sdclogo

 

 

Notice is hereby given that a Meeting of the Te Anau Community Board will be held on:

 

Date:                       

Time:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 12 April 2017

3.00pm

Distinction Te Anau Hotel & Villas
64 Lakefront Drive, Te Anau

 

Te Anau Community Board Agenda

 

OPEN

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Rachel Cockburn

 

Deputy Chairperson

Sarah Greaney

 

Members

Shaun Cantwell

 

 

Mary Chartres

 

 

Kara Matheson

 

 

Tony O'Loughlin

 

Councillor

Ebel Kremer

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE

 

Committee Advisor

Jenny Labruyere

 

Community Partnership Leader

Simon Moran

 

 

 

 

Contact Telephone: 0800 732 732

Postal Address: PO Box 903, Invercargill 9840

Email: emailsdc@southlanddc.govt.nz

Website: www.southlanddc.govt.nz

 

Full agendas are available on Council’s Website

www.southlanddc.govt.nz

 

 

 



Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM                                                                                                                           PAGE

Procedural

1          Apologies                                                                                                              5

2          Leave of absence                                                                                                  5

3          Conflict of Interest                                                                                                5

4          Public Forum                                                                                                         5

5          Extraordinary/Urgent Items                                                                                 5

6          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                      5

Reports

7.1       Council Report                                                                                 13

7.2       Request for Te Anau - Tako Town (Japan) Friendship Relationship                                                                                     23

7.3       Rotary Club of Fiordland - Roadside Project                                39

7.4       Relocation of Quintin Mackinnon Statue                                      43

7.5       Update on Odour Issues at Te Anau Oxidation Ponds                45

7.6       Te Anau Airport Wastewater Options Detailed Review               47

7.7       New Triennium 2016-2019 - New Approach                                  59

7.8       Recently Adopted Policies                                                             85

7.9       Te Anau Airport Manapouri Works and Finance Report for the period ending February 2017                                                       107  

UPDATES

8.1       Chairperson's Report

The Chairperson, Member Cockburn, to report on matters with which she has been involved since the Board’s last meeting.

 

8.2       Councillor's Report

Councillor to report on matters from the District Council table.

 

Public Excluded

Procedural motion to exclude the public                                                                   109

C10.1  Consideration of a Request to Rectify Issues to Neighbouring Properties Caused by Beech Trees on the Henry Street Reserve                                                                                           109

C10.2  Te Anau Airport Operational Issues                                            109  


 

1          Apologies

 

An apology for non-attendance has been lodged by Councillor Kremer.

 

2          Leave of absence

 

At the close of the agenda no requests for leave of absence had been received.

 

3          Conflict of Interest

 

Board Members are reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other external interest they might have.

 

4          Public Forum

           

            A representative from Emergency Management Southland wishes to speak in the public forum section of the meeting on the the following subject;

 

·         Emergency Management Southland – Civil Defence

 

5          Extraordinary/Urgent Items

To consider, and if thought fit, to pass a resolution to permit the committee to consider any further items which do not appear on the Agenda of this meeting and/or the meeting to be held with the public excluded.

Such resolution is required to be made pursuant to Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, and the Chairperson must advise:

(i)    the reason why the item was not on the Agenda, and

(ii)        the reason why the discussion of this item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting.

Section 46A(7A) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended) states:

“Where an item is not on the agenda for a meeting,-

(a) that item may be discussed at that meeting if-

(i)         that item is a minor matter relating to the general business of the local authority; and

(ii)        the presiding member explains at the beginning of the meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be discussed at the meeting; but

(b)          no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the local authority for further discussion.”

 

6          Confirmation of Minutes

6.1       Minutes of Te Anau Community Board Meeting, held on 15 February 2017.


sdclogo

 

 

Te Anau Community Board

 

OPEN MINUTES

UNCONFIRMED

 

 

 

Minutes of a meeting of Te Anau Community Board held in the Distinction Te Anau Hotel & Villas, 64 Lakefront Drive, Te Anau on Wednesday, 15 February 2017 at 3.00pm.

 

present

 

Chairperson

Rachel Cockburn

 

Deputy Chairperson

Sarah Greaney

 

Members

Shaun Cantwell

 

 

Mary Chartres

 

 

Kara Matheson

 

 

Tony O'Loughlin

 

Councillor

Ebel Kremer

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE

 

Committee Advisor

Jenny Labruyère

 

Community Partnership Leader

Simon Moran

 

 


1          Apologies

 

There were no apologies received.

 

2          Leave of absence

 

No requests for leave of absence had been received.

 

3          Conflict of Interest

 

There were no conflicts of interest declared.

 

4          Public Forum

 

Moved Member O'Loughlin, seconded Member Matheson and resolved that the Te Anau Community Board go into public forum to allow members of the public to speak.

 

Ray Willett

 

Mr Willett raised a number of concerns these being;

 

·        The lack of on-going maintenance to the Upukerora Road that leads to the lake front.  Mr Willett believes there is to be no further maintenance to the road  and considers access to the river mouth is crucial for locals and visitors alike  and would like this road to remain open and maintained for public use.

 

·        Enquired as to Real Journey’s having a reduced rate for their clients to access the Lions Park toilets.

 

·        Expressed his concern that the Te Anau Airport–Manapouri is losing opportunities and the lack progress is stifling the development of hanger sites and accommodation at the airport.

 

At the conclusion of the Public Forum section Mr Willett was advised the following;

 

o   The Upukerora Road is Council owned up to the sewer ponds, from that point on the road is the responsibility of The Department of Conservation.

 

o   Real Journey’s do not have such an agreement with Council in regard to a reduced rate for use of the Lions Park toilet facility.

 

o   Airport development issues are the subject of ongoing discussions within Council.

 

Moved Member Chartres, seconded Deputy Chairperson Greaney and resolved that the  Te Anau Community Board moves out of public forum.

 

 

5          Extraordinary/Urgent Items

 

There were no Extraordinary/Urgent items.

 

6          Confirmation of Minutes

 

Resolution

Moved Member Cantwell, seconded Member Matheson 

That the Te Anau Community Board confirms the minutes of the meeting, held on 21 December 2016.

 

In discussing the minutes members enquired as to progress of the following projects;

 

·        Requested an update on communications with absentee property owners in regard to mowing of berms and the possible changes to the bylaw.

 

·        Requested an update on the progress of the Fiordland Rotary Roadside Project.

 

·        Enquired as to progress of  a report on the Airport Ground Power Unit.

 

·        Commented that as there is no action sheet providing timeframes of projects included in the agenda there is a need for the project list and Gantt chart to be presented prior to the meeting, or with every Community Board formal agenda, in order that clarity is provided and is transparent so as to enable the Members to monitor deliverables.

 

 

Reports

 

 

7.1

Council Report

Record No:         R/17/1/1756

 

Simon Moran (Community Partnership Leader) presented this report.

 

Mr Moran advised the purpose of the report is to provide an overview of key issues across the Southland District, as well as high level local issues from various Council units. 

 

Mr Moran informed the report highlighted various issues of interest, such as the following:

 

  • Research to be undertaken on Council Services across the District to ensure that the Council has an understanding of what the customers want and how they choose to interact. 

 

  • Council keeping a watching brief on legislative developments in regard to freedom camping so as to have  a more consistent approach to regulating freedom camping bylaws particularly non self-contained vehicles and tents.

 

  • Members commented on the increased numbers of building consents and requested regular updates for building consents being lodged in particular in the Te Anau area.

 

  • Mr Moran advised Leadership Planning and Goal setting workshops are to be run throughout the District for Community Boards and CDA’s during April 2017.  Mr Moran explained the workshops are intended to help each Community Board/CDA develop a Community Leadership Plan outlining the goals and strategic priorities that they have for their communities in the current triennium and beyond.

 

The Board noted the leadership and goal setting workshop for this Community Board is scheduled for Wednesday 12 April 2017 and will take place directly following the Community Board meeting with the workshop  to include the newly elected Manapouri Community Development Area Subcommittee.

 

  • Mr Moran advised that with the funding announcement made for the Milford Opportunities project at the launch of SoRDS, work has been underway to set up the Governance Group to progress the project.

 

  • Mr Moran advised in regards to the finance report income is slightly less than budgeted because the Year to Date figure includes rentals income that is not actually received until March.

 

Mr Moran added Capital Expenditure is significantly less than expected due primarily to the delays with the pontoon project.  It also includes an element of the Streetworks and Entrance signage that have been budgeted but not progressed.

 

In discussing the report presented by Mr Moran members commented that although the report was informative they raised their concerns that there was no airport reporting and no specific local community issues and in particular at the lack of detailed information in the financial reporting.  Members felt very uncomfortable with the financial reporting section and for the time taken to present the report where there was no ability for any decision making processes or governance on behalf of the local community.

 

Members were apprehensive to resolve to receive the report, however following further lengthy discussion the  Board conceded to receive the report.

Note: Member O’Loughlin abstained from voting to this item.

 

 

Resolution

Moved Member Matheson, seconded Member Chartres 

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Council Report” dated 8 February 2017.

 

 

7.2

Te Anau Airport Wastewater Options Detailed Review

Record No:         R/17/1/473

 

Report by R Hamilton (Team Leader Community Engineers) providing details of alternative replacements for failed wastewater effluent field at Te Anau Airport, was tabled.

2       Mr Hamilton advised that during the upgrade of Te Anau Airport in 2008, an on-site wastewater treatment system was installed.  The system uses an Oasis Clearwater Series 2000 Aerobic Wastewater Treatment System, which in turn disposes of effluent via a ground cover trickle irrigation field.
Mr Hamilton added that Oasis Clearwater recommended that a Netafim - RAAM irrigation system be designed and installed to provide correct effluent field for their treatment system.  System is design capacity is 2,000 litres/day, and current load is averaging less than 500 litres/day.

1             Mr Hamilton advised that during 2014 the effluent field failed.  This also caused the submersible pump to fail due to over pressurisation when it attempted to pump against blocked outlet.  Since then all wastewater from Te Anau Airport has been trucked to Te Anau for treatment adding the initial investigation has found that the effluent field is blocked and will be difficult to clear lines and get them back in to service adding the previous distribution field was buried in the soil and had no inspection or flushing ports.  This meant the development of biological growth could not be monitored.  The potential blockages could not be assessed and preventative flushing could not occur.

2             Mr Hamilton added that any proposed replacement system will have all the features necessary.  He commented that this is achieved by having accessible inspection and flushing ports.  Other than these physical features the other thing necessary is a regimented maintenance and inspection regime to prevent blockages occurring.

3             Furthermore Mr Hamilton added there is no funding for a replacement effluent field in current LTP for the Airport and the annual cost to transport wastewater to Te Anau is around $9,120 pa.  Mr Hamilton outlined how the $9,120 is made up and that funding for this proposal would require approval for unbudgeted expenditure. 

4             In discussing the report Members agreed for a feasibility study to be completed to install a suitable effluent field for the existing treatment plant, and requested a report for the Board’s April meeting outlining time frames and unbudgeted expenditure detail.

 

 

 

Resolution

Moved Deputy Chairperson Greaney, seconded Member Cantwell  

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Te Anau Airport Wastewater Options Detailed Review” dated 31 January 2017.

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)         Confirms the best value option for ongoing management of wastewater at Te Anau Airport, and therefore directs Council to complete a detailed feasibility study for this preferred option.

 

 

 

 

7.3

Southland Internet and Mobile Services - Information update for Te Anau Community Board

Record No:         R/17/2/1974

 

5             Report by Rhiannon Souter, Enterprise Projects Co-ordinator, Venture Southland, advising that Venture Southland is leading work for the region to advocate for improved internet and mobile services for Southland’s rural communities, was tabled.

The report outlined the process (determined by the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment) and achievements to date, and what this means for the Te Anau and Fiordland area.

 

 

Resolution

Moved Cr Kremer, seconded Member Matheson 

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Southland Internet and Mobile Services - Information update for Te Anau Community Board” dated 8 February 2017.

 

 

 

Councillor's Report

 

 

9.1

Chairperson's Report

Record No:         R/17/2/2222

 

The Chairperson, Member Cockburn reported on matters with which she has been involved since the Board’s last meeting, these included;

 

 

  • Community Development Plan is underway with the closing date being 31 March 2017.

 

  • Te Anau Wastewater Discharge Project review with the Smith block investigations in progress.

 

  • Lions Park Playground discussion with Te Anau Lions Club has identified that that Club’s desire is to retain the Sputnik and make the refurbishment of that equipment a priority in conjunction with the Board in view of the Club’s 50 year celebration coming up.

 

 

 

9.2

Councillor's Report

Record No:         R/17/2/2223

 

Councillor Kremer commented on activities from the District Council table. These included;

 

  • First Council meeting for year held

 

  • Strategic workshop very worthwhile discussing  issues such as;

-        Vision for the Southland District as a whole for the next 10 years and beyond

-        SoRDS framework

-        Growth of Southland and how to retain/increase the population

 

 

 

 

The meeting concluded at 5.15pm                CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD AT A MEETING OF THE Te Anau Community Board HELD ON 15 FEBRUARY 2017.

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

Council Report

Record No:         R/17/3/5899

Author:                 Simon Moran, Community Partnership Leader

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Chief Executive

Fresh Water Management

1       In mid-February Government announced a number of initiatives aimed at improving the quality of fresh water. The ‘headline’ announcement was the setting of a target to make 90% of NZ’s rivers and lakes swimmable by 2040 which is seen as being a challenging national objective.

2       The package of announcements made included:

·        Proposed amendments to the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management to require that specific requirements be included in the relevant resource management plans to manage nitrogen and phosphorous, monitor macroinvertebrate to monitor ecological health of waterways and generally strengthen the requirements to monitor and improve water quality

·        The release of ‘swimmability maps’ for each region in New Zealand which compare water quality between regions

·        The establishment of a $100 million Freshwater Improvement Fund to assist projects aimed at improving water quality

·        The promotion of national regulations to exclude stock from waterways. On rolling and steep land the requirement will apply where the waterway is over 1 metre wide. The regulations will progressively come into effect from now until 2030.

3       Local authorities are required to give effect to the provisions included in a National Policy Statement. As a result it can be expected that the Land and Water Plan being promoted by Environment Southland will be amended to take account of these new requirements once they are formally confirmed.

4       It can be expected that there will be further amendments made to the way in which water is managed in the future. It is seen, for example, that there is a need to create a more integrated approach to the development of water policy across both central and local government so that policy related to water management standards, allocation rules, land use, the development of three waters infrastructure and the funding of such is developed within a coherent framework.

5       The amendments will have an impact on this Council as an infrastructure provider where there will be an expectation that we will continue to ‘raise the bar’ in terms of the standard of our discharges and the way in which we utilise drinking water etc.

LGNZ Excellence Programme

6       As part of a broader programme of work designed to lift the performance and reputation of the sector as a whole LGNZ launched, last year, the Local Government Excellence Programme.

7       The programme provides for an independent assessment of participating Councils by an independent panel. While the assessment is performed against a limited number of metrics it is still a valuable tool for identifying opportunities for improvement.

8       The results for the first of the Foundation Councils to have participated in the programme are expected to be released in the near future. Officers are of the view that this Council should also choose to participate in the programme at an appropriate time. Consideration will be given to the timing of when this should be.

Around the Mountain Cycle Trail (ATMCT)

9       Work is continuing to look at the options that Council has in relation to how it might progress development of the ATMCT following release of the Environment Court decision to overturn the resource consent for the proposed upper Oreti section of the trail.

10     While Council has appealed the Environment Court decision it is appropriate that Council complete a wider review of its options in light of that decision and the current status of the project more generally. As part of the current review process there are a range of factors that need to be considered. These include:

·        The current stage of development and the reasons for Council originally becoming involved in developing the trail

·        The range of community views that exist on how Council should move from here

·        The contractual commitments that Council has with other funders including the Crown. In this regard it is noted that Council has a contractual commitment to complete stages 1 and 2 of the Trail

·        The costs and benefits associated with each of the different options

·        The risks associated with each option.

11     Officers are currently drafting a report that outlines the options that exist and the factors that Council needs to consider in making a decision about it might move forward from here. It is expected that this report will be presented to Council in the near future.

Southland Regional Development Strategy (SoRDs)

12     A meeting of Councillors from the four Southland Councils was held in Gore on the 13th of March to discuss options for the future model for the delivery of Regional Development services, including SoRDS. There was good representation from all councillors at the meeting with more than 40 in attendance.

13     As was highlighted through the SoRDS strategy development work there is a need for a new model for all Regional Development activity to be put in place if Southland is to compete on the national, let alone international stage.

14     It is proposed that a new entity, which will include stakeholders/shareholders from across sectors i.e. local government, central government, iwi, community and business, will be formed. The entity will be majority owned by the four local authorities, given that they will continue to be the major funders and as such, the entity will be a Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) most likely operating under a company structure. The current Venture Southland operations will be merged into the new entity.

15     During the Mayoral Forum discussions there has also been considerable emphasis placed on the need to have a purely skills based Board managing any new Agency and also ensure that a separate strategic tourism entity is created. The need to make a significant lift in the way in which the Region approaches the development of Tourism was one of the key recommendations coming out of the SoRDS Action Team for this area.  

16     There will be a need to go through a community consultation process before the new entity can be legally formed as a CCO. It is envisaged that the community consultation process will be done via a joint committee made up of Councillors from all four Councils. To move forward from here the Mayoral Forum is having further work done to refine the proposal before it is formally presented to the four individual Councils and other community organisations for formal consideration.

Urban Development Authorities

17     To facilitate faster development within urban areas the Government is currently giving consideration to passing legislation that would allow for the creation of Urban Development Authorities.

18     The legislation would allow nationally or locally significant urban development projects to access more enabling development powers and land use rules. The new urban development authorities could have, for example, the power to assemble parcels of land, develop site specific plans, reconfigure infrastructure and to construct a mix of public and private buildings within the defined development area.

19     While the proposal is largely of relevance to cities and major urban areas it is part of the wider resource management package that Government is looking at to make development more enabling.

 

Information Management

Digitisation Project

20     Work is continuing on the Property File Digitisation project which has seen almost two thirds of the paper volume previously held at Council shipped for processing.

GIS Web Tool

21     Council has also changed the GIS tool used by the public to access property data. The tool will be updated in June which will provide additional functionality enabling users to interact with the data/images/maps more easily.

 

Environmental Services Group

Service Delivery Review

22     Under the Local Govt Act all local authorities are required to complete Service Delivery Reviews for all activities that they undertake. These reviews are intended to provide an assessment of what might constitute the most efficient way of delivering each activity or service provided by the local authority. The Council’s Section 17A Local Government Act Service Delivery Review for Regulatory and Environmental Services was presented to the first meeting of the Regulatory and Consents Committee on 23rd February 2017, by Alicia McKay the external local government and business practice consultant who provided inputs into this process.

23     Generally the review found that key statutory functions were being well delivered, but there were opportunities for improvement in on-line delivery, further collaboration with other Councils, possible further outsourcing, and greater competition in some procurement methods. This was a very useful continuous improvement process, and an action plan around recommendations will be developed and brought forward to the Committee in the future.

Building Control

24     The audit team from IANZ was at Council from 27 February to 1 March for the Council’s 2-yearly Building Control reaccreditation audit. The auditors have recommended that Council be reaccredited, with 1 Corrective Action Required (CAR) and 7 strong recommendations. This is a positive outcome for Michael Marron Team Leader of Building Solutions and the Building Control team. The auditors commented positively on the technical knowledge within the team, the general robustness of processes, and the cooperative approach from staff to the audit process.

25     The CAR related essentially to the processes followed in three of the sample commercial consents audited. The auditors commented that the staff involved were technically competent, but the material submitted with the applications was not as robust as it should have been and should not have been approved on that basis. They have requested an action plan from Council as to how we will address this issue moving forward to avoid a reoccurrence, and this will be formulated and forwarded back to IANZ within their specified two month timeframe, hopefully considerably sooner.

26     Most of the strong recommendations were in the area of document and process control and these were not issues with regard to approval of substandard work. These will also be talked through in the team and an action plan formulated to address these strong recommendations.

27     The value of consents continue to track behind that of last year which can be attributed to the overall down turn in the economy. The value of farm buildings is up dramatically this can be attributed to the new dairy hub being constructed in the District. The average per square metre cost of a residence has increased from $946 to $1315 or 39%. This highlights the additional complexity in the builds. If the consented work is to be carried out in the next 12 months it will equate to about 240 inspections.

28     As of the end of February, building activity in Te Anau is second only to the Winton area and accounts for just over 25% of the total activity in the District with 161 of the 631 building consents issued. 58 of those building consents are for new dwellings.

Resource Management

29     An application for resource consents for the proposed Rakiura Heritage Centre has been received on 1 March for a site in central Oban. At time of writing, the Resource Planning team were reviewing the application.

30     As recently reported in the Southland Times, an application to alter the designation for State Highway 1 in the Edendale area is pending and expected to be received by mid- March. This will then proceed through the formal processing and decisionmaking path as outlined in the Resource Management Act 1991.

Animal Control

31     The Council’s Annual Dog Control report, a legal requirement of the Dog Control Act 1996, was considered and approved by the Regulatory and Consents Committee  on 23 February 2017 and has been forwarded to the Department of Internal Affairs .

32     Council has entered into contractual arrangements with ADT Armourguard and the Invercargill City Council which will assist in providing better overall coverage for Animal Control functions throughout the District, by supplementing Council’s in-house team as required. Those agencies’ staff have been suitably warranted by Council and given appropriate training in our processes. Another advantage of these arrangements is that it mitigates some key health and safety risks in a series of functions which are some of the Council’s higher risk areas.

Environmental Health/Alcohol Licensing

33     A key focus in the Alcohol Licensing area currently is clearing a backlog of existing premises renewals by 1 July 2017. This work was progressing pre-Christmas but was delayed somewhat by a raft of special license applications for pre-Christmas and post-Christmas events.

34     There is also a strong focus on transferring on-licensees to the new Food Act 2014 regime by 31 March 2017; they are in the first group of businesses that have to transition. The majority have transferred, and the team are following up with the small number remaining.

Heritage

35     Johanna Massey, Roving Museum Officer, presented to the Regulatory and Consents Committee on 23rd February 2017 on the Waikaia Museum redevelopment. Work on this exciting heritage project is continuing at the time of writing, the stone cladding was being applied to the exterior of the building.

 

Community & Futures

Community Partnership

36     Consultant Sandra James from Christchurch has been contracted to undertake the Stewart Island Wharves Community and Stakeholder engagement.  Sandra has significant experience in Local Authority and community-led engagement and will have her first visit to the Island on 22 March to speak with a few key stakeholders.  This will help Sandra determine the engagement process, and the way in which the Islanders are best to be consulted.  While on the Island Sandra will have a tour by road, and then by water taxi to see the wharves first hand.  Following this initial visit, Sandra will return to the Island and Invercargill in the weeks following to facilitate the community and stakeholder engagement process.  We anticipate this will be completed by early-mid May.

37     Information has been sent to approximately 1,300 ratepayers and residents in the Edendale/Wyndham Community Board area that provides an update on Council services and facilities.  The update includes information on the old Area office, Wyndham Hall, and the Museum Building.

38     Feedback is being sought from the Te Anau community regarding how they would like to see Te Anau be “even better”. The project will be completed by October 2017 in order to feed into the Long Term Plan. The general community feedback closed at the end of March but following some further thought by the Board invitations to comment were also sent to Te Anau service groups and businesses. The next step is to undertake analysis of the feedback received and report that back to the Board in May.

39     Investigations into the Smith’s Block on Sinclair Road as a suitable solution to the disposal of treated wastewater from Te Anau have now ceased. Due to circumstances out of Council’s and Fiordland Sewerage Options’ control, the Smith block on Sinclair Road is no longer a viable option. A report will go to Council in May on what the next steps for this project will be.

40     The Board previously raised a concern about the effects that the current census meshblocks have on reporting growth in Te Anau. Staff followed this up with Statistics New Zealand and have asked for changes to the “Area Units” to better reflect the current Urban Zone and the peri-urban fringe. At the time of writing we are waiting for confirmation on whether the suggested changes have been accepted.

 

Council Strategic Workshop

41     Council hosted a Strategic Workshop from 1-3 February 2017 at which Councillors and officers worked through various strategic issues and opportunities facing the District.  The format of the workshop involved staff facilitating a variety of sessions in which Councillors were provided with opportunities to consider various scenarios and offer their future aspirations for the district and Council.

42     There were some common themes which emerged throughout the discussions and these will be captured to assist with the development of the Council’s LTP 2018-2028 – specifically related to Councils, Vision, Mission and Strategic Objectives. A summary of the Workshop discussions is currently being collated and prepared to provide an overview of the workshop.

CDA Election Process

43     The month of March sees Council facilitating the CDA Subcommittee election process – with 19 election meetings to be held from 1 March to 25 March 2017. The Mayor, Deputy Mayor, local Councillors and officers attend and lead the election meetings. 

44     The meetings also provide an opportunity for public feedback and conversations relating to local and district wide issues. The election process is based on the SDC Community Development Area Subcommittee Terms of Reference as approved by Council in October 2016.  As part of the Terms of Reference there is clearly defined candidate, nominator and voting eligibility criteria for these Council Subcommittees. Whilst this has created some concerns in some areas it has provided a consistent approach for the process.  It has also informed and identified wider issues and opportunities related to future community governance options which will be considered as part of the Community Governance Review and Representation Review to be completed in 2018.

Community Governance Project and Representation Review

45     Further work continues to investigate opportunities for the development of Council’s Community Governance Structure for 2019 and beyond. 

46     The work undertaken involves in the next 12 months the need for explicit community engagement and involvement in understanding the future focus and structures required to achieve this. The outputs from this phase of the project will inform the representation review process which is to be undertaken in 2018.

Corporate Performance Framework

47     An effective Corporate Performance Framework is fundamental for Council in support of effective planning, delivery, reporting, evaluating and creating accountabilities for organisational performance.

48     This project will support and inform the design and implementation of business improvement processes and core systems to drive accountabilities and the monitoring of performance against objectives. It has been identified that there is a significant amount of work required to be undertaken over a period of time to develop and implement an effective Corporate Performance Framework for Council. A report will be presented to the Community and Policy Committee in due course explaining in greater detail the scope of this project and key milestones required.

Risk Management

49     Work in the risk management area is a ‘work in progress’ and will require a priority focus over the next three years. The journey will involve revising and refining the development of a risk policy and framework; development of a top down risk profile; integration into the Finance and Audit Committee work programme; alignment with strategy; articulating the risk appetite; rationalising the risk register; undertaking monitoring; and development of a risk based internal audit programme.

 

Venture Southland

 

Community Development

50     The new Community Development Team leader is Amy Bird. Amy has considerable experience working with local government and communities in rural Queensland, Australia.

51     Venture is continuing to work with Cycle Fiordland and in the process of engaging a specialist consultant to undertake research work for the group.

 

Attracting and Retaining a Skilled Workforce Update:

52     In May 2016 Dairy Herd Manager and Assistant Herd Manager positions were removed from Immigration New Zealand’s skill shortage list, in addition in October the qualifying points threshold required for each migrant worker was lifted from 140 to 160.

53     Lifting the points threshold means that less workers qualify and for many they no longer have a pathway to residency. Removing the roles from the skill shortage list adds significantly to the application timeframe and undermines future job certainty.

54     Venture Southland alongside DairyNZ and Primary ITO conducted a survey of migrants to get their thoughts on the impact on them and their families of the changes. The survey closed on the 31st of March and the responses are now being analysed and will be used as an evidence base for advocacy to retain the migrant worker skills in the region and to establish a more balanced approach to skills shortages.

 

People and Capability

55     In February 2017, Council contracted Simpson Grierson to undertake a Health and Safety Gap Analysis.  The gap analysis included a review of Council’s Health and Safety Management System, discussions with key operational leaders and visits to operational locations and discussions with workers and key contractors.  The result of the Gap Analysis is a written report, which is due early March 2017.  The report will cover findings and include recommendations.

56     Clare Sullivan has been appointed as the new Governance and Democracy Team Manager and begins early April.  She comes from a strong background of governance with Councils in Wellington and Christchurch.  Clare will lead the team of Committee Advisors.

57     Another group of Leaders at Southland District Council are undertaking the Accelerated Leadership Programme.  This is the third cohort of leaders at Southland District Council to undertake this programme.  The five month programme, developed by SOLGM, is a highly interactive and practical programme that is designed to allow participants, over 5 workshops, to increase their leadership capacity.

 

Customer Support

58     The Winton Library has seen a decline over the last year in people utilising our late night service.  After reviewing the numbers of people using the services on the late nights, we have established there is less need for the evenings and more need for a longer Saturday.   After consultation with Councillors, Staff and the Community Board, we will be moving to Monday – Friday 8:30am - 5pm and Saturday 10am – 3pm.  This will begin from 3rd April 2017.

59     In Nightcaps we are consulting with active borrowers and the Takitimu Primary School regarding the current library service given the low usage of the service we currently provide.  Our aim to provide a sustainable service that meets the demand for the residents at Nightcaps.  A number of options will be explored including a regular Book Bus service or books couriered to customers.  At this stage a meeting with impacted borrowers and representatives from the school is planned for 7 March 2017, and from here we will look at potential solutions for the community.

60     In Te Anau the number of books issued over the three months to the end of February was 13,287, an increase of nearly 30% on the same period last year. Over the same time the level of internet and wifi sessions decreased by about 7% to 10,043.

Vince Boyle Heritage Collection

61     The Boyle Family of Winton very generously donated a selection of works, and uncompleted manuscripts, by the late Vince Boyle to the Winton Library and their wish is that these be made available for members of the public to use. With the help of a grant from the Southland Heritage Fund a cabinet and comfortable seating was purchased and a “living room” space has been set up in the Library for all users to enjoy.

62     Vince was a long time library user, a local historian, teacher, reporter and raconteur who was well known and respected in the area and whose writings meticulously record many local events.

63     The collection was officially handed over to the community at an afternoon tea in March, with a number of the Boyle Family present, and is now available for all users to peruse.

 

Services and Assets Group

Te Anau Manapouri Aerodrome Usage

64     The final aircraft movement statistics have come in for 2016.  Data has been collected for all aircraft movements from 2009. There has been a 74% increase in the number of flights over the period up until the end of 2016.  The peak year for movements was 2012 with 1,211 aircraft landings.  Following this period a moderate decline occurred with 945 occurring in 2014.  A steady recovery has occurred following the 2014 dip to 1,063 at the end of 2016.  A steady increase in large aircraft movements has attributed to dedicated services for the Tauck Tours, aircraft reliability and improvements to the approach system into the airport. 

 

Land and Water Plan Implementation

65     Under the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM) water quality and quantity are to be maintained and improved, and any over allocation to be phased out over time. Environment Southland (ES) is required to set environmental limits by 2025, with all “communities” required to meet those limits in due course.  They are progressing this work via their proposed Water and Land Plan.

66     To assist with addressing the impacts of these changes on local authority infrastructure ES have formed a 3 Waters officer working group. The objectives of the Group are to work through the implications of the new freshwater standards, develop an agreed approach to the re-consenting of local authority infrastructure and ensure that the organisational objectives are aligned.

Property

67     Council is preparing a new road line licence agreement for the existing occupation of the road reserve along the lakefront by Real Journeys as they have confirmed they will upgrading their building this winter. The new agreement has extended termination clauses and is as agreed previously by both the Te Anau Community Board and Council.

Community Engineer

68     The Lions Park Flying Fox is having a platform investigated and will be installed in the coming months. Both the Flying Fox and Expression Swing will have edging installed by financial year end.

69     The Water Park Track will be progressed in the coming months in line with the Noble Report, currently in investigation/concept stage.

70     Completed projects are the Lions Park BBQ, trimming and removal of the lakefront trees, and the boat harbour dump station.

71     Footpath and Kerb & Channel renewals are progressing as per budget by financial year end.

Finance

 

72     Income is currently slightly down on year to date budget due to the timing of invoicing and will even out again when the business unit is updated as at the end of March.

73     As at end of February all operational budgets are running slightly under budget YTD, except the Cemetery which is unfortunately dependent on the level interments required.

74     Streetworks Capital costs will be significantly less than expected due to the $20k Streetlight budget that will not be used due to the Roading Department intention to install LED lighting.

75     Beautification Capital costs are zero due as the Town Entrance project and Events Sign budgeted have not been undertaken and will be considered further as part of the community consultation process.

 

 

New Zealand Petroleum & Minerals Block Offer

76     Council received a request to comment on the recently announced block offer back in October 2016, however, the matters that can be considered by MBIE are very limited in scope and relate to seeking information on the rules that would apply to anyone who wins the bid for the area on offer.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Council Report” dated 4 April 2017.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.  

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

Request for Te Anau - Tako Town (Japan) Friendship Relationship

Record No:         R/17/3/6373

Author:                 Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

Approved by:       Steve Ruru, Chief Executive

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1       This report provides information to assist the Te Anau Community Board in making a decision relating to a request from Tako Town in Japan to form a Friendship Relationship between both towns.

Executive Summary

2       Over the past 18 months there has been interest expressed by Tako Town (Japan) to develop some formal relationship with the Te Anau Community Board by way of a Friendship Relationship or Agreement.

3       Following various correspondence and communications between officers and elected representatives from Tako Town, the Te Anau Community Board and Southland District Council the Te Anau Community Board referred the request to Council for direction and consideration for an appropriate course of action going forward.

4       The full report which covered this subject from the Southland District Council Community and Policy Committee meeting on 15 March is attached for the Te Anau Community Board’s reference and background information.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Request for Te Anau - Tako Town (Japan) Friendship Relationship” dated 5 April 2017.

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)         Accepts the request from Tako Town (Japan) to become involved with Tako Town (Japan) as part of a Friendship Relationship.

e)         Agrees to initiate discussions with Tako Town (Japan) with regards to formalising the Friendship Relationship.

 


 

Content

Background

5       Please refer to the attached report as presented to the Southland District Council Community and Policy Committee meeting of 15 March 2017.

Issues

6       Please refer to the attached report as presented to the Southland District Council Community and Policy Committee meeting of 15 March 2017.

7       The main issue regarding the ability of the Te Anau Community Board to enter into an agreement with Tako Town was considered.

8       Council resolved to support the Te Anau Community Board involvement with Tako Town as part of a Friendship Relationship – if it is the wish of the Te Anau Community Board to enter into such a Friendship Relationship.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

9       Please refer to the attached report as presented to the Southland District Council Community and Policy Committee meeting of 15 March 2017.

10     The Te Anau Community Board is able to enter into a Friendship Relationship accordingly following consideration of the Local Government Act 2002 and the Council’s Community Board Terms of Reference.

Community Views

11     Community views for this particular request from Tako Town (Japan) will be sourced primarily from the Te Anau Community Board as the elected representatives for the area.

Costs and Funding

12     There are no extraordinary expenditure items identified as being required if the Te Anau Community Board entered into a Friendship Relationship directly with Tako Town.

Policy Implications

13     Due consideration is given to the Southland District Council International Relations Policy (attached).

Analysis

Options Considered

14     The Te Anau Community Board considers two options regarding this request – (1) to accept the request from Tako Town (Japan) in becoming involved with Tako Town (Japan) as part of a Friendship Relationship or (2) not to accept the request from Tako Town (Japan) in becoming involved with Tako Town (Japan) as part of a Friendship Relationship.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – To accept the request from Tako Town (Japan) and become involved with Tako Town (Japan) as part of a Friendship Relationship

Advantages

Disadvantages

·      Builds on existing relationships already established as part of educational exchanges between Fiordland College and Tako Education Board.

·      Provides for formal acknowledgment of the existing relationships as identified by the Tako Town request.

·      Encourages the development of opportunities for a broader understanding for residents of Te Anau and surrounds of international relationships.

·      Clearly identifies this as an opportunity for the Te Anau Community Board and Te Anau community specifically and has support from the Southland District Council.

·      Responsibility for and level of involvement for development and implementation sits clearly with the Te Anau Community Board.

·      Requires consideration of appropriate level of involvement and any future level of resource investment being the responsibility of the Te Anau Community Board.

 

Option 2 – Not to accept the request from Tako Town (Japan) in becoming involved with Tako Town (Japan) as part of a Friendship Relationship

Advantages

Disadvantages

·      Not require any future resource commitment decisions.

·      Does not provide an opportunity for any formal involvement by the Te Anau Community Board to support the existing educational relationships and the Tako Town request.

 

Assessment of Significance

15     This is not considered significant in relation to Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Recommended Option

16     It is recommended that the Te Anau Community Board accept the request from Tako Town (Japan) and become involved with Tako Town (Japan) as part of a Friendship Relationship.

Next Steps

17     Inform the Tako Town (Japan) representatives of the Te Anau Community Board decision and initiate discussions with regards to formalising the Friendship Relationship.

 

Attachments

a         Report to Community and Policy Committee - 15 March 2017 - Request for Te Anau - Tako Town (Japan) Friendship Relationship

b         Policy - International Relations (Supercedes Sister Cities Policy Statement)   

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 

POLICY:                                             INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS POLICY

 

 

GROUP RESPONSIBLE:                   CHIEF EXECUTIVE

 

 

DATE APPROVED:                            4/6/14

 

 

DATE AMENDED:                             

 

 

FILE NO:                                             100/45/1/3, 240/10/5/11

 

 

POLICY DETAIL:

 

 

1.         Purpose

 

            The purpose of Southland District Council’s International Relations Policy is to bring the world to Southland and Southland to the world, through cultural, educational, knowledge-sharing and people-to-people links, as well as economic ties. 

 

 

2.         Priorities

 

            Southland District Council’s involvement in establishing and maintaining international relationships should contribute to:

 

(a)        Extending the hand of friendship nationally and internationally on a
person-to-person and/or community-to-community basis, utilising the tools of local government.

 

(b)        Perpetuating an understanding between people at all levels and of different countries and cultures.

 

(c)        Bringing together like interest groups in each district or region.

 

(d)        Providing a forum of exchange of experiences.

 

(e)        Promoting the sharing of knowledge and understanding and extend the level of contacts throughout all sectors of the community.

 

(f)         Developing economic, trade, cultural, educational, sporting and other beneficial exchanges.

 

 


 

3.         Principles

           

            Any relationship Southland District Council enters into will be well researched to ensure that generally:

 

(a)        There exists significant historical, cultural, social, economic or geographic similarities between Southland District and the prospective international relationship.

 

(b)        The prospective community is, or is moving towards, express good governance and rule of law values in a democratic fashion.

 

(c)        The prospective district or region is, or is moving towards, a reasonable human rights record.

 

(d)        The establishment of the proposed relationship will provide specific and demonstrable benefits to strategic, national and/or district interests.

 

(e)        There exists demonstrable community support for the proposed relationship.

 

(f)         There is funding available for the relationship.

 

 

4.         Policy Outline

           

4.1       Southland District Council will pursue a range of relationships to ensure opportunities are maximised.  The range of relationships will be determined by the type, location, and purpose of the relationship.

 

4.2       Four different types of relationship (outlined in Appendix 1) have been identified that allow for different outcomes, management processes, resource commitments, and review processes, and helps clarify expectations. 

 

            Council notes that it should only have a role in international relations where Council’s input can encourage cultural, educational and person-to-person links.  Council recognises that while economic development is the role of commerce and industry and not of local government, where international relationships between Southland District and other cities/regions can produce a by-product of economic development for Southland, Council will support links between businesses and industry to encourage any international economic benefit to the region.

 

            Council recognises that cultural, educational, knowledge-sharing, and people-to-people and/or community-to-community links underpin all of Council’s international relationships, and must be established before other aspects of the relationship can be put in place.  Cultural, educational, knowledge-sharing and people-to-people links remain at the forefront of the International Relations Policy and at the heart of all of Council’s international relationships.   

 

4.3       Council will provide guidance regarding the nature, type, purpose and location of international relationships.  Council will also lead any relationship on behalf of the District.

 

            Council’s International Relations Committee will establish the necessary foundations through friendship, and continue to promote cultural and public diplomacy aspects of Council’s international relationships. 

 

            Venture Southland will be called upon to assist Council in the delivery of any relationship, and attend meetings of the International Relations Committee. 
This approach allows for the incorporation of the Tourism, Community, Events, and Economic Development teams’ input into maximising the benefit to Southland from the relationship, where necessary.

 

            Similarly, a member of the Southland District Council Strategy and Policy Team will also attend meetings of the International Relations Committee, and further the delivery of any relationship.

 

4.4       Council will ensure that any ratepayer funds spent on international relationships are used in the most responsible, prudent and effective way to benefit Southland.

 

4.5       When Council is hosting international delegations, Council will work with local communities, industry, volunteer groups, not-for-profit groups, government and iwi to ensure formal delegations receive the best possible understanding of Southland and New Zealand’s unique cultural dimensions.

 

4.6       Council will look at opportunities to leverage off other international relationships to deliver its strategic international goals as well as participating with organisations with aligned objectives such as Sister Cities New Zealand.

 

4.7       Council, through its Human Resources Department, will encourage staff exchanges where they can be justified as part of professional or organisational development.  Preference will be given to those exchanges that are reciprocal in nature.  Any exchange recipient will report to the Committee within three months of their return.

 

4.8       Any delegation sent or received by the Southland District Council, will have local member(s) of equivalent status to those of the complementing international delegation.

 

 

5.         Monitoring and Review

           

5.1       Review periods will be incorporated into all agreements governing international relationships, with an opportunity to re-classify or exit the relationship should it no longer meet its objectives.

 

5.2       Monitoring will include:

·                  A report in an appropriate publication aimed at Southland residents, about the actions of the International Relations Committee over the previous 12 months.

 

5.3       This policy to be reviewed again no later than three years after Council agrees to it.

           

 


 

Appendix 1:  Types of Relationships

 

Type of Relationship

Purpose and Nature

Timeframe

Action points

Formal Relationships

 

 

 

Strategic Relationship

·          City/region will share some sort of similarity, be it community, locality, geographic composition, etc.

·          Based on an overarching joint task, such as education.

·          Relationship must have actual or potential local community interest and support.

·          Opportunities for partnering with the private sector will be identified and encouraged.

·        Long-term.

·        Can become ongoing for sectoral knowledge-sharing.

·        Assessed annually.

 

Friendship Relationship

·          City/region will share some sort of similarity, be it community, locality, geographic composition, etc.

·          Relationship must have actual or potential local community interest and support.

·          Based on friendship due to the ethnic and cultural links between Southland and this community (eg, where large migrant communities have originated).

·        Medium/Long-term.

·        Assessed annually.

·        Facilitate cultural understanding

·        Facilitate people-to-people links.

·        Focus on migrant sector.

Fostering Relationships

·          City/region will share some sort of similarity, be it community, locality, geographic composition, etc.

·          Relationship is based on a niche link, particularly for knowledge-sharing in a specific area or sector.

·          Likely to benefit both partners involved.

·         Medium-term for duration of project/sectoral interest.

 

 


 

 

Ad-hoc Visits/Delegations

One-off Co-Hosting

·          Visiting groups request a civic reception of some kind. 

·          Basis of visit could be technical, commercial, educational, social.

·          Because of the need to keep within budget constraints, requests may be declined or charges applied.

·          Short-term.

·          Can be connected to other regions’ hosting.

 

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

Rotary Club of Fiordland - Roadside Project

Record No:         R/17/3/6609

Author:                 Nick Lewis, Community Engineer

Approved by:       Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1       The Rotary Club of Fiordland have submitted a letter to the Te Anau Community Board (the Board) wishing to “hand over” their beautification project that the club currently undertake, for the township entrance road side of the Te Anau Mossburn Highway (SH94).

Executive Summary

2       An approximate 3 km long area of Te Anau Mossburn Highway (SH94) road side from the town entrance has been beautified and maintained for the past six years as a Rotary Club Project.  The Rotary Club wish to dispose of this ongoing commitment and are requesting the Board to take over responsibility.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)      Receives the report titled “Rotary Club of Fiordland - Roadside Project” dated 5 April 2017.

b)      Determines that this matter or decision be recognised 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)      Declines the request from the Rotary Club of Fiordland to take over its beautification project.

e)      Requests staff to include a minor variation to the maintenance contract to include the north side of the Te Anau Mossburn Highway extending to the 80km/hr signage thus matching the south side of the highway, in order to tidy up the township only responsibilities under the maintenance contract.

 


 

Content

Background

3       The letter states the Rotary Club undertook on its own initiative to improve Te Anau’s image by tidying up the roadside for approximately 3 km of the Te Anau Mossburn Highway
(State Highway 94) from the town entrance.  The project has been ongoing for the past six years.  They have been undertaking this works through a mix of club members and contractors.

Issues

4       The roadside is State Highway and thus not controlled by SDC and any approvals required would need to be gained through the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA).

5       Current township budgets do not include for this work outside the township.  The current Maintenance Contract extends to the 80 km/hr signage on the south side of the highway (and a minor variation to the contract could be agreed to include the north side of the highway to the 80 km/hr signage).

6       There are private residents within this area currently maintaining their frontages, this private situation is accepted by the NZTA.

7       To current knowledge there has never been an understanding that this Rotary Project responsibility would come to Council.  Does this request, if accepted set precedent for any other community group to expect to be able to start “projects” with financial implications then when they desire be able to off load to Council without making such agreements at project initiation.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

8       The area in question is State Highway 94 road reserve and thus the jurisdiction of the NZTA. Any paid contracted works in the State Highway road reserve requires the authority of the NZTA and an approved Traffic Management Plan through the NZTA.

Community Views

9       The views of the Board are deemed to represent those of the local Te Anau community.

Costs and Funding

10     The Rotary Club have stated the main costs are associated with the mowing through a local contractor and being mowed approximately seven to eight times per year at $345 including GST per mow, being approximately $2,760/year.  They have not provided any other costs or factors that may need to be considered and allowed for any future works, including but not limited to, weed spraying and garden plots.  They are not operating under NZTA approved traffic management and this could significantly increase costs for any contractor to undertake this work.

11     There is no plan for the Council to takeover any contractual arrangement from the
Rotary Club.  The current township maintenance contract extends to the 80 km/hr signage on the south side of the highway and a minor variation could be introduced to include the north side of the highway to the 80 km/hr signage.  This signage location is the defined township boundary between SDC and NZTA.  This pro-rata increase of approximately 1500 m2 would equate to roughly 0.26% of type 2 mowing under the contract or $18.00/ month.

12     If the work is undertaken such costs could be paid through the Township Maintenance Contract as tasked work and costs would need to cover such approvals and traffic management requirements of the NZTA, a variation agreement would be difficult as this area is not within the township nor addition of new reserves which is the criteria for variation to the mowing area via a pro rata increase, or a standalone contract could be made with an undetermined contractor, again including such approvals and traffic management required by the NZTA

13     The NZTA have stated that they would consider funding this work through their own contractors or through SDC but the value would have to be agreed once known.  The NZTA have stated a reluctance to allow the Rotary Club or the Club’s contractors to continue without meeting NZTA requirements but the Club would be required to discuss this with NZTA.

Policy Implications

14     SDC policy dictates that only approved contractors can be engaged for works.  The main reason for this is to ensure compliance with the Health and Safety at Work Act along with other factors such as, approved traffic management and financial terms and conditions.

15     NZTA policies will include that an approved Traffic Management Plan would be required to undertake works in the road reserve.  There may be other NZTA policies with bearing on this activity.

Analysis

Options Considered

16     There are two options to consider to this request:

(a)     Accept the offer to continue works maintaining the roadside outside the township as per currently mowed and maintained by the Rotary Club of Fiordland, including all costs of works and compliance through associated traffic control required by the NZTA.  This would possibly significantly increase the estimated costs from those stated by the Rotary Club as they do not currently meet NZTA requirements, specifically through approved traffic management.

(b)     Decline the request from the Rotary Club of Fiordland.  Further to declining this proposal the Rotary Club could be advised to approach the NZTA and seek funding through the agency or advocate on the club’s behalf for NZTA to continue maintaining to the currently levels through their own contractors.


 

 

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Accept proposal

Advantages

Disadvantages

·      The continued upkeep of this area is ongoing to the current level of service provided by the Rotary Club of Fiordland.

·      Ongoing additional costs are placed on the Te Anau community.

·      The community is funding works which should be that of the NZTA responsibility (or partly so).

 

Option 2 - Decline proposal

Advantages

Disadvantages

·      Additional costs are not borne onto the community.

·      Allows the Community Board to clearly identify/define that within the township/
80 km signs is theirs to maintain and outside is NZTA and this gets reflected in the maintenance contract "as in plug a gap" .

·      If the Rotary Club decide to stop maintaining then the area may revert back to a less tidy state if the NZTA decide to not continue with the same level of service.

 

Assessment of Significance

17     The issue is considered not significant.

Recommended Option

18     That the Board decline the request from the Rotary Club of Fiordland to take over the beautification project and any associated costs to undertake.  That the Board request staff to include a minor variation to the maintenance contract to include the north side of the highway extending to the 80 km/hr signage matching the south side in order to tidy up the township only responsibilities.

Next Steps

19     This will be dependent on the Board’s decision.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.  

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

Relocation of Quintin Mackinnon Statue

Record No:         R/17/3/6435

Author:                 Nick Lewis, Community Engineer

Approved by:       Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1       To consider and provide formal direction as to relocate or not, the Quintin Mackinnon Statue as no formal resolution was made to not relocate the said statue following new information presented to the Board by Member Greaney.  This was following the existing direction to relocate the statue as per the request presented to the Board by Mr Ray Willett.

Summary

2       At Wednesday, 2 March 2016 meeting Public Forum, Mr Ray Willett requested the Te Anau Community Board (the Board) consider the relocation of the Quintin Mackinnon Statue from its current location adjacent the Te Anau Department of Conservation office to the ANZAC Reserve.

3       Following this request from Mr Willett the Board concluded to consider this subject in the Lakefront Beautification Plan the Board were intending to develop.

4       Subsequent to the above and following further information from Mr Willett, during the Wednesday, 5 October 2016 meeting, the Board then agreed (via the Action Sheet) to relocate the statue as per the request forthwith, and for the Council and Venture staff to pursue application for grant monies from the SDC Community Initiative Fund. 

5       Application for funding was lodged for the March 2017 round of funding but has subsequently been deferred until the May 2017 meeting.

6       At the Board’s 23 November 2016 meeting, Member Greaney presented alternative information around the statue and reasons for its current location which the Board accepted and agreed to not relocate the statue.  This decision was not formally resolved and the Action Sheet has ceased to be utilised. 

7       Member Greaney provided further information to this effect.  That information was centred on, that the original Fiordland Promotions Association commissioned and chose the location, that Mr Robert Romach guaranteed the loan that funded the project, and that the rock the statue is placed upon was damaged during installation and maybe unusable if relocation was attempted and finally the relocation does not fit with broader community wishes.

8       The Board is required to make a decision to formally resolve what was agreed, to not relocate the Quintin Mackinnon Statue and subsequently direct staff to cease the current funding application to the SDC Community Initiatives Fund.

9       The exert of the minutes from the Action Sheet item of the Board’s 5 October 2016 meeting relating to this subject is as follows:

Lakefront Beautification - Quintin McKinnon Statue

10     The Board agreed the Quintin McKinnon Statue be relocated to ANZAC Reserve forthwith.  Community Engineer and Venture staff to pursue an application for grant monies to the Southland District Council’s Community Initiative Fund to assist with funding of this project.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Relocation of Quintin Mackinnon Statue” dated 4 April 2017.

b)         Notes the decision made in the Action Sheet item of the 5 October 2016 meeting to relocate the Quintin Mackinnon Statue and to pursue an application for grant monies to the Southland District Council’s Community Initiative Fund.

c)         Notes that the relocation does not fit with the broader community wishes.

d)         Agrees to request that officers do not proceed further with the application for funding from the Community Initiatives Fund and not relocate the Quinton Mackinnon Statue as the rock the statue is placed on, suffered damage and maybe unsafe for relocation if attempted.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report. 

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

Update on Odour Issues at Te Anau Oxidation Ponds

Record No:         R/17/3/7086

Author:                 Bill Witham, Operations Manager - Water and Waste Services

Approved by:       Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Background

1       In response to a request from Board members Council, have prepared this brief report outlining steps taken to manage the odour issues that were first reported in February 2017.

2       As you are aware, odour issues were initially identified on-site on Tuesday, 21 February 2017.  Council responded to this issue by its incumbent Water and Waste Contractor, Downer NZ, monitoring the scheme and testing on a twice daily frequency for the following:

 

·                  Dissolved oxygen (DO).

·                  pH.

·                  Temperature.

·                  Pond clarity (via stone testing).

·                  Observing for any offensive odour.

 

3       This testing confirmed the pond’s overall primary oxidation pond performance was declining as average results were stable between the following counts as outlined below:

                     DO 1.0-2.0 g/m3 (around the inlet) with a pH of 7.4-7.6.

4       Although primary pond dissolved oxygen levels were lower than what was expected, effluent DO has consistently remained stable between 9.0-10.0 g/m3 during this period of time, as did pH and temperature, which is consistent with what you would expect.  This indicated that treatment was being provided by the system and there was no risk of untreated wastewater being discharged.

5       A sulphurous odour however was noted at site particularly around the primary oxidation pond, as was a change from a typical clarity of green to a misty brown appearance. 
Reports of odour were also received beyond the site boundary. 

6       It was also during this time that septic tank imports were halted.  Downer operators identified, during its routine inspection, a large fluorescent blue discolouration was present around the primary pond inlet at the times in which they were discharging which it is suspected is a contributory factor.  Waste importers confirmed the contents included chemical toilet disinfectant extracted from a number of portable toilets in Milford Sound.  It is estimated this volume amounted to approximately 40 m3.

7       Odour was noticeable particularly to adjacent neighbours of the pond site when a wind direction was travelling in a direction of North East.

8       In response to the situation, Council and Downer staff undertook a number of remedial steps to help the pond recover, these being:

·                  Daily testing of dissolved oxygen across the pond as an indicator of pond health.

·                  Introduction of additional aeration, initially by hiring of pumps which were later supplemented with additional aerators brought in from outside the district.

·                  Stabilisation of pH in he pond by the bulk dosing of lime.

·                  Dosing of the influent with a nutrient rich food source (trade name Ensol 5000) to promote algal regrowth.

·                  Pumping across from ponds 2 and 3 into pond 1 to accelerate algal regrowth.

 

9       These measures were introduced in a step by step manner with the impact monitored prior to taking the next step.

10     By the end of the third week, since odour was first reported, monitoring results indicated that the ponds were improving with a marked improvement noted by the end of the following week.  This is typical with any biological system that it will require a period of time to recover.

11     As further precaution, Council staff also sought the advice from independent experts who agreed that the step by step approach was appropriate and that effectively staff had followed a logical consistent path that they believed appropriate.

12     Water and Waste staff have also liaised closely with Environment Southland staff including meeting out at Te Anau on 3 March.  Environment Southland have indicated that they are satisfied with Council’s response to the issue and acknowledged that a full recovery may take some time and that Council’s response should be consistent with that.

13     As of 30 March staff are reporting that the pond system is again performing to the level expected of this type of system.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Update on Odour Issues at Te Anau Oxidation Ponds” dated 3 April 2017.

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report. 

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

Te Anau Airport Wastewater Options Detailed Review

Record No:         R/17/3/6154

Author:                 Ray Hamilton, Team Leader Community Engineers

Approved by:       Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1       Approve award of contract to replace failed wastewater effluent field at Te Anau Airport.

Executive Summary

2       During upgrade of Te Anau Airport in 2008, an on-site wastewater treatment system was installed.  System uses an Oasis Clearwater Series 2000 Aerobic Wastewater Treatment System, which in turn disposes of effluent via a ground cover trickle irrigation field.
System is design capacity is 2,000 litres/day, and current load is averaging less than 500 litres/day.

3       During 2014 the effluent field has failed, this also caused the submersible pump to fail due to over pressurisation when it attempted to pump against blocked outlet.  Since then all wastewater from Te Anau Airport has been trucked to Te Anau for treatment. 

4       A report to Te Anau Community Board meeting on 12 February recommended that a new disposal field be installed to replace failed system, this report was based on proposal provided by Mahon Plumbing in 2016.

5       SDC subsequently received an alternate proposal from Te Anau Earthworks to install a proprietary (AES) effluent disposal system with: 2,000 litres/day capacity, including secondary treatment, as well as a 20 year warranty.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Te Anau Airport Wastewater Options Detailed Review” dated 5 April 2017.

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)         Seek approval for allocation of unbudgeted funding to support award of Contract to Te Anau Earthworks for supply and installation of AES Soakage Field at Te Anau Airport.

 

 

Content

Background

6       During upgrade of Te Anau Airport in 2008, an on-site wastewater treatment system was installed.  System uses an Oasis Clearwater Series 2000 Aerobic Wastewater Treatment System, comprising a 10 m3 balance tank including two x Zabel filters, plus a 10 m3 TEXASS reactor tank.  The system has design capacity of 2,000 litres/day and currently accepts all wastewater from: Te Anau Airport, Aero Maintenance, and Te Anau Helicopter Services.

7       During 2014 the effluent field has failed, this also caused the submersible pump to fail due to over pressurisation when it attempted to pump against blocked outlet. Since then all wastewater from Te Anau Airport has been trucked to Te Anau for treatment.  This waste is pumped from the 10 m3 balance tank.

8       SDC Environmental Health policy requires the effluent disposal area to be fenced off.

9       Te Anau Earthworks submitted a proposal to investigate soil conditions at site and complete preliminary engineering on suitable replacement options for disposal fields.
They identified 2 options:

(a)        Install a compliant soakage field suitable for treated effluent pumped from existing Oasis Clearwater system.

(b)        Install an AES wastewater treatment soakage field with capacity to handle 2,000 litres/day, including 20 year warranty.  This system would be connected to existing Oasis system, but is a secondary treatment system in its own right, so if Oasis system ever fails, the AES field can be connected directly to balance tank. This would mean new system is now acting as secondary treatment system for facility.

Issues

10     Issues identified in February report will all be “managed” by features offered by the AES system.  Product brochures attached explain these features, but are summarised here:

(a)        Blockages are designed out with “skimmers and ridges”.

(b)        20 year warranty mitigates any exposure to costs associated with any failures.

(c)        AES is an expandable system (largest capacity currently 200,000 litres/day) so any increase in loading above 2,000 litres/day can be managed by installing additional treatment area.

(d)        AES is an advanced secondary treatment system, using latest technology and materials.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

11     No resource consent is required as proposed effluent field replaces a similar system.

Community Views

12     Te Anau Community Board have been briefed on the failure of the existing effluent field and have been provided information on costs to transport waste to Te Anau.  Preference is to get on-site system operational again, being mindful of reliability expected.

Costs and Funding

13     There is no funding for replacement effluent field in current LTP for the Airport.  The annual cost to transport wastewater to Te Anau is around $9,120 pa.  Gore Septic Tank Cleaners charge: $300 to handle and transport each load plus there is a $80 disposal fee/load at
Te Anau Treatment Plant, so 24 loads @ $380 each = $9,120.

14     Funding for this proposal would require approval for unbudgeted expenditure. This project has been included in February budget forecast, where costs are included in Airport capital account.

Policy Implications

15     Nil.

Analysis

Options Considered

16     Install a compliant field to manage secondary treated effluent from existing Oasis system or install a proprietary secondary treatment on site waste water system.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Install effluent field suitable for existing treatment plant (Mahon plumbing)

Advantages

Disadvantages

·      Proven system

·      Mahon Plumbing are Oasis Agent.

·      Reliant on current Oasis Secondary Treatment system

·      No warranty.

·      No facility for expansion (increase capacity).

 

Option 2 - Install effluent field suitable for existing treatment plant (Te Anau Earthworks)

Advantages

Disadvantages

·      Low capital cost approx.. $8K

·      Reliant on current Oasis Secondary Treatment system

·      No warranty

·      No facility for expansion (increase capacity).

 

Option 3 - Install advanced secondary onsite wastewater system (AES)

Advantages

Disadvantages

·      Can replace existing Oasis system if this system fails in future.

·      20 year warranty.

·      System is expandable.

·      Marginally higher capital cost $16K.

 

Summary of Options:

Option

1

2

3

Scheme

Mahon Plumbing

Te Anau Earthworks

AES

Estimated Costs

Design

Soakage Field

Build Fence

Total

 

720

14,100

-

14,820

 

950

4,500

1,400

6,850

 

950

13,600

1,400

15,950

Secondary Treatment

N

N

Y

Provision to increase capacity above 2,000 litres/day

N

N

Y

Warranty

Nil

Nil

20 years

 

 

Assessment of Significance

17     Proposal is not considered significant.

Recommended Option

18     Option 3 - Installing a proprietary advanced secondary onsite treatment system will provide a cost effective long term solution to managing Te Anau Airport’s wastewater with an on-site treatment facility.

Next Steps

19     Community Board approve project and source/request unbudgeted funding of $17K (includes contingency allowance of $1,000 for unknowns)

 

Attachments

a         Site Map for Te Anau Airport Effluent Field

b         Environment Technology: AES Background Information HC HP

c         AES H10 Loading Metric HCHP

d         AES Owners Manual - Warranty    

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 


 


 


 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

New Triennium 2016-2019 - New Approach

Record No:         R/17/3/4151

Author:                 Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

Approved by:       Steve Ruru, Chief Executive

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Introduction

1       The Southland District Council has been undertaking some significant change over the past two years.

2       This has been reflected in considering business improvement opportunities for Council from both an internal and external perspective.

3       Many of the internal operational changes have been embedded in over the past 12 months following an Organisation Redesign which resulted in the current operational and staffing structure.

4       Council has utilised the new triennium 2016-2019 and the October 2016 election to introduce a number of the changes that have a greater external focus – and involve the interface with communities and the Council’s own community governance structures.

5       This report covers off the next stage of induction for the eight Community Boards of the Southland District Council.

 

New Triennium 2016-2019 – New Approach

6       The Southland District Council is considering how it engages and liaises with its communities and external stakeholders.

7       As part of this approach it has developed some clarity around the approach and way of working with its community governance structures – being Community Boards and Community Development Area Subcommittees – for the 2016-2019 triennium.

8       The Council’s governance structure is based on the Southland District Council (1 Mayor and 12 Councillors) as being the territorial authority and the Local Government Act 2002 establishes how Council can delegate decisionmaking – while acknowledging that Council is ultimately responsible for a delegated decision.

9       Council approved, at its 26 October 2016 meeting, the Southland District Council Community Board Terms of Reference which clearly define the scope of activities and delegations for the Community Boards within the status, role and powers defined in the Local Government Act 2002.

10     Community Boards are unincorporated bodies resourced by Council and are part of the Council governance structure. Therefore as an elected representative of the Community Board members represent Council when they act under a Council delegation.

11     It is acknowledged that Council and Community Boards share the common objective to assist in contributing to delivery of services and activities for the betterment of the communities Council serves.

12     As was mentioned explicitly by the Mayor and Chief Executive Officer at the inaugural meetings of Community Boards in November 2016 – a key focus for this triennium is that Council supports its Community Boards to be future focussed and think wider communities of interest – both geographic and issues based.

13     This means Council and Community Boards need to look at HOW we do things to ensure long term sustainability and affordability of service provision across the District is maintained at an appropriate level for future generations.

14     There are many challenges and opportunities facing the Southland region and district and Council is committed to leading the way with its Community Boards to view these bigger picture issues in a strategic and collaborative way.

15     Council is supporting elected Community Board representatives to acknowledge and understand they are part of the bigger district wide picture and have a significant role to play to ensure the district continues to develop and prosper as one.

16     Council is also promoting a multi-agency approach when addressing future issues and opportunities – and to this end sees Community Boards playing a significant role in leading and addressing various community wide initiatives on behalf of their wider communities of interest.

17     Council is advocating across the region and district for more of a partnering and collaborating approach in working together for a better Southland. Council should not be seen as the sole solution – but as being part of the solution.

18     The attached presentation provides an overview and a rationale for the new approach and new way of working to be developed and implemented for the 2016-2019 triennium. The new approach does mean that we will be changing and doing things differently to the way in which they have been done in the past. It is essential that we do change if Southland is to prosper in the future. 

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “New Triennium 2016-2019 - New Approach” dated 4 April 2017.

 

 

 

Attachments

a         Community Board Meetings - April 2017 - new triennium new approach    

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

Recently Adopted Policies

Record No:         R/17/3/3813

Author:                 Robyn Rout, Policy Analyst

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1       This report notifies the Community Board of policies that have recently been adopted by Council. Copies of the policies are included as attachments to this document, for the member’s information.

 

New Policies

 

2       Members may be aware that Council has been reviewing and developing a number of policies. The following policies came into effect when they were adopted at a Council meeting on the 23rd of February:

·    The Easter Sunday Shop Trading Policy – this is a new Policy that allows all shops in the District to trade on Easter Sunday.

·    The Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy – this Policy gives guidance on the governance and administration of the Levy. The Policy has been updated to bring it into alignment with current roles within Council, and so it aligns with recently adopted terms of reference and delegations. A more comprehensive review of the Stewart Island/Rakiura Levy is scheduled to be completed next year.

 

3       The Remission and Postponement of Rates on Maori Freehold Land Policy was also adopted at the meeting on the 23rd of February, and will come into effect on the 1st of July. This Policy allows rates to be remitted on Māori Freehold Land when the land meets the criteria outlined in the Policy. The Policy has been updated to bring it into alignment with current roles within Council, and some minor matters have been clarified. 

4       If any further information about the policies is needed, please contact the Strategy and Policy team.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Recently Adopted Policies” dated 14 March 2017.

b)         Notes that the Council has recently adopted three new policies, two of which came into effect on the 23rd of February 2017.

 

 

Attachments

a         Easter Sunday Shop Trading Policy

b         Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy

c         Remission and Postponement of Rates on Maori Freehold Land Policy    

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

EASTER SUNDAY SHOP TRADING POLICY

 

 

This policy applies to: the Southland District

 

 

 

 

DOCUMENT CONTROL

 

Policy owner:  Group Manager Environmental Services

TRIM reference number:

R/2016/10/17248

Effective date: 
23 February 2017

 

Approved by:  Council

Date approved: 
23 February 2017

 

Next review date:  2022

 

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

1.          PURPOSE. 1

2.          DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS. 1

3           BACKGROUND.. 1

4.          POLICY DETAILS. 2

5.          ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. 2

6.          ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS. 2

7.          REVISION RECORD.. 3

 

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 

EASTER SUNDAY SHOP TRADING POLICY

 

 

1.   PURPOSE

 

The purpose of this policy is to allow all shops in the Southland District to open on Easter Sunday.  This policy will:

·          promote ease of business;

·          recognise the needs of the retail and tourism sectors;

·          apply a consistent and simple approach to Easter Sunday shop trading.

 

 

2.   DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

 

Term

Meaning

Shop

Is a building, place, or part of a building or place, where goods are kept, sold, or offered for sale, by retail; and includes an auction mart, and a barrow, stall, or other subdivision of a market; but does not include -

(a) a private home where the owner or occupier's effects are being sold (by auction or otherwise); or

(b) a building or place where the only business carried on is that of selling by auction agricultural products, pastoral products, and livestock, or any of them; or

(c) a building or place where the only business carried on is that of selling goods to people who are dealers, and buy the goods to sell them again.

Employer 

Has the same meaning as in Section 5http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0057/latest/link.aspx?search=ta_act_S_ac%40ainf%40anif_an%40bn%40rn_25_a&p=1&id=DLM58337 - DLM58337 of the Employment Relations Act 2000

Shop Employee

Means an employee within the meaning of Section 6http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0057/latest/link.aspx?search=ta_act_S_ac%40ainf%40anif_an%40bn%40rn_25_a&p=1&id=DLM58619 - DLM58619 of the Employment Relations Act 2000 who works in or from a shop.

Southland District

Is the area depicted in Appendix 1.

 

 

3    BACKGROUND

 

In 2016 the Shop Trading Hours Act 1990 (the Act) was amended, allowing councils to introduce a policy letting shops trade on Easter Sunday.

 

Council can apply the policy to the whole District, or just to a particular region or regions.  A policy cannot define specific opening hours, what types of shops may open, or for what purposes a shop may open.

 

4.   POLICY DETAILS

 

4.1    Shop Trading Permitted

 

This policy allows all shops to trade on Easter Sunday.

 

4.2    Right to refuse to work

 

Employers must comply with the provisions relating to a Shop Employees right to refuse to work, as is set out in the Act and in the Employment Relations Act 2000.

 

Employers and Shop Employees must also give notice in accordance with the time provisions set out in the Act.

 

4.3    Scope

 

This Policy applies to the whole of the Southland District. A map outlining the boundaries of the Southland District is included as Appendix 1.

 

This Policy does not apply to the sale or supply of alcohol. Alcohol sale and supply is regulated under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

 

4.4       Review

 

This Policy will be reviewed within five years of adoption.  The Act requires the use of the Special Consultative Procedure when adopting, reviewing and determining whether to amend, revoke, replace or continue the policy.

 

 

5.   ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

 

Party/Parties

Roles and Responsibilities

Environmental Services

Providing advice on the content and scope of the policy. Advising on adopting, reviewing, amending, revoking, replacing or continuing the policy.

Strategy and Policy

Adopting, reviewing, amending, revoking, replacing or continuing the policy. Undertaking consultation in accordance with the Special Consultative Procedure.

Communications

Developing a communications strategy and assisting with consultation.

 

 

6.   ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS

 

The sale and supply of alcohol on Easter Sunday aligns with the Act.  The sale and supply of alcohol is restricted by the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

 

This policy aligns with the Southland Regional Development Strategy’s objective of generating an ease of doing business in Southland.

7.   REVISION RECORD

 

Date

Version

Revision Description

23 February

R/16/10/17248

Policy introduced

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

APPENDIX 1. Map of the Southland District

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 

 

POLICY:                                             STEWART ISLAND/RAKIURA VISITOR LEVY

 

 

ROLE RESPONSIBLE:                      Activity Manager Community Assistance

 

 

DATE APPROVED:                            23 February 2017

 

 

DATE AMENDED:                             

 

 

FILE NO:                                             R/17/1/1098

 

 

1.0       PURPOSE

 

This policy provides guidance on governance and administration of the
Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy.  The policy outlines who is liable to pay the levy as well as how the levy will be collected, administered, allocated and enforced. 

 

 

2.0       BACKGROUND

 

Although Stewart Island/Rakiura has a small resident population, it is a destination for a large number of short-term visitors.  This creates a unique funding challenge for Southland District Council. 

 

The Southland District Council (Stewart Island/ Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Act 2012 (the Act) was passed into law on 26 March 2012.  The Act empowers Southland District Council set and collect levies and obtain revenue from visitors to Stewart Island/ Rakiura.  Under the Act, funds must be used to better provide services, facilities, and amenities for Island visitors.

 

 

3.0       DEFINITIONS

 

The Act - the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/ Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Act 2012.

Council - the Southland District Council.

Island - Stewart Island/Rakiura.

Levy - the sum of money (inclusive of GST) collected under Stewart Island/ Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw 2012.

Revenue - revenue (inclusive of GST) collected under Stewart Island/ Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw 2012, by an approved operator in accordance with contractual arrangements with the Council.

Visitor - any person who travels to the Island and is not exempt from payment of levy or revenue under the Act or the provisions of this policy. 

 

Approved Operator - once an agreement is reached between Southland District Council and a transport vessel operator for the collection and payment of revenue, the operator becomes an Approved Operator.  The Approved Operators are
Real Journeys on behalf of Stewart Island Experience, Stewart Island Flights and
ISS McKay on behalf of the cruise ships.

Agent - a business entity that enters into a contractual arrangement with Southland District Council to collect the Levy from its passengers on behalf of the Council. 

Resident - a person recognised as living on the Island for electoral residency purposes under Section 23 of the Local Electoral Act 2001. 

Ratepayer - a person who is named on a current rates notice of a rating unit on the Island.  Only persons who are named on current rates notices are considered to be ratepayers, regardless of who funds rates payments.

Tenant - a person who has a tenancy agreement for a rating unit on the Island under the provisions of the Residential Tenancies Act 1986.

Dependant - a person primarily under the care and responsibility of another person, living with that person as a member of their family and substantially reliant on that person for financial support.

Activity - has the meaning given in Section 5(1) of the Local Government Act 2002 This includes:

(a)        the provision of facilities and amenities; and

(b)        the making of grants; and

(c)        the performance of regulatory and other governmental functions.

Freedom traveller - a visitor who travels to the Island by means other than as a passenger of an approved operator.  This includes chartered vessels and independent travel.  It does not include people who travel via the ferry (Stewart Island Experience) or scheduled flight (Stewart Island Flights) or cruise ships.

Rakiura Māori Land Trust - the Rakiura Māori Lands Trust is governed by six Trustees appointed by the Māori Land Court upon recommendation from the beneficial owners.  The Rakiura Māori Land Trust holds lands and funds in trust for many Rakiura Māori descendants. 

 

4.0       COLLECTION

 

The Act provides for the collection of money from two sources:

1.         Revenue collected on behalf of Southland District Council by Approved Operators; and

2.         Levy income from visitors arriving as freedom travellers. 

 


 

Through contractual arrangements, Southland District Council will collect revenue from Approved Operators.  Approved Operators include Stewart Island Experience (the ferry), Stewart Island Flights (scheduled airline service) and cruise ships.  Passengers will pay the Approved Operator in accordance with the terms of carriage ie, the levy will form part of their ticket price. 

 

However, if the person travels via an Approved Operator and pays a local or child fare, the Approved Operator will not charge the levy. 

 

Under the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw 2012, Southland District Council will collect the levy.  The levy will be collected from freedom travellers, ie those who are visitors under the Act but do not travel as passengers of an Approved Operator.  Where a person is a freedom traveller the categories of exemption in Clause 4.1 apply.  This means that if a person is not exempt, he or she will have to pay the levy. 

 

The Act exempts people visiting the Island for a continuous period of 21 days.  If revenue is collected from such individuals, they can seek a refund from Southland District Council by providing proof they have been on the Island for at least 21 days.

 

4.1       Who Pays

 

All individuals travelling to Stewart Island/Rakiura must pay the levy or pay revenue to an Approved Operator unless they are exempt under the Act or pay a local fare. 

 

The Act provides several categories of exemption.  These are:

1.         Residents, ratepayers and tenants of Stewart Island/Rakiura and their spouses, civil union partners, de facto partners, or dependants;

2.         Beneficiaries of the Rakiura Māori Land Trust or individuals who have an ownership interest in a Māori land block on the Island;

3.         Visitors who remain on the Island for any continuous period of 21 days or more;

4.         Owners of a transport vessel or individuals employed under contract to work on a transport vessel;

5.         Individuals whose visit is entirely within the boundaries of the
Rakiura National Park;

6.         Persons under the age of 18 years on the date of arrival on the Island.

 

Where the resident or ratepayer exemption applies to a person, the exemption does not automatically apply to the whole family or group.  The exemption applies to the ratepayer(s) set out on the rates notice and their spouse, civil union partner, de factor partner or dependant.  This does not include visiting adult children or grandchildren (unless they are dependants).  Holiday home owners are exempt if they are a ratepayer on the Council’s rates notice.  However, beneficiaries of family trusts are unlikely to be exempt if they are not designated by name as ratepayers on the Southland District Council rates notice. 

 

The exemption does not apply to visiting trades-people unless the person stays for more than 21 days.  Volunteer visitors are also required to pay the levy unless they fall within a category of exemption.

 

Visiting entirely within the boundaries of the Rakiura National Park means the person visiting does not arrive or leave through the township of Oban. 

 

 

5.0    CALCULATION

The amount of the levy is set out in the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw 2012 and is currently set at $5.00. 

 

In the event an increase in the levy amount is considered, public consultation will occur via the Southland District Council Annual/ Long Term Plan process.  If Council decides to increase the levy amount, the increase will not take effect until 1 October in the year following the decision ie, Approved Operators will receive 15 months lead in time before they start collecting the new amount. 

 

5.1       Arrangements with Approved Operators

 

Approved Operators will collect revenue on behalf of Southland District Council in accordance with contractual arrangements.  The contractual arrangements will be negotiated for each Approved Operator taking into account the individual circumstances of each transport business. 

 

Apart from cruise ships, Approved Operators will charge the levy for both inbound and outbound journeys ($2.50 each way).  This allows for passengers who use different modes of transport to travel to and from the Island and allows the levy to be apportioned across the modes of transport on an equitable basis. 

 

5.2       Collection of the Levy from Freedom Travellers

 

The Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw 2012 outlines levy collection from visitors who travel to the Island via private or chartered transportation ie, freedom travellers.  A levy of $5.00 will be payable when the person arrives on the Island.  Southland District Council has provided a collection box to receive payments, placed at the Southland District Council office at 10 Ayr Street, Oban.  Freedom travellers can deposit levy payments at this location at any time.  Southland District Council will also enter into agreements with an agent(s) operating chartered vessels to collect the levy from passengers on behalf of Southland District Council. 

 

Only one payment is required per person for the duration of their stay on the Island.  Travel to neighbouring Islands (excluding the mainland) will not constitute leaving the Island. 

 

 

6.0    PROOF OF EXEMPTION

 

Persons exempt under the Act can apply for a Southland District Council photo identification card.  Southland District Council photo identification cards will be accepted as proof of exemption by Approved Operators and agents.  They will also be accepted by enforcement officers monitoring compliance with the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw 2012.

 

A Southland District Council photo identification card will be issued and renewed at no cost to exempt applicants.  Renewing a Southland District Council photo identification card will require confirmation of entitlement using documentation as set out in Appendix A.  Photographs will also be updated at the time of renewal.  It is the responsibility of the card holder to advise the Council of any change in contact details or exemption status. 

 


 

The card remains the property of Southland District Council.  Cards are not transferable and cardholders retain sole responsibility for use of the card issued to them.  A replacement fee will apply to lost or damaged cards.  This fee will be set out in the Southland District Council Schedule of Fees and Charges. 

 

Agreements between Southland District Council and Approved Operators are reached on an individual basis and may differ.  A Southland District Council photo identification card may be required by the Approved Operator at the time of ticket purchase or boarding the vessel for an exemption to be granted. 

 

Each Approved Operator may choose to compile a list of names eligible for local fares.  Eligibility for a local fare is a commercial decision made at the discretion of Approved Operators and is not influenced or administered by Southland District Council.  Individuals can contact Approved Operators to ascertain whether they maintain such a list and to determine their eligibility for inclusion.  Eligibility for local fares may mean that there is no requirement to apply for and carry a photo identification card when travelling.

 

6.1    Application for Exemption

 

An application to receive a Southland District Council photo identification card can be made by attending the Southland District Council office located at 15 Forth Street, Invercargill or by sending a completed application form to PO Box 903, Invercargill 9840 accompanied by a colour passport sized photo of each applicant

 

Applicants are also required to provide documentation which proves their exemption.  Examples of accepted documentation to prove exemption status are set out in Appendix A. 

 

Two categories of card will exist, distinguished from one another by colouring.  The first category will cover people with long term exemptions, including ratepayers, residents and beneficiaries of the Rakiura Māori Land Trust.  Cards issued to individuals in this category will be valid for a period of up to five years. 

 

A second category of card will be issued to people who have a temporary exemption due to circumstances such as seasonal work or extended temporary stay on the Island.  These cards will be valid for a fixed period of time up to six months. 
To align with seasonal work trends, fixed periods for temporary cards will be from
1 October to 31 March and from 1 April to 30 September each year. 

 

 

7.0       REFUNDS

 

People who have been charged the levy but believe that they are exempt under the Act can apply to Southland District Council to receive a refund. 
Refund applications should state the reason for the claim, along with a copy of supporting documentation as set out in Appendix A. 

 

An application for a refund must be made within six months of the date of travel. 

 

 

8.0       AUDIT

 

Southland District Council has the ability to audit the collection and payment of the levy by agents and revenue by Approved Transport Operators.  Audit procedures may include a review of visitor numbers against funds received. 

 

9.0       ENFORCEMENT

 

Part 2 of the Act outlines infringement offences.  Any person considered a visitor that has evaded payment or falsely claims that they are not a visitor will be considered to have committed an infringement offence. 

 

An infringement fee is set by way of regulation and will be displayed on signs erected on the Island.  Infringement notices can be issued by Southland District Council Enforcement Officers.  Enforcement Officers are authorised to request proof of payment or exemption from individuals. 

 

Southland District Council photo identification cards are accepted as proof of exemption.  A ticket issued by an approved transport operator, a cruise ship boarding pass or a receipt from the collection box or a levy collection agent will also be accepted as proof of payment. 

 

 

10.0     ADMINISTRATION

 

The Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Subcommittee (the Subcommittee) has delegated responsibility to make decisions regarding funding from the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Fund.  Decisions will be based on the compatibility of applications with allocation criteria and alignment with strategic outcomes determined by the Subcommittee.

 

The Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Subcommittee is a Subcommittee of the Community and Policy Committee and is subject to standard audit procedures.  The Community and Policy Committee will be informed of funding decisions via memoranda.  Southland District Council’s Annual Report will contain an itemised statement of the Stewart Island/ Rakiura Visitor Levy Fund each year. 

 

10.1     Stewart Island/ Rakiura Visitor Levy Subcommittee Membership

 

The Subcommittee will meet annually to review applications and allocate funding. 
The Subcommittee will consist of the following members appointed by Council:

·                  A representative recommended by each of the Approved Operators (three in total).

·                  One Community Board representative and the Councillor for Stewart Island.

·                  One independent Councillor who will act as a representative of
Southland District Council and be appointed by the Council.  The independent Councillor will act as Chair of the Subcommittee. 

 

The Chair of the Subcommittee will have a casting vote, which can only be exercised to resolve an evenly split vote.

 

10.2     Technical Advisory Group

 

The Subcommittee will be supported by a Technical Advisory Group (TAG). 
The TAG will be appointed by Southland District Council to provide strategic insight and technical expertise regarding funding applications.  The Technical Advisory Group will provide recommendations to the Subcommittee based on an assessment of the demand for projects, their viability, likely impact and alignment with strategic outcomes. 

 

 

10.3 Allocation Criteria

 

Allocations will be made in May of each year.  The application process will be administered by Venture Southland.  Advertisements will be placed once the fund is open to receive applications and will include the deadline for receipt of applications.  Late applications will not be considered. 

 

Only funds that have been received by Southland District Council at the time of advertisement will be allocated. 

 

To be considered for funding, applications must be consistent with Section 6(b) of the Act.  Section 6(b) states that revenue and levies collected must be used to fund:

1.         Activities used by visitors;

2.         Activities on the Island for the benefit of visitors; or

3.         To mitigate the adverse effects of visitors on the environment of the Island.

 

These criteria do not exclude applications for funding in relation to the development or maintenance of existing facilities, services and projects.  However, no funds will be allocated retrospectively for projects that have already been completed. 

 

In considering applications, the Subcommittee will give priority to applications for activities or projects that can demonstrate the widest public benefit.  Applications that primarily benefit a single or limited number of persons or entities will be given a low priority.

 

Applications to the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Fund must be made using the appropriate documentation provided by Venture Southland.  All applications must include:

·                  An outline of the project or work requiring funding, including a timeline.

·                  If the project involves physical works, scale conceptual plans including site plans.

·                  Any requirement for resource or building consent.

·                  A business plan for the project including costs and on-going funding requirements, if any.

·                  Evidence of legal status of the applicant (eg, charitable trust or body corporate).

·                  An assessment of how the project meets the purposes of the Act and responds to the set strategic outcomes. 

·                  Declarations of interest. 

 

If a Subcommittee member has any connection to an application greater than that of the general public that member should declare an interest in the relevant application, prior to it being considered.  In such circumstances, the member affected shall still be entitled to speaking and voting rights, unless the member has a pecuniary interest in the application. 

 

11.0  REVIEW

Southland District Council will review the Stewart Island Rakiura Bylaw and this Policy within 6 years of adoption.

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 

APPENDIX A:  DOCUMENTS WHICH CAN BE USED TO

CLAIM EXEMPTION OR REFUND

 

The table below contains a list of documents which will be accepted as proof of exemption from the need to pay the Stewart Island/Rakiura Levy. 

 

These documents will be accepted in relation to 1) applying for a photo identification card and 2) applying for a refund. 

 

Original documentation from both Category A and Category B must be presented concurrently.  Southland District Council requires proof of both identity and levy exemption status.  A current address will need to be provided to receive notice of renewals and other information. 

 

This is not a comprehensive list and other equivalent documents may be accepted when applying for a Southland District Council photo identification card or applying for levy refund.

 

At least one photo ID must be produced from Category A

The name on the document must be exactly the same as the applicant’s name

·        Passport (Passports can be accepted up to two years after the expiry date).

·        Proof of Age Card with photo. 

·        Drivers Licence.

·        Public Service Employee ID Card bearing a photo.

·        Education ID Card with photo.

·        Firearms licence.

At least one form of identification from Category B

Reason for exemption

Example of accepted proof of exemption

·        Ratepayers.

·        Tenants.

·        Residents.

One or more of the following documents showing name and address on Stewart Island:

·        Notice of rates or VG number verified by Rates Department.  Rates Notices must state that the applicant is the owner of the property to which the Rates Notice was sent and the document must be current at the time of the application.

·        Tenancy Agreement. 

·        Utilities bill. 

·        Insurance Renewal Advice. 

·        Motor Vehicle Registration. 

·        Electoral roll number. 

·        Mortgage documents. 

·        Current Land Titles Office records.

·        Spouses of a ratepayer or tenant.

·        Civil union or de facto partner of a ratepayer or tenant.

·        Dependants of a ratepayer or tenant.

·        Application to be made in conjunction with the respective person.

 

·        Rakiura Māori Land Trust beneficiaries.

·        Southland District Council may be able to check property rights via the www.Māorilandonline.govt.nz website or work with the Rakiura Māori Land Trust to access its database of beneficiaries. 

·        People under the age of 18.

·        Passport. 

·        School student concession card.

·        Birth Certificate.

·        Owners or those working on transport vessels.

·        Employment documentation (eg, payslips, letter from employer).

·        Visitors whose visit is for 21 days or more.

·        Tickets or invoices showing names and dates of arrival and departure. 

·        Receipts for accommodation covering the relevant time period. 

 

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 

 

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

DRAFT REMISSION AND POSTPONEMENT OF RATES ON MĀORI FREEHOLD LAND

 

 

This policy applies to:  Council and owners of Māori freehold land

 

 

DOCUMENT CONTROL

 

Policy owner:

Community and Futures

TRIM reference number:

R/16/8/13717

Effective date:

1/07/2017

Approved by: Council

 

Date approved: 23 February 2017

 

Next review date:

1/07/2020

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

1.          PURPOSE. 2

2.          DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS. 2

3.          POLICY DETAILS. 2

3.1         Background. 2

3.2         Objectives. 3

3.3         Conditions and Criteria for the Postponement and Remission of Rates on Maori             Freehold Land. 3

3.4         Postponement of Rates. 3

3.5         Remission of Penalties. 3

3.6         Remission of Rates. 4

3.7         Existing decisions on Maori Freehold land. 4

3.8         Length of decision. 4

4.          ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES. 4

5.          ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS. 5

6.          REVISION RECORD.. 5

 


REMISSION AND POSTPONEMENT OF RATES ON MĀORI FREEHOLD LAND

 

 

1.   PURPOSE

 

            Southland District Council has developed the Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori Freehold Land Policy (the Policy) to ensure fair and equitable collection of rates from all sectors of the community.  The Policy recognises that certain Māori-owned lands have particular features, ownership structures or other circumstances that make it appropriate to provide rates relief.

 

            The Policy provides the framework for granting remissions and postponements for the payment of rates and penalties on Māori freehold land, as is adopted under Section 102(2)(e) and Section 108 of the Local Government Act (2002).

 

 

2.   DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

 

Term

Meaning

LGA

Local Government Act (2002)

LGRA

Local Government (Rating) Act (2002)

Maori freehold land

Land whose beneficial ownership has been determined by the Māori Land Court by freehold order.

Service Rates

Sewerage and water rates, recycling and rubbish bin collection rates

Waahi Tapu

Place sacred to Maori in the traditional, religious, ritual or mythological sense.

 

 

3.   POLICY DETAILS

 

3.1    Background

 

The Southland District Council carries out its rating function in accordance with the requirements of the LGRA and the LGA.

 

All Māori freehold land in the Southland District is liable for rates in the same manner as if it were general land (as per section 91 LGRA).

 

Māori Freehold land is defined in the LGRA as land whose beneficial ownership has been determined by a freehold order issued by the Māori Land Court.  Only land that is the subject of such an order may qualify for remission or postponement under this policy.

 

Whether rates are remitted in any individual case will depend on the individual circumstances of each application.  Schedule 11 of the LGA identifies the matters which must be taken into account by Council when considering rates relief on Māori freehold land.

 

When considering the objectives listed below Council must take into account:

•           the desirability and importance of the objectives (3.2) to the District; and

•           whether remitting the rates would assist attainment of those objectives.

 

3.2       Objectives

 

The objectives of rates remission and postponement on Māori freehold land by Council are:

(a)        supporting the use of the land by the owners for traditional purposes;

(b)        recognising and supporting the relationship of Māori and their culture and        traditions with their ancestral lands;

(c)        avoiding further alienation of Māori freehold land;

(d)        facilitating any wish of the owners to develop the land for economic use;

(e)        recognising and taking account of the presence of Waahi Tapu that may affect the use of the land for other purposes;

(f)         recognising and taking account the importance of the land in providing economic and infrastructure support for marae and associated papakainga housing (whether on the land or elsewhere);

(g)        recognising and taking account of the importance of the land for community goals relating to:

i.          the preservation of the natural character of the coastal environment,

ii.         the protection of outstanding natural features,

iii.         the protection of significant indigenous vegetation and significant habitats of indigenous fauna;

(h)        recognising the level of community services provided to the land and its occupiers;

(i)         recognising matters related to the physical accessibility of the land.

 

3.3       Conditions and Criteria for the Postponement and Remission of Rates on Maori Freehold Land

 

Conditions for the rates to receive rates remission include for defined Maori freehold land to be:

·                    Maori freehold land as set out in the definitions

·                    not occupied by a dwelling, out-building or commercial building; and

·                    not used for economic benefit.

 

Applications for remission of rates on Māori freehold land must be made in writing, and should include:

•           a description of the size, position and current use of the land,

•           an indication of the ownership and documentation that shows the land which is subject to the application for rates remission is Māori freehold land,

•           outline future plans for the land (if any),

•           sources and level of income generated by the land (if any),

•           financial accounts if requested,

•           outline the reason for the request,

•           describe how the application meets any one or more of the objectives listed in 3.2.

 

Council may grant a remission of up to 100% of all rates, except Service Rates.

 

3.4       Postponement of Rates

 

Council does not postpone rates for Māori freehold land; however, it will remit 100% of rates (excluding Service Rates) on application, if the application meets the criteria set out in 3.3.

 

3.5       Remission of Penalties

 

Remission on rates penalties on Māori freehold land will be subject to application meeting the criteria set out in 3.3.  Each application will be considered on its merits and remission will be granted where it is considered just and equitable to do so.


 

Where significant arrears exist, penalties may be remitted whilst regular payments are made to reduce the arrears balance. 

 

Decisions on remission of penalties will be made on the same basis as remission of rates, with the delegated authority to remit penalties being given to the Chief Financial Officer, with recommendations from the Finance Manager.

 

3.6       Remission of Rates

 

An application for remission of rates must be considered by the Chief Financial Officer.

 

All rates on Māori freehold land whose owners name or names (or the name of the lessee) appears on the valuation roll (under Section 92 of the LGRA) will be collected in the usual manner of rate collection and follow up.

 

All rates, rates arrears and penalties on Māori freehold land vested in trustees will be collected from income derived from that land and held by the trustees for the beneficial owners, but limited to the extent of the money derived from the land and held by the trustees on behalf of the beneficial owner or owners (as per Section 93 LGRA).

 

For Māori freehold land, any person who actually uses the land whether for residing, farming, storage or any other use, whether they have a lease or not, is liable to pay the rates (as per Section 96 LGRA).  The rates invoice will be delivered to that person and the rates will be collected in the usual manner.  Section 97 of the LGRA provides for the person to be treated as having used the whole of the land for the whole financial year, unless they can establish otherwise.

 

Rates arrears on Māori freehold land shall be reviewed annually and amounts determined by Council as uncollectible shall be written off (for accounting purposes) on such land.

 

3.7       Existing decisions on Māori Freehold land

 

Any decisions made by Council regarding rates remissions on Māori freehold land before
1 July 2017 remain recognised by Council.

 

3.8       Length of decision

 

Decisions regarding rates remission on Māori freehold land remain in perpetuity, unless the land becomes occupied or used for economic benefit. In this case, it is expected that the landowners would advise Council of the change in land use. If there is evidence of the use of the land for occupation or economic benefit, Council may request financial statements regarding the property in order to review a decision. Reviews of decisions regarding rates remission for Māori freehold land will be made by the Chief Financial Officer.

 

 

4.   ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES

 

Party/Parties

Roles and Responsibilities

Finance Manager

Receive applications and make recommendations to Chief Financial Officer for remission of rates on Māori freehold land.

 

May request financial statements regarding the property if there is evidence that the land is occupied or being used for economic benefit.

 

May write off rates if the application is accepted

Chief Financial Officer

Accept or decline applications for remission of rates on Māori freehold land.

 

Review applications, if applicable, for remission of rates on Māori freehold land.

 

 

5.   ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS

 

·         Local Government Act (2002),

·         Local Government (Rating) Act (2002)

 

 

6.   REVISION RECORD

 

Date

Version

Revision Description

2016

Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori  Freehold Land

R/16/8/13717 – Long Term Plan 2018-2028

2015

Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori  Freehold Land

R/15/6/10846 – Long Term Plan 2015-2025

2012

 

Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori  Freehold Land

R/13/8/11136 - Long Term Plan 2012-2022

2007

 

Rates Remission Policy for Māori  Freehold Land

2007/05/4523

26 June 2003

 

Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori  Freehold Land

 

30 January 1997

Remission and Postponement of Rates on Māori  Freehold Land

 

 

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

Te Anau Airport Manapouri Works and Finance Report for the period ending February 2017

Record No:         R/17/4/7520

Author:                 Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

Approved by:       Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

1       Attached is the Te Anau Airport Manapouri Works and Finance report for the period ending February 2017.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Te Anau Airport Manapouri Works and Finance Report for the period ending February 2017” dated 4 April 2017.

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.

 

Attachments

a         Te Anau Airport Finance Report for Meeting to be held 12 April 2017    

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

 

   

 


Te Anau Community Board

12 April 2017

sdclogo

 

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

 

Recommendation

 

That the public be excluded from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.

C10.1 Consideration of a Request to Rectify Issues to Neighbouring Properties Caused by Beech Trees on the Henry Street Reserve

C10.2 Te Anau Airport Operational Issues

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

Consideration of a Request to Rectify Issues to Neighbouring Properties Caused by Beech Trees on the Henry Street Reserve

s7(2)(g) - The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege.

 

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.

Te Anau Airport Operational Issues

s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities.

 

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.