveloping	10%	1
Recycling	10%	1
Beautification	40%	4
Other (please specify)		6
*answered question*		10
*skipped question*		3

^{Table 2} ^{- Please specify the type of job
undertaken?}

Other – please specify

· Mainly work which involves heavy lifting and removal of book stock from one site to another

· All of the above except for the one ticked

· Recycling and bringing paper boxes upstairs

· Wide range of outside jobs, planting, tidying, cleaning, painting etc

· Inside Maintenance also

· Carpentry

Trends

The most popular job type was Beautification (40%) followed by outside maintenance (20%).

In 2014/2015 the most popular job type was Reserves Maintenance followed by
Outside Maintenance. Respondents could select more than one category.

Question 3 - Work schemes completed the work for you according to the specifications?

^{Graph 3 - Work schemes completed the work for you
according to the specifications?}

Work schemes completed the work for you according to the specifications?
Answer Options	Response Percent	Response Count
Very Satisfied	46%	6
Satisfied	46%	6
Dissatisfied	8%	1
Very Dissatisfied	0%	0
*answered question*		13
*skipped question*		0

^{Table 3 - Work schemes completed the work for you
according to the specifications?}

Trends

Twelve clients (92%) were either satisfied or very satisfied with the work; one client (8%) was dissatisfied. In 2015/2016, ten clients (91%) were either satisfied or very satisfied with the work and one client (9%) was dissatisfied. These results are similar between the two years and the result does meet the KPI target in the 10 Year plan 2015-2025 of 90% satisfaction.

Question 4 - If you answered Dissatisfied or Very Dissatisfied did you provide feedback to the Work Scheme Co-ordinator? If not, why not?

One respondent commented on this question. They answered yes they had provided feedback.

Question 5 - If any of the work did not specifications, could you please outline the specifications not met?

One respondent commented:

· Work not completed as per written instructions supplied

Question 6 - Do you agree that the costs were fair and reasonable? (I.e. value for money?)

^{Graph 4 - Do you agree that
the costs were fair and reasonable? (I.e. value for money?)}

Do you agree that the costs were fair and reasonable? (I.e. value for money?)
Answer Options	Response Percent	Response Count
Strongly Agree	15%	2
Agree	85%	11
Disagree	0%	0
Strong Agree	0%	0
*answered question*		13
*skipped question*		0

^{Table 4 - Do you agree that
the costs were fair and reasonable? (I.e. value for money?)}

Question 7 - If possible, please comment on the reason for your response above:

· Convenience, and in line with other commercial pricing

· A lot of the work done by taskforce is difficult to organise with outside contractors so costs are fair

· Most of the time, the costs were fair

· Some routine tasks can be completed cheaper by local resources

Question 8 - Did the work undertaken for you make it possible for small communities to complete projects where they would otherwise not be able to due to costs or lack of resources?

^{Graph 5 -}^{Did the work undertaken for you
make it possible for small communities to}^{complete projects}^{where they would otherwise not be able to due to costs or lack of resources?}

Did the work undertaken for you make it possible for small communities to complete projects where they would otherwise not be able to due to costs or lack of resources?
Answer Options	Response Percent	Response Count
Yes	69%	9
No	0%	0
Not applicable	31%	4
*answered question*		13
*skipped question*		0

^{Table5 -}^{Did the work undertaken for you
make it possible for small communities to}^{complete projects}^{where they would otherwise not be able to due to costs or lack of resources?}

Trends

In 2015/2016, nine out of 13 (69%) said that the work undertaken did make it possible for small communities to complete projects. This is a significant increase from the previous survey.

In 2014/2015, six out of the 11 respondents (55%) said that the work undertaken did make it possible for small communities to complete projects.

Question 9 - Please comment on your overall satisfaction with the Southland District Council Work Scheme or suggest any specific areas for improvement.

Comments were positive overall and satisfaction was high.

Please see comments below.

· Work all good

· The schemes are okay for what I use them for

· If we didn't have access to this resource, I am not sure how we would complete some of these tasks. Our staff numbers are limited and also aging and the work is heavy and quite demanding

· Work done was ok

· Please with work done 2015, but have been unable to get them this year due to staff issues and backlog of work

· Due to staff shortage some tasks have not been getting done as frequently as they should but this will improve with the employment of the second supervisor

· The team has been one leader short and this has had an effect on work timetables but looking good for the future with an extra team leader

· Communication when jobs cannot be completed or routine jobs cannot be done could be improved

· Now that another supervisor has been hired, the response times should improve

· Quality control assurance? Political or operational value to rate payers? Feedback from community groups?

· Chris delivers a project well on-site at a reasonable cost- more than happy

Question 10 - Can you think of any other services that the Works Schemes can assist you with?

· No.

· Minor maintenance work on our buildings and also spraying for pests

· They do most of my type of work now

· If you wanted to grow this business then Cemetery maintenance (mowing) through a contract (with annual schedule and cost) could be an option. Would take some initial investment in machinery (mowers)

· Doing ok

· Perhaps regular, reliable, and cost effective community housing/Council owned halls grounds maintenance. Spraying, mowing, gutter cleaning etc. Good basic maintenance that protects council assets

Question 11 - Can you think of any other organisation or individual who would be interested in using the service?

Please see all the comments below:

· Not at this time

· Communities, DOC contractors

· Rural schools

· No

Conclusion

Work Scheme clients continue to be highly satisfied with the quality of work undertaken by the Work Schemes activity and believe the costs are fair and reasonable.

Shannon Oliver

PLANNING AND REPORTING ANALYST

Appendix 1 - Questionnaire

Activities Performance Audit Committee

29 June 2016

Council Facilities Survey Results - 2015/2016

Background

During the preparation of the 10 Year Plan 2015-2025, the key performance indicator measure for Community Facilities was changed from:

“Percentage of building occupants satisfied with the standard of their building,”

“Percentage of Council staff who thinks that the council building they work in is appropriate for the purposes of doing their job effectively”.

The survey is conducted every two years. The last survey conducted in 2014 had a result of 30%.

The latest 2016 result was 42%.

The performance measure target to meet was 80%. Therefore both results from 2014 and 2016 do not meet the target.

Methodology

The Strategy and Policy Department undertook the survey in May 2016. An e-mail was sent out to all Southland District Council staff which contained a link to the survey in Survey Monkey. The survey was available to complete from 5 May 2016 to 20 May 2016.

A copy of the questionnaire can be found Appendix 3.

The survey asked respondents the following four questions:

1. What location are you?

2. Do you think that the council building you work in is appropriate for the purpose of doing your job effectively?

3. Please provide a comment on the reason for your response.

4. Do you have any suggestions for how the building can be improved?

Response Rate

The “All SDC users” email distribution list had 203 recipients. An email was sent out and 88 staff responded. The response rate was 43.3%. The margin of error is ± 7%.

Key Results

Question 1 - What location are you?

The majority of responses were from staff in the Invercargill office (85%), followed by Winton (5%).

What location are you?
Answer Options	Response Percent	Response Count
Invercargill	85%	75
Lumsden	2%	2
Otautau	2%	2
Riverton	0%	0
Te Anau	2%	2
Stewart Island	2%	2
Wyndham	1%	1
Winton	5%	4
Other (please specify)		1
*answered question*		88
*skipped question*		0

Table 1 – What location are you?

Graph 1 - What location are you?

Question 2 - Do you think that the council building you work in is appropriate for the purpose of doing your job effectively?

A five point scale was used in this survey question. Responses for very appropriate and appropriate were combined to give the overall satisfaction score. Likewise responses for very dissatisfied and dissatisfied were combined to give the overall dissatisfaction score.

The overall satisfaction of respondents was 42% (very appropriate and appropriate combined). 23% were neutral and 35% did not find the building appropriate (not appropriate and very inappropriate combined). This does not meet the goal target of 80%.

An analysis of satisfaction of participants for each location has not been conducted because of the small number of people working at the area offices (answers could be traced back to the respondent). Respondents were assured that their responses would remain confidential.

Do you think that the council building you work in is appropriate for the purpose of doing your job effectively?
Answer Options	Response Percent	Response Count
Very appropriate	6%	5
Appropriate	36%	32
Neutral	23%	20
Not appropriate	28%	25
Very inappropriate	7%	6
*answered question*		88
*skipped question*		0

Table 2 - Do you think that the council building you work in is appropriate for the purpose of doing your job effectively?

How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the standard of the building?

Graph 2 - Do you think that the council building you work in is appropriate for the purpose of doing your job effectively?

Question 3 - Please provide a comment on the reason for your response?

The seventy three responses were separated into six categories

1) New building (1)

2) Heating/Ventilation (5)

3) Needs refurbish (32)

4) Configuration (15)

5) Adequate (17)

6) Safety (2)

7) Unsure (1)

The most common responses were: the need to refurbish (32), the building is adequate (17) and the need to reconfigure (15).

Details of individual comments are tabled in Appendix 1.

Question 4 - Do you have any suggestions on how the building can be improved?

There were a number of suggestions for improvement outlined by the respondents below.

The sixty three responses were separated into four categories:

1) New building (19)

2) Heating/Ventilation (8)

3) Needs refurbish/relocate (17)

4) Configuration (19)

Details of individual comments are tabled in Appendix 2.

Appendix 1 – Question 3 - Please provide a comment on the reason for your response to Question 2?

*Category*	*Key*
New building	1
Heating/ventilation	2
Needs refurbished	3
Reconfiguration	4
Adequate	5
Safety	6
Unsure	7

A lot of my work is carried out away from the office	5
Able to function normally and comfortably	5
Am happy with location & size of my space	5
Apparently this building is not earthquake proof and knowing that and knowing there isn't much being done to help this is a scary thought. Offices are too crammed, there are too many offices/departments around the building with no accessible ventilation, and no a fan is not enough.	6
Bit of a rabbit warren, takes a lot of time to get anywhere, that could be more productively utilised	4
Bit of a rabbit warren. Dated in places	4
Bright and welcoming library but poor staff area provision	3
Cold, cramped, dated and unpleasant environment	3
Cold, leaky, ancient	3
Could be better	3
Could be better especially around air control/heating/cooling. Don't need state of the art building, but do need the right attitudes.	2
Customer friendly access, warm, and in the central business area	3
Dark, leaky, depressing, cramped	3
Dated building, drab, doesn't present a professional look to community, office space could be better, toilets on Exec floor in an inappropriate place	4
During Freedom Camping time I feel a room for Wi-Fi users would stop a lot of congestion in the Library.	4
Equipment in cramped areas with not enough workspace. Some areas in department have become a dumping ground for misc. "stuff.”	4
Given the age of the building it is appropriate	5
Hard to move through quickly, poor layout and design of spaces, visitors comment on how it looks tired - does not look like an up to date, well-functioning council looks like	3
Have the tools to do job	5
I am in the older part of the building, no access to natural light; air conditioning does not work consistently. The accommodation in general is tired and dated and has not been refurbished in approx. 20 years.	3
I have only just started at SDC so I'm not sure yet whether the building is appropriate. Our particular area is undergoing a lot of change in the future and the space will physically change.	7
I like where I am located now, god only knows where I will end up in the re-shuffle.	5
I understand there are limitations to the appearance of the building but I think there should be some improvements made to the appearance of the interior - it does not look professional at all, facilities like heating do not work (and impact negatively on productiveness) etc	3
I would prefer an office with an openable window rather than rely on mechanical ventilation	3
If they are talking about shared services etc, may be instead of upgrading the building to earthquake standards they should look at acquiring another building and share the same building with ICC and ES - so people come to the one building and use the facilities that are there. That way they could share reception duties - payments etc - it would be very workable. ICC on separate floors and SDC on the other floors.	1
Interior and exterior decor is very out-dated and no secure access to staff areas. Heat and lighting systems are inconsistent across the building and possibly not the most efficient. Lack of meeting rooms is an issue.	3
It has a large and welcoming foyer area which is important for interaction with the public. Internally, departments are scattered like a rabbit warren but this isn't a major problem.	5
It is old, draughty, has poor lighting, ventilation and heating.	3
It tends to be a bit compartmentalised - people hiding in their own corners of the castle towers building their own empires. It needs more natural light. It's quite dull and uninviting. Needs a bit of modernisation and colour.	3
It’s fine in my view, those who think to the contrary should spend some time as a meat worker or roading contractor to know how lucky they are	5
It’s fine it would be nice to have natural ventilation in internal areas to sure how though	2
It's ok	5
Lack of space, poorly set out, need for refurbishment	3
Limited room, aging facility, leaks, leaks causing H&S issues (fire in switchboard), over crowded	3
Located in another business, Run down office, not easily identified as SDC	3
Lots of space, its great working in the District	5
Meeting rooms for public and staff are needed in order to facilitate the programmes 21st Century libraries are expected to offer.	3
Much too small and doesn't provide suitable working spaces for staff or areas for private customer interaction.	3
My desk space is tiny. Office space does not allow for storage of paperwork necessary to facilitate my job effectively.	4
Needs to be tidied up roof tiles replaced that are holed, new painting in offices new wallpaper, carpet upgrade more room for personal space.	3
Not enough ventilation for some staff working whole day	2
Office space is good and good screening for noise as a lot of time spent on the phone.	5
Office space too small to accommodate all my equipment	3
Office work area feels like an oubliette. Very little natural light and no outside view. When it rains there is a terrible smell and drip like Chinese water torture on to the roof. Constant hum of heat pump whining away makes it hard to hear at times.	3
Offices are quite full. Some areas have a real "rabbit warren" feel.	4
Open plan and can communicate with relevant staff in same location.	5
Small desk for working on, not enough room for actives with members	4
Some teams have heaps of room, and some are crammed into spaces with no ventilation The Customer service area is not very secure, people can easily come into any area of the building	4
Some teams which need to be closer aligned are in different areas of the building.	4
Standard office space	5
Sure, I’ve a desk, chair and computer essentials - Repetitive flooding in nearby office - Rabbit warren, and cave-like (for those not near a window) effect. Not fantastic for productivity, image of workplace of choice, enhanced customer service.	3
Temperature of office fluctuates a lot. Decor getting a bit tired.	2
The building has been the subject of many investigations, band aids, wall changes, heating-ventilation-lighting issues, personnel accommodation changes, and the like. The required increase in personnel is not coping with the age, size, and restrictions on modern office space. Ad-hoc heating, tape over lifting carpet joins, failing exterior cladding all lead to sweating the asset - the result being a financial burden in years to come.	3
The building is no longer fit for purpose	3
The building is old and no longer fit for purpose.	3
The building was made for our job. Recycling/Refuse	5
The design and layout of the building.	3
The environment is agreeable - adequate standard of facilities to work.	5
The Invercargill office does not have enough space - it lacks storage, some parts have heating and air-conditioning and some don't. It is not appropriate for Chambers to be in the middle of the building.	3
The RM Department is small (for the number of people in the department). It has a terrible draft whenever the wind blows. The heat pump can’t keep up when its cold (it always defrosts) and when it’s windy the draft takes the warm air away. The heat pump it noisy when you sit under it all day. There is a residue of dust on our desks after a windy night. There is a leak behind my desk that wets the carpet when it rains. The carpet has mould as a result of the leak. Further, it's too close to the women's' toilet which often stinks out the room.	3
The space I have is adequate for what I need to do my work.	5
The state of the building does not make me feel good about my job. It's shabby and run down.	3
The tower block creates a rabbit warren effect with all the corridors and small hallways. The open plan areas eg Water team and Community engineers are ok when opened up.	3
The way the staff are accommodated in this building is 'a disaster waiting to happen"; it is a death trap and who will be responsible if something untoward occurs?	6
The workforce in the Invercargill building is very split up, which reduces the level of interaction between teams, as people are more inclined to pick up the phone or email rather than go to a different floor, etc. To save time This is a shame as relationships are built up by face to face communication, which is particularly valuable between teams / functions.	4
There are several leaks when it rains and problems with ventilation and odour at times.	2
There is an imbalance with lack of natural light, insufficient space around desks and uneven temperatures throughout the building. This is not great for staff that are office bound. Some of the better locations are for staff who are rarely in the building eg roading.	3
There is room for me to do my job, but not room for other purposes (meetings, storage etc)	3
Too many people to be accommodated. Some spaces not suitable for the purpose.	4
Too cramped	4
Very bright, sunny, and roomy office. Great counter layout.	5
We can do our required job with the required facilities at hand. However I do question why our main office is in Invercargill when we are the Southland District Council and the majority of our customers are situated out in the district. For all our staff that work out in the field Invercargill is not the most central location for them to be based.	4
Would be ideal if we could be closer to other teams that we have close working relationships with, however I understand that there are many constraints.	4

Appendix 2 - Do you have any suggestions for on how the building can be improved?

Category	No
New building	1
Heating/ventilation	2
Refurbish/relocate	3
Reconfiguration	4

A bonfire - well time to for a reality check and relocation. Research shows physical environment is more important than pay!!	1
A new building that is up to modern work environment standards.	1
A new building with natural light, good work space and a nice customer area would go a long way to feeling proud to belong.	1
Apart from the tower block I feel that very little can be done to the older part of the building. That part is used by date.	1
As suggested many years ago. Purchase the likes of the Waikiwi school grounds and build a purpose built modern facility capable of a bright, clean, comfortable, and welcoming environment for staff and visitors. Council, like other Councils, must consider improved premises as soon as possible.	1
Automatic door for ease of access for elderly with Zimmer frames or walking difficulties.	3
Bring up to earthquake standard in the old parts of the building. Redecorating, new carpet, and paint. Clean windows more often. More open plan, less rabbit-warren like.	3
Build up with parking underneath. Join the Memorial Hall to the library with easy access between the buildings for public and staff.	3
Building due for replacement	1
Central air con so we all have the same heat/cool. Not so rabbit warren like. No dividing barriers around desks!!	2
Clear signage marking the name of each department would be useful.	4
Connect departments that deal with each other in close proximity not at other ends of the building	4
Could be modernized, remove walls - open things up. Get departments with things in common in the same area to improve information sharing.	3
Could do with some interior decorating	3
Creating an open plan environment as far as possible, would encourage inter-departmental discussions, support, understanding, and strengthening of relationships. The introverts (who might not come to morning tea / lunch in the break-out room) will be out in the open with everyone else. It would simplify the Infrastructure support. Having hot desks allows managers to come and sit amongst their team on occasion - to feel their pain and experience their day-today work environment. Out of office staff can hot desk to mix with the locals and teams that they wouldn't normally get to spend time with. A coffee machine and/or small breakout area downstairs will allow for a casual space to meet, rather than an official meeting room. Lots of great ideas / conversations come from water cooler / casual chats.	4
Don't move large teams of people into areas that are not big enough. A recent plan for staff relocation is pathetic, suggests 22 plus staff on one floor when 16-18 is the max with minimal working areas (m²)	4
Equipment could be set up better within department. Time could be spent having a spring clean.	4
Get some re-locatable buildings and put on the car park site and put staff in them to enable a re-fit of the Invercargill offices. Also encourage staff to work from the SDC office close to their homes if they live in places near Otautau or Winton.	3
I appreciate that there is significant cost involved, but it would be great if we could have a more open-plan workspace to increase the ease of engagement between individuals and teams. I feel this would improve staff morale and strengthen teams. I know this is a small issue but it would be great if we could have coffee facilities on the ground floor as it needs a fair amount of time to get to the cafeteria for a hot drink.	4
I personally believe our main office should be in the district we manage. I understand that costs are prohibitive to go to another building but I think we need to think outside the square, and maybe have some staff based in our other offices to make more room here.	1
I think you should look at renting another building. You have an awful lot of wasted space coming into reception, put some staff are squashed up in tight areas - and other staff have to move out to accommodate to new premises to accommodate new employees. I do think that people who sit in the office all day should get natural lighting and windows as others have the ability to get out and about.	1
Improved air circulation/heating/cooling system.	2
Improved heating and lighting in staff only areas, improved exterior and interior signage.	2
Interior and exterior decor is very out-dated and no secure access to staff areas. Heat and lighting systems are inconsistent across the building and possibly not the most efficient. Lack of meeting rooms is an issue.	2
It's an old building so its limited in what can be done but the main issues are lighting and ventilation.	2
Just keep up with the ongoing maintenance. The main public areas are looking really nice but upstairs could do with some refurbishment.	3
Knock it down and rebuild	1
More gents toilets somewhere on the eastern side of the building	3
Move to a new building	1
Move to a new site, it would cost too much to change the existing	1
My first impression is there is a huge variety in the quality of people’s workspace. Some people are relatively better off than others but largely this is not guided by position in the organisation. As this is two buildings in one, all areas need to be seen and assessed as parts of a whole. It is not the worst I’ve worked in but I suspect SDC will outgrow this building eventually.	4
Need the back room updated to cope with the free Wi-Fi users which have increased immensely in Lumsden. Staff are in the process of cleaning it out for this. Purpose.	4
Needs to be tidied up roof tiles replaced that are holed, new painting in offices new wallpaper, carpet upgrade more room for personal space.	3
New building	1
New Building or renovate the existing building	1
New building or renovations	1
New building, or refurbishment including new toilets, lighter brighter offices	1
New! Or major updates.	1
Open it up, take away partitions, walls, bring common groups together	4
Place community specific people into the appropriate community	4
Probably start again or a major floor by floor upgrade. At least put in adequate ventilation and heating before it becomes a health & safety issue, if not already.	3
Provide something which is purpose built to provide for 21 C activities.	3
Pull the whole thing down and completely re-build.	1
Re arrangement	4
Reconfigure reception area, but that is already planned. It doesn't work very well currently	4
Reduce the number of people accommodated in the building and the opportunity be given to staff to relocate to other area offices	4
Relocate or build a purpose built building	1
Remodel upstairs not just ground floor and chambers.	3
Riverton office could be in provided by extension for Wi-Fi users (conservatory extended toward street). Security safety could be improved fount desks and interview rooms. Building department wall to be stopped leaking. Lack of ventilation in the building makes un healthy	3
Some areas that work closely together, need to be in same area	4
Soundproofing for offices that are in busy thoroughfare areas, a heating/air conditioning system that actually works, some cosmetic improvements (even just a lick of paint - the offices that have been changed from apricot to grey/cream look much better), there is a distinct lack of wheelchair accessibility, spaces that can accommodate all staff legally are few and far between, etc.	3
Soundproofing for offices that are next to busy thoroughfares and a heating/cooling system that works properly.	3
Spending money on it will improve the situation but it won’t solve the space issue unless the department is shifted.	3
The building needs maintenance and the customer service area needs to be sectioned off somehow. I understand that teams are to be relocated this is a work in progress	4
The criteria for the reshuffle shortly sounds sensible	4
The Invercargill office building is extremely congested; this is due to a number of reasons such as additional staff and a poor layout with the current footprint. Such as the number of large departmental manager offices that exist in the building.	4
The reception area needs a makeover to allow the customer to see CSO staff and allow the staff to see the customer, when coming into the building.	4
There is lacks of air movement which is not helped by the positioning of the heater in the building which create areas of dead hear and temperature variations in the room cause by spaces of dead air and lack of air movement. But given the design of the building this would be very hard to over come	2
There is still plenty of room in Bill Richardson Drive	3
Tinkering with continuous repairs can only go so far in improving an aging building, but a new one would be unpalatable politically.	1
Ventilation	2
Ventilation and Temperature control	2
We have two store rooms beside the Library that could be relined and used as a Wi-Fi room and craft room in the off season.	4

Appendix 3 – Survey questionnaire

Activities Performance Audit Committee

29 June 2016

TO: FINANCE AND POLICY COMMITTEE

FROM: THE director of works and services

MEETING DATE: Wednesday june 8 2016

quarterly report – southland museum and art gallery

Report Prepared by: Paul Horner – Manager, Building Assets and Museum

Summary

Report about the operation of the Southland Museum and Art Gallery for the Third Quarter of 2015/2016.

Recommendations

That the report be received.

Implications

1.	Has this been provided for in the Long Term Plan/Annual Plan? Yes.
2.	Is a budget amendment required? No.
3.	Is this matter significant in terms of Council’s Policy on Significance? No.
4.	Implications in terms of other Council Strategic Documents or Council Policy? No.
5.	Have the views of affected or interested persons been obtained and is any further public consultation required? No.

Financial Implications

Ø Expenditure variance is $94,546 overspent to the end of March. Over-expenditure has been reduced by $15,382 since the end of the Second Quarter.

Level of Performance

Target Levels of Performance Required by the Statement of Intent are:

Service Level	Achievement, Third Quarter
Prepare for building refurbishment and extension to enable internal environmental conditions to meet national/international guidelines.	Redevelopment plan completed and approved by Trust Board. Presentations provided to councils and funders
No irreparable loss or damage is caused to collections or objects on loan.	No loss detected
100% of objects acquired entered into Vernon database and verified	100% of new acquisitions entered. Review of collection information urgently required.
100% records on Vernon database maintained	100% maintained. Review of collection information urgently required.
Project planned to review, update and verify records on database	This project is dependent on achieving a $600,000 p.a. increase of funding
Three semi-permanent exhibitions are delivered. A minimum of 12 short-term exhibitions, including 8 in the community access gallery, are presented annually.	Six semi-permanent exhibitions at present. 12 short term exhibitions opened by end of third quarter including 6 in the Community Access gallery.
Over 25 education programmes delivered to 4000 school students, including curriculum-linked and exhibition-related programmes.	30 programmes delivered to 2,872 pupils by end of third quarter
Iwi Liaison Komiti (representing the four Southland Runanga), meets four times a year.	Four by end of third quarter.
Annual visitor numbers exceed 200,000/annum	189,469 by end of third quarter (4% ahead of same quarter last year)

Operational Comments

The museum is operating well with high people-counter numbers at the front door. With 245,000 people counted in the year to June 2015 the museum is the most visited tourist attraction and community heritage organisation in Invercargill.

Data gathered since January 2016 shows that 16% of visitors make purchases at the café, 10% make enquiries or purchases at the i-SITE and 6% make purchases at the shop.

Exhibitions which have been held in the Community Access gallery so far this year have been:

Ø Polyfest 2015 (schools)

Ø Day Activity Centre clients of SDHB

Ø Inspired 2015

Ø Ballantynes, Beaches, Bush and Brushstrokes

Ø Tony Bishop Deep Freeze

Ø Top Art, school art projects

The art exhibitions which have been held up to end of the third quarter were:

Ø Jeff Thomson, Corrugations

Ø Anderson Park Art Gallery exhibition, Southerly Aspect

Ø Southland Art Foundation exhibition by their Artist in Residence for 2015, Stephen Mulqueen, Blackbird.

Ø Southland Museum and Art Gallery Phototgraphic exhibition, Inner City, Campbell Collection.

Ø Tungaru: The Kiribati Project.

Ø Sergeant Dan

The semi-permanent exhibitions at present are:

Ø Roaring 40’s

Ø History Gallery

Ø Maori Gallery

Ø Natural History Gallery

Ø Victoriana Gallery

Ø World War 1 Exhibition

Staff

The Collection Manager resigned in March. It is intended to re-fill this position in the new financial year.

Future Issues

Review of the catalogue information of the collection is the most important project needing to be carried out in the near future. This is the reason that SMAG has proposed an increase of the Regional Heritage Rate from $34.10 including GST this year to $50.00 next year to provide a further $600,000 of operational budget.

The Southland Museum and Art Gallery holds a large, unique and valuable collection from all of Southland however due to shortage of funding of the museum operation, this has not been and cannot be, catalogued and stored to the best of our ability. This is of immediate concern because:

1) This funding is needed to speed up Catalogue improvement so that the collection can be removed from the pyramid at any time in the future. (poor collection information = no moving and no exhibitions)

2) It must be done whether redevelopment, reroofing or relocation occurs. i.e. it is independent of uncertainty about the future of the museum.

3) SMAG is especially different to any other Southland museum or gallery because of the enormous responsibility of its large collection and the need and cost to maintain, preserve and present it.

4) Over the last 10 years two major projects should have been carried out on the collection i.e. cataloguing and digitising. Neither of these has occurred.

5) It should also have been re-shelved and packaged for protection. This has also not occurred.

6) We estimate that there is about 20 man-years of work i.e. 4 staff for 5 years, just to correct present problems of cataloguing, packing and storing.

7) The enormity of the collection means that SMAG should have at least 4 permanent professionals working with the collection on a full-time basis in order to fulfil the expectations our community for access (on-line and on-site), exhibitions and interpretation – and all for free.

8) SMAG has never had the funding to do this, which leads directly to the present situation.

This has been the situation for some years at SMAG and can only be addressed by an increase of operational funding. As well, the museum has always needed new curators for natural history and anthropology. A natural history curator is vital as a replacement strategy for our Tuatara curator who will soon be nearing retirement. An anthropology curator who can work on a Southland wide basis is a need which was identified at least 10 years ago. Technicians are needed to carry out development of the catalogue information.

A break-down of the requested extra operational funding is as follows:

2 collection technicians @ approximately $50,000 p.a 100,000

2 curators @ approximately $70,000 p.a. 140,000

Staff costs for training, technology, equipment etc p.a. 60,000

Exhibition development, technology, materials etc p.a. 100,000

Collection catalogue and storage costs, materials etc p.a. 100,000

Catch-up for increased present operation costs p.a. 100,000

Total per annum $600,000

At the time of reporting, the 3 TLAs are close to completing the consultative process for next year’s Annual Plan.

**********

Activities Performance Audit Committee

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Health and Safety

Record No: R/16/6/8895

Author: Janet Ellis, People and Capability Manager

Approved by: Steve Ruru, Chief Executive

☐ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☒ Information

Purpose

1 To provide an update on health and safety activity within the Southland District Council.

Recommendation

That the Activities Performance Audit Committee:

a) Receives the report titled “Health and Safety” dated 22 June 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.

f) Notes the new Health and Safety Toolkit developed.

Content

Due Diligence Responsibilities

2 As part of due diligence requirements, Councillors are required to keep up to date with health and safety matters, understand the nature of the business, audit its hazards and risks, ensure there are appropriate reporting and investigation processes in place and monitor and verify that appropriate actions are being taken. Training on health and safety responsibilities for elected members will be included in the 2016 Council Induction Programme.

3 A new document Health and Safety Guide: Good Governance for Directors 2016 is attached (Attachment A) for Councillors information. The guide, which is published by the Institute of Directors and WorkSafe New Zealand, sets out why effective governance is important, the essential elements of health and safety governance and the role of directors in health and safety governance.

4 A number of Councillors visited the Dipton forest in May. This was organised by IFS and was a well-managed event. Councillors were made aware of the hazards in the forest and saw first-hand how IFS were managing the major risks to their workers. The investment in sophisticated machinery and technology it has meant that while harvesting the logs no workers are on the ground and therefore the risks of serious harm are minimised while production actually increases.

Health and Safety at Southland District Council

Southland Councils Health and Safety Management Group

5 The Health and Safety Toolkit for Southland District Council is in the finalisation stages. Consultation has occurred within all four Councils. Feedback was overwhelmingly positive. A copy of the draft Southland District Council toolkit is attached (Attachment B) for your information. In late June 2016, the Management Group will meet and finalise the toolkit.

6 A wellness day is being organised for Southland District Council staff at the end of June. This is in conjunction with Invercargill City Council and will include stalls for staff to visit, places to get blood pressure and eyes tested.

Contractor Health and Safety Management

7 Contractor Health and Safety Management has been a big focus for the last two years. In April 2016, Contractor Health and Safety Management was defined as one of the top five health and safety risks.

8 In order to manage this risk a subcommittee has been created to specifically focus on and manage the Council’s relationships with its contractors regarding health and safety matters. The actions undertaken by Council contractors involve some of the most hazardous work which Southland District Council is involved with. Examples include working in trenches, and working on our roading network in close proximity to passing traffic. Some of these health and safety risks are potentially fatal if not subject to appropriate management and mitigation measures.

9 The subcommittee will have involvement from staff who manage Contractors as well as involvement from some of Southland District Council’s preferred Contractors both large and small. This should encourage a collaborative culture, similar to the Roading Alliance Contract model.

10 To date we have done 3 administrative “assessments” on Primary Contractors namely Fulton Hogan, SouthRoads and Downers. Other Observations have been done with Bond (albeit ICC transfer station but as part of Wastenet).

11 Any short comings were somewhat minor singular events such as administration errors and recently expired documentation. There were no major issues involving system failure or absence of process, arising from these assessments which would give concern as to these contractors remaining on our “Approved Contractors List”.

12 We are currently assessing “spend” to ensure we target our more frequently used contractors who would then in turn create more “Risk” to the SDC, for our next run of assessments.

Vehicles and Driving

13 Vehicles and driving was also defined as one of the top five health and safety risks for our staff at Southland District Council in April 2016. A committee of staff from across the organisation has been formed. This committee will work with the Fleet Manager and focus on the vehicle policy, procurement and minimising the risks associated with driving for our staff.

14 Both of the subcommittees will provide reports to the Health and Safety Committee and the Executive Leadership Team on a six monthly basis.

Personal Protective Equipment

15 Council has implemented a new Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Policy which includes ensuring all staff have the appropriate PPE.

New Health and Safety Application

16 All staff and Councillors will soon have access to our free health and safety application. The application allows users to report the key safety messages to Southland District Council, Incidents, Near Misses, Good Practice and Suggestions in real time.

17 Southland District will receive information and will be able to use the information to manage safety in a positive and proactive way. Below is a picture of what the application will look like on either a smart phone or on an I-pad.

Accidents/Incidents/Near Misses

18 In the last five months (1 January 2016 to 31 May 2016) there were six reported incidents. One incident was when a staff member was threatened on a property, one was a fall following tripping over a mat, and four incidents (all minor) including cuts to the finger and eyebrow area from the garage door opposite the Invercargill office. The Property team is working with the Landlord of this building to install a roller door to make access easier. In addition we also received two early reporting notifications of strains which were looked into and fixed.

Attachments

a Health and Safety Guide Good Governance for Directors 2016 View

b Health, Safety and Wellness Toolkit 2016 Draft View

Activities Performance Audit Committee

29 June 2016

sdclogo

MWH Global Transfer of Ownership to Stantec Inc

Record No: R/16/6/8955

Author: Joe Bourque, Strategic Manager Transport

Approved by: Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 This report requests formal approval of MWH Global assigning and novating all of its rights, obligations, title and interest in, to and under Contract 12/03 to Stantec Inc.

Executive Summary

2 MWH Global has entered into a merger with Stantec Inc. Under the terms of
Southland District Council Contract 12/03 for Professional Services, the merger constitutes an assignment of the contract, due to the change of control.

3 From a Council point of view there are no real negative issues with granting this approval as the people involved in the contract, terms and conditions all remain the same.

Recommendation

That the Activities Performance Audit Committee:

a) Receives the report titled “MWH Global Transfer of Ownership to Stantec Inc” dated 17 June 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) Agrees to the transfer of ownership of MWH to Stantec Inc.

e) Agrees that the Chief Executive should write officially granting Council’s approval to MWH assigning and novating all of its rights under the Southland District Council Contract 12/03 for Professional Services to Stantec Inc.

Content

Background

4 MWH Global (MWH) have been providing professional services to Southland District Council (SDC) since the start of 1999 when they took over the staff and work functions of SDC’s former design office. Over the past 17 years and three consecutive contracts, there have been many changes but MWH have continued to meet SDC’s needs.

5 The current contract is operated on a formalised One Team relationship where MWH provide a dedicated team of six people to provide the bulk of SDC’s external professional services with additional people, as required, for a range of expertise and dealing with peak workloads. The expiry date is 30 June 2017.

6 MWH have helped manage pavement renewals, reseals, bridge upgrades and replacements, as well as providing major inputs into asset management, asset management plans, programmes, RAMM, etc. MWH have also been a key in developing the ENP and now the safety deficiency database.

7 Recently, to provide the company with greater access to capital to allow it to expand its services, MWH has elected to merge with Stantec Inc, a listed Canadian company.

8 Additional information on Stantec Inc and the impact of the merger from an MWH perspective have been appended to the report (Background on Stantec Inc).

Issues

9 Under the current SDC Contract 12/03 for Professional Services, this merger constitutes an assignment of the contract, due to the change of control.

10 The terms of the contract require approval form Council to allow the contract to be assigned to the new entity.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

11 The provisions in Contract 12/03 require that any change in ownership or controlling interest in the Consultant shall be deemed to be an assignment of the contract. This cannot occur with the approval of Council as the client.

Community Views

12 No specific community views have been sought as no change in level of service is anticipated. It is reasonable to expect, however, that the community would see this as a routine administrative issue to be managed by the Council.

Costs and Funding

13 Cost and funding will not be affected by the merger.

Policy Implications

14 No policy implications are anticipated.

Analysis

Options Considered

15 Effectively only to options exist, Council either agrees to the assignment or not.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Council Agrees

Advantages	Disadvantages
· Council potentially gains access to greater depth of resources and knowledge.	· None.

Option 2 - Council does not agree

Advantages

Disadvantages

· No obvious advantages.

· Potentially a lost opportunity for Council to gain access to additional resources and knowledge that a organisation of this size can offer.

· Council would have to retender the work or enter into some form of procurement for a new contract.

Assessment of Significance

16 While the annual value of the contract is large the merger itself does not change any of Council’s commitment or levels of services and therefore it is not considered significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Recommended Option

17 It is recommended that the Activities Performance Audit Committee authorise the
Chief Executive to acknowledge and confirm MWH Global assigning and novating all of its right, obligation, title and interest in, to and under SDC Contract 12/03 to Stantec Inc.

Next Steps

18 If this recommendation is accepted the Chief Executive will formally confirm the assignment in writing.

Attachments

a Stantec Inc and MWH Global - Company Information View

Activities Performance Audit Committee

29 June 2016

sdclogo

Southland District Council 2016/2017 Resurfacing Contracts

Record No: R/16/6/8976

Author: Joe Bourque, Strategic Manager Transport

Approved by: Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

☒ Decision ☐ Recommendation ☐ Information

Purpose

1 This report outlines the tenders received for the 2016/2017 Southland District Council Resurfacing Programme and seeks approval from the Activities Performance Audit Committee to award Contract 16/10 and Contract 16/12 to the recommended tenderers.

Executive Summary

2 This report covers the tendering for the resurfacing of approximately 1,120,000 m² of urban and rural roads in the Southland District Council’s 2016/2017 Resurfacing Programme, to be let as two contracts. The report covers the tenders received, the evaluation carried out and recommendations for letting the contracts.

Recommendation

That the Activities Performance Audit Committee:

a) Receives the report titled “Southland District Council 2016/2017 Resurfacing Contracts” dated 17 June 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) Accept Fulton Hogan’s tender price of $2,327,551.36 plus GST for Contract 16/10 - 2016/2017 Eastern Area Resurfacing.

e) Accept Downer’s tender price of $2,458,250.00 plus GST for Contract 2016/2017 Western Area Resurfacing.

f) Approves the 2016/17 Sealed Roads Resurfacing budget being adjusted to $4.8M subject to the variation being managed within the overall roading budget for 2016/17.

Content

Background

3 This report covers the tendering for the resurfacing (resealing and second coat sealing) of approximately 1,120,000 m² of urban and rural roads in the Southland District Council Resurfacing Programme. The total resurfacing programme has been split evenly into two contract areas, being the Eastern and Western areas which operate each side of
State Highway 6.

4 Prior to tendering, Southland District Council (SDC) and MWH discussed the options for the 2016/2017 reseals. Consideration was given to a single contract similar to 2015/2016.
This option was discussed in detail as it encourages the two local contractors to tender their best price as they only have one chance at getting this large contract. In the past, both Downer and Fulton Hogan have successfully completed reseal contracts that have covered the entire SDC network, Downer in 2014/2015 and Fulton Hogan in 2015/2016.

5 However, during the option assessment, Downer brought to our attention that with its commitments, including for the Southland and Coastal Otago NZTA Network Outcome Contracts, they did not have the ability to complete a single network wide contract for SDC. With this in mind, and the aim to get the best possible market contested tender price, the option of two separate contracts was chosen.

6 Also, just prior the tender going out it was revealed that Downer had just won the Invercargill City Council 2016/2017 reseal contract.

7 Splitting the district into two areas was done to encourage competition for these large parcels of work in the current market place. It also produced contract areas that have a mix of coastal and drier inland areas to reduce the risk of weather affecting progress.

8 The work involved in the contracts includes; texturising of preseal patching, temporary traffic management, sweeping, supply and spraying of bitumen, supplying, placement and rolling of chips and pavement marking.

9 The conforming tenders are similar to previous years including having the cost of spraying the bitumen included in with the supply, cart and laying of chips. This has been done so that the bitumen cost is a supply only rate and can be more easily identified when adjusting for cost fluctuations.

10 The NZTA bitumen volume based contract price adjustment formula will again apply to these contracts. This formula uses predetermined values for the percentage of bitumen and non-bitumen related costs which are fluctuated on a monthly basis using NZTA index values. This formula has had positive support from local contractors and is intended to more fairly apportion the cost fluctuation risk between the Principal and the Contractor.

11 The contracts were advertised on Local Government Online and in the Tenders Gazette. Tenders were received from two companies by the closing date of 8 June 2016.

12 The tenders are set up to be let on a Price Quality Method basis, with the total non-price weighting of 30% being on relevant experience, track record, resources, relevant skills and methodology. These attributes therefore had to be evaluated prior to opening the price envelopes. To do this the Tender Evaluation Team studied the tenders and met to discuss and agree scores on 10 June 2016.

13 This team was made up of Hartley Hare, Michael Duggan and John Laskewitz.
As a result of their deliberations, which reviewed the Tenderer’s information provided against that requested, the following scores were awarded:

Tenderer	Relevant Experience	Track Record	Resources	Relevant Skills	Methodology
Downer	90	80	85	85	85
Fulton Hogan	90	80	90	80	80

14 Both Downer and Fulton Hogan have very similar relevant experience and track records, hence the same scores. For the resources component, the evaluation team determined that Fulton Hogan has an edge with their variable sprayer over Downer’s conventional sprayer.

15 In the relevant skills component, Downer’s showed through its total experience available for the contract and its presentation of its tender that they were just ahead of Fulton Hogan.

16 In the methodology component, again Downer demonstrated through its more clearly set out methodology and presentation that it was overall just ahead of Fulton Hogan.

17 Fulton Hogan gave a good performance for the 2015/2016 season. While it got off to a late start, mainly due to the weather, they completed sealing for both the effective Eastern and Western areas on time, but did have some road marking issues that are being addressed.

18 The tender prices received were as follows (excluding GST):

Tenderer	Contract 16/10 - Eastern Area	Contract 16/12 - Western Area
Downer Conforming	-	$2,458,250.00
Fulton Hogan	$2,327,551.36	$2,516,524.65
MWH Estimate	$2,191,285.00	$2,292,175.00

19 The Engineer’s estimates are based on the 2015/2016 tender rates. It has turned out that Fulton Hogan’s price for the Eastern Area is 6.2% above estimate which may reflect the current cost of bitumen and the current state of the competitive tendering market.

20 With the prices received it may not be possible to complete all of the sites within the provisional resealing budget of $4.25 million for the 2016/2017 physical resealing works. However, there are some sites that are on the programme that have been identified that could potentially be delayed depending on how the tender prices came out. This was done so SDC had some flexibility to deal with tender prices above the physical works budget.

21 The amount of work able to be completed within the available budget will be dependent on final treatments chosen and cost fluctuations. It should be noted that due to savings made in 2015/2016, because of lower cost fluctuations, there may be sufficient money in the budget to fund the full contract values.

22 With the Price Quality Method evaluation the non-priced scores were used to evaluate the Supplier Quality Premium. These premiums were then deducted from the tender prices to determine who had the lowest overall tender price and therefore becomes the recommended Tenderer. For the purposes of tender evaluation the Contingency Sum and any Provisional Sums, included in the tender schedule, are excluded from the estimate but left in the Tenderer’s prices for the calculation. In both the Eastern Area Tender and the Western Area Tender the total contingency sum was $100,000 and Provisional Sum allowing for Source Property Testing was $5,000, a combined total of $105,000 for each contract.

23 This produces the following (all scores reduced by their weighting):

Contract 16/10 - Eastern Area

Attribute (Weighting)	Fulton Hogan
Relevant Experience (5%)	4.5
Track Record (5%)	4.0
Resources (5%)	4.5
Relevant Skills (5%)	4.0
Methodology (10%)	8.0
Sum of Non-priced Attributes (30%)	25.0
Tender Price	$2,327,551.36
Supplier Quality Premium ($)	0
Price less supplier quality premium	$2,327,551.36

24 It is disappointing to only receive one tender for the Contract 16/10 - Eastern area.
However, given Downer’s pre-tender notice of its commitments this is not surprising.
Fulton Hogan’s tender is 6.2% above the MWH estimate and is considered a competitive tender when its tendered average rate of $4.16 m² is compared to the Western area rate of $4.41 m².

Contract 16/12 - Western Area

Attribute (Weighting)	Downer	Fulton Hogan
Relevant Experience (5%)	4.5	4.5
Track Record (5%)	4.0	4.0
Resources (5%)	4.25	4.5
Relevant Skills (5%)	4.25	4.0
Methodology (10%)	8.5	8.0
Sum of Non-priced Attributes (30%)	25.5	25.0
Tender Price	$2,458,250.00	$2,516,524.65
Supplier Quality Premium ($)	$15,622,.68	0
Price less supplier quality premium	$2,442,627.32	$2,516,524.65

25 It is good to see that for Contract 16/12 - Western Area, two tenders were received and that they were within 2.4% of each other. Downer’s tender is 7.2% above the MWH estimate and is considered a competitive tender when compared to Fulton Hogan’s tender.

Issues

26 As with previous years the contracts will include continuing to apply the standard NZTA cost fluctuation formula. As always, predicting what this will do during the season is very difficult as it depends on changes in bitumen prices and the value of the $NZ versus the $US.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

27 No unusual legal considerations are involved with this project. As with all projects, but larger value projects in particular, there is the risk of a legal challenge regarding the tender results from unsuccessful Tenderers. To reduce this risk the Tender Evaluation Team carefully followed the NZTA procurement procedures.

Community Views

28 The final treatments selected will take account of the existing seal, road and environmental conditions, traffic loading, community expectations and available sealing budget. This will result in use of smaller chips in urban and built up areas where possible, to cut down traffic noise.

Costs and Funding

29 The budget for the 2016/2017 Resurfacing Programme was set at $4.5M including the costs of professional services. The reseal sites are chosen as part of the resurfacing programme based on the ongoing needs of the sealed network.

30 As cost fluctuations apply to both the 2016/2017 contracts, this could result in the final cost being significantly different from that tendered. This will be monitored during the contract period. Given the prices tendered there is a good chance that the bulk of the reseal programme can be completed within the budget.

31 This style of contract and procurement has been chosen to try to obtain the best value for money for the roading network.

Policy Implications

32 The project is part of the Southland District Council 2016/2017 Resurfacing Programme and fits within the Annual Plan and budget expectations.

Analysis

Options Considered

33 In developing the procurement methodology, two main options were considered for contract size as detailed below:

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Single Contract covering the full District

Advantages

Disadvantages

· With only one contract the tenderers only have one chance to win this work so they have to put their best submission forward. This may maximise competition in a market with just two players.

· There is a slight reduction in contract administration with only one contract rather than two.

· There is risk to SDC in having its whole programme with one contractor if that contractor does not perform. This risk has been successfully managed over the last five years.

· The unsuccessful tenderer has to find work elsewhere for a year.

Option 2 - Two separate Contracts to cover the District

Advantages

Disadvantages

· There is reduced risk to SDC in having the full programme with more than one contractor as this increase the chances of the programme being completed on time.

· Continues to promote some form of competitive tendering with limited suppliers.

· Slight increase in contract administration with two rather than one.

· Potential for reduced competition as tenderers have two changes to win work and may not put there absolute best submission forward.

Assessment of Significance

34 The procurement method used through an open tender process, utilising the budget in the Annual Plan, means that the letting of this contract is not significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Recommended Option

35 Both Downer and Fulton Hogan have successfully completed reseal contracts for SDC during the 2013/2014, 2014/2015 and 2015/2016 seasons. They are both large national companies who should be able to complete these contracts and have both submitted reasonably competitive prices.

36 It is therefore recommended that:

• Fulton Hogan’s tender price of $2,327,551.36 for Contract 16/10 - Eastern Area be accepted; and

• Downer’s tender price of $2,458,250.00 for Contract 16/12 - Western Area be accepted.

37 It is also requested that the Activities Performance Audit Committee approve the overall expenditure on the Sealed Roads Resurfacing Programme for the 2016/17 year to be the combined value of the two contracts ($4,785,801.36) rounded to $4.8M. Adjustments within the 2016/17 roading programme will be made to accommodate this budget change. The total value of the roading programme will not be altered as the result of this change.

Next Steps

38 Council formally award the contracts to the recommended tenderers and Council's
Group Manager Services and Assets formally notify the successful and unsuccessful tenderers of the outcome from the tendering process.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

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

Chief Executive	Steve Ruru
Committee Advisor	Alyson Hamilton

Designed with Community in Mind

This is a very good fit with MWH’s purpose of:
Building a Better World