sdclogo

 

 

Notice is hereby given that a Meeting of the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board will be held on:

 

Date:                      

Time:

Meeting Room:

 

Tuesday, 15 August 2017

10.45am

Pavilion, Ayr Street, Stewart Island

 

Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board Agenda

 

OPEN

 

 

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Jon Spraggon

 

Deputy Chairperson

Steve Lawrence

 

Members

Dale Chittenden

 

 

Aaron Conner

 

 

Greg Everest

 

 

Bruce Ford

 

 

Anita Geeson

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE

 

Committee Advisor

Kirsten Hicks

 

Community Partnership Leader

Michelle Stevenson

 

 

 

 

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

 

 

 


Terms of Reference – Community Boards

 

Community Boards are bodies established by statute.  Their responsibilities and powers are as delegated by the Southland District Council which are to:

·                      Represent and act as an advocate for the interest of its community.

·                      Consider and report on all matters referred to it by the Southland District Council, or any matter of interest or concern to the Community Board.

·                      Maintain an overview of services provided by the Southland District Council
within the community.

·                      Consider annual estimates for expenditure within the community and recommend these to Council.

·                      Communicate with community organisations and special interest groups within the community.

·                      Undertake any other responsibilities that are delegated to it by the Southland
District Council.

 

In addition to these activities, Community Boards will consider how best to provide for their communities, and the people who live there, into the future.

 

Community Board members will provide leadership by:

·                Positively representing their community and the Southland District

·                Identifying key issues that will affect their community’s future and work with Council staff and other local representatives to facilitate multi-agency collaborative opportunities.

·                Promote a shared vision for the wider community of interest area and develop ways to work with others to achieve positive outcomes

 

·                Community Boards will adopt a strategic focus that will enable members to:

·                Provide local representation and guidance on wider community issues, initiatives and projects.

·                Contribute to the development and promotion of community cohesion, by developing and supporting relationships across a range of stakeholders at a local, regional and national level.

·                Take part in local community forums, meetings and workshops.

·                Inform local residents and ratepayers on issues that affect them.

 

Community Boards shall have the following delegated powers and be accountable to Council for the exercising of these powers

 

Engagement and representation by:

·                Facilitating the Council’s consultation with local residents and community groups on local issues and local aspects of district wide issues including input into the Long-term Plan, Annual Plan, and policies that impact on the Board’s area.

·                Engaging with council officers on local issues and levels of service, including infrastructural, recreational, community services and parks, reserves and cemetery matters.

·                Representing the interests of the community at Council, Committee or Subcommittee meetings when a motion under debate relates to a matter that the Board considers to be of particular interest to the residents within its community.

·                Monitoring and keeping the Council informed of community aspirations and the level of satisfaction with services provided.

 

Financial by:

·                Approving expenditure within the limits of annual estimates.

·                Approving unbudgeted expenditure for locally funded activities up to the value of $10,000.

 

Rentals and leases

·                In relation to all leases of land and buildings within their own area, on behalf of Council;

§    Accepting the highest tenders for rentals of $10,000; or less per annum.

§    Approving the preferential allocation of leases where the rental is $10,000 or less per annum.

 


 

Local assets and facilities by

·                Overseeing the management of local halls and community centres which are owned by Council and where no management committee exists.  This will occur by way of relationship with officers of Southland District Council. 

·                Appoint a local liaison person responsible for community housing.

 

Some Community Boards have specific delegations in addition to the broad delegations above:

 

Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

·                Contributing to the development of policy relating to the governance of the Stewart Island Electrical Supply Authority (SIESA). 

·                Overseeing the management of SIESA by way of relationship with officers of Southland District Council. 

 

Te Anau Community Board

·                Overseeing the management of the Te Anau/Manapouri Airport by way of relationship with officers of Southland District Council.

 

The Community Boards can make recommendations to Council on:

 

Assets and Facilities

·                Annually providing feedback on any asset management plans or community services strategies applicable to the community for which the Community Board is responsible.

 

Rentals and leases

·                In relation to all leases of land and buildings within their own area, on behalf of Council;

§    Recommending rentals in excess of $10,000 per annum to the Group Manager Services and Assets

§    Recommending the preferential allocation of leases where the rental is in excess of $10,000 per annum to the Group Manager Services and Assets.

 

Contracts/Tenders

·                Recommending tenders less than $200,000 to the Group Manager Services and Assets.

·                Recommending tenders in excess of $200,000 to the Services and Assets Committee.

·                Recommending tenders to the Services and Assets Committee where preference is not for acceptance of the highest tenderer,

 

Financial

·                Recommending annual estimates to Council.

·                Recommending unbudgeted expenditure in excess of $10,000 to the Services and Assets Committee.

 

Local Policy

·                Considering matters referred to it by officers, the Council, its committees or subcommittees, including reports and policy and bylaw proposals relating to the provision of council services within the Board’s area; and

·                Making submissions or recommendations in response to those matters as appropriate.

 

The Chairperson of each Community Board is delegated with the following additional responsibilities:

·                 Approval of leases, rental agreements and the rollover of existing contracts under $1,000;

·                 Engaging with Community Board members to make submissions to the Council on behalf of the Community Board where a submission period is outside of the Community Board meeting cycle.  Where a Chairperson is unable to base a submission on a consensus among Community Board members, a Community Board meeting must be held.

 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

sdclogo

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM                                                                                                                                   PAGE

Procedural

1          Apologies                                                                                                                        7

2          Leave of absence                                                                                                           7

3          Conflict of Interest                                                                                                         7

4          Public Forum                                                                                                                  7

5          Extraordinary/Urgent Items                                                                                          7

6          Confirmation of Minutes                                                                                               7

Reports for Recommendation

7.1       Relocation of Power Pole on Mr Davis’ Property, Hicks Road, Stewart Island   15

Reports

8.1       Council Report                                                                                                             17

8.2       Stewart Island/Rakiura Golden Bay Wharf Update                                                 37

8.3       Stewart Island Wharfing Provision Community and Stakeholder Engagement  39

8.4       Stewart Island Rakiura Community Facilities Assessment                                    43

8.5       Review of the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy                                               125

8.6       Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board Representative on Rakiura Heritage Centre Trust                                                                                                               139  

UPDATES

cHAIRPERSON’S REPORT

Councillor's Report  


1          Apologies

 

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

 

2          Leave of absence

 

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

 

3          Conflict of Interest

 

Committee 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

Notification to speak is required by 5pm at least two days before the meeting. Further information is available on www.southlanddc.govt.nz or phoning 0800 732 732.

 

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         Meeting minutes of Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board, 12 June 2017


 

sdclogo

 

 

Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

 

OPEN MINUTES

 

UNCONFIRMED

 

 

Minutes of a meeting of Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board held in the Pavilion, Ayr Street, Stewart Island on Monday, 12 June 2017 at 1.30pm.

 

present

 

Chairperson

Jon Spraggon

 

Deputy Chairperson

Steve Lawrence

 

Members

Dale Chittenden

 

 

Aaron Conner

 

 

Greg Everest

 

 

Anita Geeson

 

Councillor

Bruce Ford

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE

 

Mayor Gary Tong, Group Manager Community and Futures Rex Capil, Manager Governance and Democracy Clare Sullivan, Committee Advisor Kirsten Hicks


1          Apologies

 

At the close of the agenda no apologies had been received.

 

2          Leave of absence

 

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

 

3          Conflict of Interest

 

Councillor Ford and Member Geeson declared an interest in item 7.1 Street Works Associated with the Rakiura Heritage Centre, and removed themselves from the table.

 

4          Public Forum

 

            Ms Jen Ross (representing the Department of Conservation) addressed members on the following topics:-

 

o   Staff/hours changes for Winter

o   Flock counts of the Southern NZ Dotterel

o   Mason Bay dune restoration

o   Rakiura Track maintenance

o   Great Walk hut fees

o   Predator dog work

o   National Volunteer Week

o   Science leadership teaching programme

o   Green Ribbon awards

o   Ulva Island Marine Reserve

 

            Ms Bridget Carter (representing the Department of Conservation) spoke to the Board

            regarding:-

 

o   Environment Southland Resources Management Strategy

o   Predator Free Rakiura

o   Infrastructure Management Plan

o   DOC Community Awards

 

5          Extraordinary/Urgent Items

 

Moved Councillor Ford, seconded Member Everest

 

Resolved that the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board Late Agenda be accepted as urgent business.

 

6          Confirmation of Minutes

 

Resolution

Moved Deputy Chairperson Laurence, seconded Member Geeson

Confirms the minutes of Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board, held on 10 April 2017.

 

Reports for Recommendation

 

7.1

Street Works Associated with the Rakiura Heritage Centre

Record No:         R/17/5/11100

 

 

Councillor Ford and Member Geeson declared a conflict of interest and removed themselves from the table.

Report on Street Works Associated with the Rakiura Heritage Centre, prepared by Brendan Gray (Community Engineer), was presented to members.

This report was created in response to the Board’s request for information regarding the financial implications of an earlier request for funding.

Members were advised of the following financial breakdown.

2       

Amount of Grant Provided
(GST excl)

Total Proposed Community Board Rate 2017/18
(GST excl)

Est Total Rate Including Grant
(GST excl)

Percentage Increase

Rate for Land Value $88,000

(GST incl)

currently $131.46

Rate for Land Value $160,000
(GST Incl)

currently $239.01

$134,468

$79,873

$214,341

168%

$345.11

$627.48

$80,000

$79,873

$159,873

100%

$257.41

$468.02

$40,000

$79,873

$119,873

50%

$193.01

$350.92

If the The impact of a loan funding would be as follows:

Amount of Loan

Period of Loan

Loan Repayment Each Year

Estimated Total Rate with Loan Repayment (GST excl)

Rate for Land Value $88,000
(GST Incl)
currently $131.46

Rate for Land Value $160,000
(GST incl)
currently $239.01

$134,468

5 years

$30,676

$110,549

$178.00

$323.63

$134,468

10 years

$17,290

$97,163

$156.44

$284.44

$80,000

5 years

$18,251

$98,124

$157.99

$287.25

$80,000

10 years

$10,286

$90,159

$145.17

$263.94

$40,000

5 Years

$9,125

$88,998

$143.30

$260.54

 

 

Members discussed their general support for the proposed Heritage Centre, but following consultation with the community felt that funds could be better obtained from more appropriate funding avenues.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Resolution

Moved Member Conner, seconded Member Laurence

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Street Works Associated with the Rakiura Heritage Centre” dated 7 June 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)         Selects Option 3 – Do not support the Rakiura Heritage Centre Trust request for funding of additional work

NB Member Chittenden wishes to record his opposition to resolution d).

 

 

Reports

 

8.1

Council Report

Record No:         R/17/5/11551

 

The Council Report was presented by Rex Capil (Group Manager Community and Futures).

Mr Capil advised that the purpose of this report is to provide an overview of key issues across the Southland District, as well as those of a more local nature.

 

Matters drawn to members’ attention include the following:-

 

§  Work is progressing on the formation of a proposed new council controlled organisation Southland Regional Development Agency.

§  A new Tourism Infrastructure Fund has been announced by government, replacing the Mid-sized Regional Facilities Fund and Regional Growth Partnership Fund. This fund might be useful for Stewart Island wharves.

§  Stewart Island Wharf engagement has been progressing well, with a well circulated questionnaire, one-on-one interviews, public drop in sessions and consultation with key stakeholders. A report is expected to go to Council July/August 2017.

§  A report regarding the future ownership of the Golden Bay wharf is expected to be presented to Council in June/July. Time needs to be taken to complete all due diligence. In the short term, letters outlining restrictions (due to the current state of the facility) will be sent to all users.

§  Year to date income for the Board is at a slightly lower level than expected, due in most part to outstanding applications to the Visitor Levy for long term projects. Due to the timing of the allocations meeting, it is likely that these projects will be deferred to 17/18.

§  SIESA income is tracking as expected.

 

 

Resolution

Moved Member Everest, seconded Member Geeson

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Council Report” dated 7 June 2017.

 

 

8.2

SIRCET Nursery relocation to Traill Park

Record No:         R/17/5/8991

 

Report on the proposed SIRCET Nursery relocating to Traill Park, prepared by Brendan Gray (Community Engineer) was presented to Members.

 

A total of 11 conditions of use were discussed and approved by members.

 

 

Resolved

Moved Councillor Ford, seconded Member Geeson

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “SIRCET Nursery relocation to Traill Park” dated 7 June 2017.

 

b)         Supports the decision to relocate the SIRCET nursery to Traill Park under the agreed conditions.

 

 

9.0     CHAIRPERSON’S REPORT

 

          Chairperson Spraggon raised the following matters with the Board:-

 

o   Visitor Levy honesty box has been relocated to the wharf.

o   LTP project update

o   Oyster bonamia

o   Advocate newspaper report

o   Wharf maintenance

 

Parking on Elgin Terrace at wharf entrance

 

Resolution

 

Moved Member Conner, seconded Member Everest

 

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

 

requests staff report back on progress in regard to the rezoning of the parking restrictions at the Halfmoon Bay wharf end of Elgin Terrace.

 

SIESA

 

Resolution

Moved Member Chittenden, seconded Member Everest

 

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

 

requests that a review of the organisation and operational structure of SIESA, including future composition and ownership, be scoped and costed.

 

Resolution

 

Moved Member Everest, seconded Councillor Ford

 

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

 

requests scoping and costing of a review by Ian Walsh (Opus) on the Envirolink Stewart Island Hydro Report.

 

 

10.     COUNCILLOR’S REPORT

 

          Councillor Ford addressed members on the following topics:-

 

o   Rates

o   Animal control

o   Annual Plan

o   Alternative Electricity

 

 

 

The meeting concluded at 2.40pm                CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD AT A MEETING OF THE Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board HELD ON 12 JUNE 2017

 

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

sdclogo

 

Relocation of Power Pole on Mr Davis’ Property, Hicks Road, Stewart Island

Record No:        R/17/8/17688

Author:                 Ray Hamilton, Team Leader Community Engineers

Approved by:       Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Background

1        During construction of distribution network on Stewart Island a wooden pole has been located on private property of Mr Davis on Back Rd. Under law the pole may remain, however Mr Davis is planning to construct a shed in this area and pole would create a safety hazard. Powernet have provided 3-options to upgrade network in this area and are compared below.

2        The distribution network on Stewart Island includes a number of non-compliant tanalised softwood poles that will require replacing in the very near future. There are three softwood poles in area being considered that will require replacing “anyway”.

 

Summary

3        Powernet have provided 3-options to consider

4        Options 1 & 2 provide solutions to both issues identified above, i.e. removal of pole on private property as well as three non-compliant softwood poles, they also provide a future connection for 4 Hicks Rd. Option 3 considers costs to replace the 3-non-compliant softwood poles, and is considered the base case (or do nothing)

5        Options 1&2 are therefore considered to be the best solutions to issues, and difference in cost (approx. $5K) is due to increased cost for larger cable if Community Board wish to “future proof” installation should they decide to continue underground route from this location to sewerage pump closer to the Power House

 

Options considered

6        Option 1 involves removing overhead section around Davis property and replacing this with an underground section of cable using 35mm diameter cable that is sized to meet current demand

7        Option 2 also removes the overhead section, with an underground cable, however cable is sized at 95mm diameter which is same as current section from power house to Sewerage Pump on Back Rd, so is suitable for connection to any future upgrade on system i.e. is future proofed.

8        Option 3 only considers replacing existing softwood poles with new compliant concrete type. This option does not remove pole from private property.

9        Powernet have explored another option to relocate poles to alternate locations along roadside, but have been unable to find a safe route due to steep drop-offs and “bluffs” as well as narrow road margins restricting design options. This option is considered too risky and has been discounted.

 

Option

1

2

3

Remove pole from Davis Property

Y

Y

N

Replace 3-Softwood poles

Y

Y

Y

Can cater for future expansion at 45 Hicks Rd

Y

Y

N

Extra Capacity

N

Y

Y

Cost ($K)

40

45

37

 

 

 

Recommendation

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Relocation of Power Pole on Mr Davis’ Property, Hicks Road, Stewart Island” dated 8 August 2017.

b)         Confirm option best suited for Community needs, considering extra costs to meet any future load growth.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report. 

  


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

sdclogo

 

Council Report

Record No:        R/17/7/15756

Author:                 Michelle Stevenson, Community Partnership Leader

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Chief Executive

Bonamia Ostreae Response

1        There has been a significant multi-agency response in relation to the discovery of the Bonamia Ostreae parasite in two marine farms in the Big Glory Bay area of Stewart Island.  This parasite can be fatal to flat oysters and has been in New Zealand in the Nelson/ Marlborough area since 2015.

2        This response has been led by the Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI) under the Biosecurity Act 1993 and there is a controlled area notice in place which legally restricts the movement of shellfish, vessels and equipment, to seek to limit the potential for spread of the parasite to uninfected areas.

3        The response has also been utilising the facilities and support structures provided by Emergency Management Southland and the Emergency Control Centre (ECC) at North Road. MPI staff have been very complimentary regarding the ECC and the assistance from Emergency Management Southland.

4        Southland District Council has been involved in the response in two key ways.  Firstly, Mayor Tong has facilitated several key meetings involving key stakeholders/ communities at Bluff and Oban.  Secondly, the Council was asked to participate in the multi-agency response planning team. 

5        A focus of the initial stage of the response planning work was to seek to establish a location to dispose of the large volume of removed material.  It was resolved that the most appropriate location for disposal was the regional landfill operated by AB Lime at Kings Bend. AB Lime have been proactive in working with the response team to facilitate this disposal occurring.

6        The operation of physically removing the affected marine farms is a significant body of work, and obviously this operation planning has to have very strong regard to the biosecurity and health and safety risks which are applicable to this work.  Working in the marine environment and in waters which can be at times very rough means that the work programme need to be factored around the ability to safely perform key tasks, having regard to factors such as fatigue and climatic conditions.  Indications are at this stage that the overall operation could take in the order of 100 days but this is obviously dependent on a range of these factors.

7        At the time of writing, phase 2 of the operation has been completed which involves the removal of the remaining cages, with a total of approximately 80 tonnes of cages having been removed by the end of Stage 2.  Stage 3 involves the uplifting and removal of ropes and strings from the marine farms.

8        The Biosecurity Act includes compensation provisions for losses where actions are necessitated by provisions within the Act. The MPI website provides further information on this issue. Council has no statutory role in relation to the issue of compensation.

9        Obviously, the removal operation is having a significant impact on the affected famers, families and staff and the wider community.  MPI has been working closely with the Rural Support Trust and other agencies to provide welfare services and support.

10      Testing has been occurring to establish whether the parasite is present in the wild oyster beds in Foveaux Strait. The results from this work were released on 10 July and have shown that it is not present at the moment. Further testing will occur in September.

Civil Defence Review

11      Central Government have decided to carry out a review of the way in which natural disasters and other emergencies are currently managed by the existing civil defence structures.

12      The review is described as: “Better responses to natural disasters and other emergencies in New Zealand”, and will be led by a Technical Advisory Group (“TAG”) which is chaired by Hon Roger Sowry. 

13      The terms of reference for the review have now been released. In the problem definition section they note that:

·      The underlying principle of “act locally, coordinate regionally, support nationally” may not be suitable in all circumstances

·      Decisions are not necessarily made by adequately skilled and experienced people, mandated at the appropriate level of government, and supported by the best information possible in the circumstances

·      Volunteers may not be adequately supported by a professional emergency management force

·      Information is not always readily available to decision makers on the scale, complexity and evolving nature of an emergency, to determine the capacity and capabilities required for the response effort

·      There is a need for timely, consistent and accurate communication to the public

·      Response capabilities are not necessarily deployed as promptly and seamlessly as possible, taking advantage of economies of scale and the experience of senior responders.

14      The overall focus of the review will be on:

·      The decision-making process and chain of command including the devolved nature of this structure from central to local government and how the response to emergencies is managed by the different agencies

·      How decisions and who has power to declare a state of emergency

·      The nature of information flows to the public and media given available technology and the nature of the resources available locally and centrally to assist

·      Capability and capacity across the system including ways and means to better deploy resources depending on priorities

·      Whether legislative changes are needed to improve the way in which emergencies are managed.

15      An initial report from the Technical Advisory Group is required to be with the Minister by 1 September 2017.

16      Officers will continue to monitor the review as it proceeds and report on any outcomes of significance to Southland. 

Rural Fire

17      The transition process to merge Rural Fire Authorities with the NZ Fire Service to create Fire and Emergency Management NZ (FENZ) was completed with the establishment of FENZ on 1 July 2017. This included the transfer of all Rural Fire Southland staff and assets into the new structure.

18      As part of the transition process Council entered into a formal agreement with FENZ to provide for the sale of the relevant firefighting equipment to FENZ for $1 as previously approved by

19      Council. The agreement also provides for the continuation of some internal support services for a further 12 month period until FENZ is in a position to assume responsibility for these functions.  

Open Spaces Strategy

20      Council adopted, in late 2014, an Open Spaces Strategy to set a strategic framework within which the provision and planning for reserves and other open spaces owned by Council could be managed.

21      While the strategy sets the overall strategic goals within which Council is looking to manage

22      its reserves and open spaces there is a need for more detailed planning work and a prioritised work programme to be developed to support implementation of the overall strategy.

23      Officers are now having work advanced to:

·      Assess current usage and the issues associated with our current open space network relative to community demand

·      Assess the extent to which the network is currently ‘fit for purpose’ and understand any gaps that might need to be addressed

·      Develop a prioritised work programme for the district as a whole to ensure that Council can deliver on its overall strategic goals.

24      The outputs from the prioritised work programme can be used to inform the 2018 10 Year Plan and any future grant applications that Council may wish to make.

25      It is important to recognise that the programme will look at the priorities from a district wide perspective. There is a risk that individual communities (including Community Boards and CDAs) may have a view on priorities that is different to that which is established at the district level.

LGNZ Business Plan

26      LGNZ has developed a new Business Plan for the 2017-2019 term to continue to assist achieve policy and advocacy goals.

·    Infrastructure: Ensuring infrastructure and associated funding mechanisms are in place to allow for growth and maintenance across housing, building, transport, broadband, tourism-related, three waters and flood control infrastructure.

·    Risk and resilience: Understanding and addressing risks from natural hazards and other events – both for infrastructure and to support resilience in the economy and our communities.

·    Environmental: Leading and championing policy and working alongside central government and iwi to deal with the increasing impact of environmental issues including climate change, the quality and quantity of New Zealand’s freshwater resources, and biodiversity.

·    Social: Working alongside central government, iwi and stakeholders to address social issues and needs in our communities including an ageing population, disparity between social groups, housing (including social housing) supply and quality, and community safety.

·    Economic: Developing a range of policy levers, to address and fund economic development and growth across all of New Zealand.

27      The Plan identifies as priorities the need to proactively develop responses to climate change policy and water policy.  The climate change work will build on the sector’s work around risk and resilience and the roles we will have to play in climate change adaptation and contribution to mitigation.  The work on water policy will seek to integrate the quality, quantity, infrastructure and affordability debates. 

Tourism Infrastructure Fund

28      The new Tourism Infrastructure Fund was recently announced by Tourism Minister Hon. Paula Bennett. 

29      The $102 million fund over four years is a boost for tourism infrastructure funding and recognises the real need some communities are facing as a result of booming visitor numbers.  Compared with the $12 million over four years in the Regional Mid-sized Tourism Facilities Grant Fund announced last year, the new fund adds impetus in this area.

30      The panel responsible for assessing proposals and recommending a package of infrastructure projects that best aligns with the Government’s priorities for the fund was announced by Tourism Minister Paula Bennett.

31      The panel members, appointed for a four year term, are:

·      Judy Kirk (chair), consultant and experienced director

·      Norm Thompson (deputy chair), Deputy Chair of Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development

·      Kauahi Ngapora, General Manager of Whale Watch Kaikoura

·      Chris Roberts, Chief Executive of Tourism Industry Aotearoa

·      Sarah Hannan, Programme Director for the Southland Regional Development Strategy

·      Iain Cossar, General Manager Tourism, Sectors, Regions and Cities at the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment

·      Bruce Parkes, Deputy Director-General Science and Policy at the Department of Conservation.

Community Safety

32      There have been concerns raised about police resourcing in smaller communities and there has been some movement towards redressing the balance.

33      Earlier this year, the Government announced new investment in police.  Of an extra 880 police to hit the ground over the next four years 140 are destined for rural and regional areas, a further 20 stations will have a 24/7 officer on duty and all 12 police districts are to receive more police over the four years. The Southern Region is to receive an extra 37 police on top of the 557 sworn staff already policing the Southern Region.  The Southland Rural Police base is still to be confirmed.

34      Local authorities are encouraged to continue to highlight the issues being faced by communities in their areas.  We as a Council now have an opportunity to further work with the Commissioner, our local Area Commanders and the Government to make sure the safety of our communities improves.  While four years is a long time to wait, the challenge of recruiting and training 880 new officers cannot be underestimated.

35      LGNZ and Chair of the Rural Sector Brian Hanna has met with police Commissioner Mike Bush to discuss the rollout in greater detail and the effectiveness of the regional ‘hub’ model for rural towns, which has been the source of some concern.

Local Government Survey

36      LGNZ has recently released the 2017 Local Government Survey, which is the second three yearly survey looking at how the sector is perceived by citizens and businesses across New Zealand.

37      The overall outcome from the survey is similar to the first survey completed in 2014. In summary the key results include:

·      The public and businesses consider that local government has an increasingly important role in the country’s prosperity and well-being

·      The sectors reputation remains low, and is particularly low amongst businesses

·      There have been, however, some improvements since 2014 with a small positive movement in the public’s overall satisfaction with the performance of the sector and the public and businesses are also more positive of the recent performance of Councils in their area than they are of the sector as a whole

·      Key priority areas for improvement continue to be sound financial decision making, delivering strong leadership to develop strategies for prosperity and well-being, and listening to, and acting upon, the needs of the community

·      Compared with 2014 the public and businesses are more likely to want local government to lift its performance by dealing with some of the key issues of the day including transport, infrastructure and housing.

38      The findings from this latest survey reinforce the need for the sector as a whole to continue to focus on looking at ways to lift its performance and to also engage with communities about the work that it does. The strategic priorities that Council has developed locally are consistent with this overall theme.

39      At a national level LGNZ have developed the CouncilMARK excellence programme to support the work of local authorities that are aiming to lift their performance.

CouncilMARK™ Local Government Excellence Programme and Reputation Research

40      Reports from the first group of councils to go through the programme are due to be released in July.  It has taken a lot of work from the councils involved, assessors, the Independent Assessment Board and the team at LGNZ to get to this point.  It is certainly a comprehensive and collaborative process and the outcomes are going to be effective in achieving the Programme’s goal of showing and growing local government performance.

41      This is a courageous and necessary step in the sector’s long term interest.  If we want to change our reputation and our standing with the public then as a sector we have to take action and the Programme will play a critical role in achieving this. 

 

 

Te Anau Wastewater Discharge Project

42      At its 17 May meeting Council asked officers to proceed with the development of a Business Case for the Kepler option. This decision reflects the importance of Council continuing to progress development of this option given the need to have an alternative discharge fully operational by December 2020, unless new consents can be obtained to extend use of the existing Upukerora discharge.

43      Following this decision officers have been advancing work to develop the first phase strategic business case and also scope the work needed to develop the financial and commercial business cases needed. This has included workshops to define/refine the key objectives, criteria and weightings.

44      In parallel with the work on the Kepler Business Case officers are also progressing development of potential criteria and a process via which it might identify potentially suitable alternative disposal sites. Work is underway to develop these criteria with a report back on these going to the Te Anau Wastewater Project Committee in August. As part of this work officers have undertaken some preliminary GIS work looking at the property sizes, soil classes, and physiographics of the basin.

Milford Opportunities Project

45      A strategic Business Case for the Milford Opportunities Project was submitted to the Ministry for Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) during June along with details of the proposed governance arrangements for the project. The business case is needed to support the funding agreement that is proposed to be signed between MBIE, the Department of Conservation (DOC) and Council for the project.

46      Over recent months there has been significant work advanced by DOC and Milford Sound Tourism looking at different aspects relating to the long term development of Milford and what those development options might mean for the infrastructure and services for which each agency is responsible. The outputs from this work will be used to inform the Milford Opportunities Project strategy work.

Using Land for Housing

47      On 17 June the Productivity Commission released a draft report on “Using Land for Housing”. While the report focuses on the processes used within major cities to provide land for housing including the issues relating to housing affordability it is of relevance to all local authorities given that it could well lead to changes within the overall planning framework within which local government works.

48      Key issues identified in the report include:

·      some of New Zealand’s cities will continue to grow rapidly in the coming years

·      cities have struggled to respond to population growth

·      the projected supply of housing in Auckland is well short of what is needed

·      allowing cities to grow matters for economic growth and individual wellbeing

·      city planning and regulation can work better

·      land readiness matters

·      infrastructure can be a major bottleneck

·      there is scope to make better use of existing funding tools

·      incentives to put land to its best use are needed.

49      In response to these issues the Commission have proposed a number of recommendations including:

·      allowing large cites to undertake integrated spatial planning as an alternative to current statutory planning mechanisms. This is consistent with recommendations made through previous reviews of the RMA that all regions be required to undertake spatial planning exercises

·      remove regulations that prevent the efficient use of land for housing eg mandatory balconies for apartment

·      give greater priority to cities and housing in the RMA

·      more user charges, particularly for water services, and the removal of prohibitions on tolling and congestion charges

·      greater use of targeted rates to fund infrastructure required to support growth

·      levy rates on Crown-owned land

·      identify and pursue opportunities to develop Crown and local authority land in high growth cities.

50      The draft report has been released for public consultation until 4 August. Following consideration of any submissions received the Commission will release a final report which will be considered by central Government. 

Southland Regional Development Strategy 

51      Work has continued with the development of the proposed Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) to lead regional development activity, including the implementation of the SoRDS Action Plan.

52      The size of the challenge facing Southland Region was reflected in the Foreward from the Mayoral Forum in the Action Plan where the four Mayors/Chair indicated:

“The comprehensive development of the region and reversing the loss of population from the demographic time bomb facing us is a challenge at another order of magnitude compared to those we have faced previously.”

53      Given the challenge it is clear that the region needs to significantly lift its performance in advancing development of the region as a whole. While the SoRDS Action Plan provides an overall direction it needs a ‘whole of region’ entity to take it and the broader regional development work needed forward. The need for this was summarised in the SoRDS Action Plan as follows:

“But the challenges SoRDS is addressing are major, long term and require a strong united regional effort on a scale even Southland has not before achieved.”

54      If progress is to be made in addressing the challenges facing the Region then it is important that Southland District and the region as a whole be prepared to do things differently to the way in which they have been done in the past. Retention of the status quo will not achieve the changes the SoRDS Action Plan indicated as being necessary.

55      The work completed to look at a proposed new model has highlighted some differences between the four Councils and other community stakeholders which will need to be addressed as we look at moving forward with the development of a new implementation model.

Community and Futures

Representation Review  

56      Planning is underway to meet both the statutory requirements of the Representation Review and to inform and engage with the people of Southland.

57      The first part of the process will be for Council to consider at meetings in September and October decisions regarding the electoral system to be used for the 2019 and 2022 local authority elections (First Past the Post or Single Transferrable Vote) and whether it wants to consider establishing a Maori ward in the district. These decisions are both required in the legislation.

58      Stakeholder engagement will start to occur on the Community Governance Review and Representation Review will be discussed at the Community Conversations in October and November. The issue of representation has already begun to be raised at the April Community Conversations meetings.

SOLGM Workshop

59      Officers recently attended the Representation Review Forum run by the Society for Local Government Managers for councils who will be undertaking a Review in 2018.  Fifty seven councils are completing reviews.  This was a timely reminder about the processes to consider, an opportunity to hear best practice examples, and get advice from the Local Government Commission on their expectations. The learnings from this forum will feed into the planning for the Representation Review.  

Community Conversations

60      Council has just completed its second round of Community Conversations in Riverton, Te Anau, Tokanui, Wyndham, Lumsden, Winton, Otautau and Stewart Island. Good numbers turned out at every conversation and there was a wide range of topics discussed. The key topics included connectivity, tourism and freedom camping, environmental bottom lines, representation, technology and the changing world.

61      Most groups were actively looking to the future and wanted to talk about ensuring their community kept up with the change that is happening. Council plans to hold the next round of Community Conversations in late October-early November, with a focus on community governance and representation and the upcoming Long Term Plan.

Residents Survey

62      The Resident survey has been completed with a report presented to the Community and Policy meeting in June for information.  The research company presented an overview of the results to the committee.  Workshops will be held in July with the council activity managers to discuss the results and create any required improvement plans. The final results report will be added to the website and sent to the CDAs and CBs.

District Facilities Project

63      We have received the third interim report and have met with Venture Southland’s, Amy Bird to agree the style of the report and the expectations around the type of analysis. The final report is due by the end of August and will be reported to Council.

Te Anau Community Consultation

64      The Board continues to refine the list the community created and will have another workshop on 10 July to continue advancement. The end result will then go back out to the community for a further opportunity to comment.

Stewart Island Wharves update

65      The community engagement into the Stewart Island wharves owned by Southland District Council and Golden Bay wharf (currently owned by Southport NZ) has concluded. 

66      The independent consultant has completed her report and it will be submitted to Council in August. The engagement process has been well acknowledged and received 102 survey submissions, 3 days of one-to-one interviews on the island, an evening conversation café, and numerous stakeholder interviews on the island and in Invercargill.  Preliminary responses indicate there are some common themes coming through from stakeholders and the community that Council may investigate following the report being presented to Council in August.

67      The wharves are an important transport link on Stewart Island, and have been described by the community as their SH1.  They accommodate commercial, tourism and recreational users.

Service Delivery Scoping Project

68      The purpose of this project is to consider future Council service delivery options for communities in the Southland District with demand from residents, ratepayers and visitors being the primary focus. 

69      Consultant Rebecca Mc Elrea has been engaged to undertake this process and has been working closely with staff to create an appropriate engagement strategy for the project which includes inviting the public to complete surveys, observations of demand for services in the Council offices and libraries around the district and conducting interviews with customer support staff and other Council staff.  Once this part of the process is complete, drop-in sessions will be held around the District to discuss the findings and invite further feedback. This project will culminate in a report being presented to Council to discuss the future options for service delivery across the District.

2017/2018 Annual Plan

70      The Annual Plan was adopted by Council at its meeting on 7 June and a copy of the final document is available from the Council’s website and offices.

71      The final plan resulted in a District Rate increase of 3.63%. The actual rates changes for individual properties will differ depending on the services received, location, land-use and land value. The final Annual Plan document includes details of the different rates from page 67 as well as a table showing rates for a range of sample properties on pages 91 and 92.

72      The final plan forecasts a surplus of around $1.4 million. In adopting the plan, Council also confirmed its fees and charges for the 2017/2018. An updated fees and charges schedule is also available from the Council’s website and offices.  Officer have sent replies letters to those who provided feedback on the Annual Plan letting them know Council’s decisions on the matters they raised. Any feedback related to local Community Board or CDA projects have been forwarded on to these committees and their Community Partnership Leaders/Community Engineers to consider.

2018 - 2028 10 Year Plan

73      Work is well underway on the programme of work related to the 2018 - 2028 10 Year Plan. This is the main activity planning and budgeting document for Council. It sets out what services and activities Council will provide, who will pay (and how) and how Council will measure its performance. The purpose of the plan is to:

·    Describe the activities of Council

·    Describe the desired community outcomes (the outcome Council aims to achieve in meeting the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions)

·    Provide for integrated decision-making and co-ordination of resources

·    Provide a basis for accountability

·    Provide a long-term focus for decisions and activities

·    Provide an opportunity for community participation in these decisions.

74      As the plan covers a ten year period (30 years for infrastructure-related assets), the process of preparing the plan is also about considering how the community (and therefore what the community needs from Council) may change in the future. This is then used to identify any key issues and decisions about Council’s activities and services with any options identified and the community consulted before final decisions are made.

75      Officers have spent the past three months focussed on reviewing Activity Management Plans which underpin the thinking behind what is needed to be done over the next ten years for each key activity area. This has also involved preparing budgets for the next ten years and, as part of this, Council’s Community Partnership Leaders have been talking to local Community Boards and CDA Subcommittees about any local projects for that period that they are considering which need to be allowed for in the budgets. Once this work is completed officers will review the financials and the ability to deliver on the work programme and discuss this with Council and local committees in the coming months.

76      Workshops are also planned with councillors over August, September and October to discuss the draft Activity Management Plans and budgets and get input into options being considered. An overview of the key stages of the process are shown in Work Plan below. Officers are working through the process and aim to have a draft of the documents prepared by the end of 2018 ready for audit in January 2018 with community consultation in March/April 2018.

Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy

77        Later this year, Council staff will commence a review of the Stewart Island Rakiura Visitor Levy. This will include a thorough review of all parts of the Levy, including reviewing the Stewart Island Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy. As part of this work, Council will be engaging with people in the District to get community views on the Levy and how it should be used.

Venture Southland Community Development

78        The Venture Southland Community Development team has also been conducting an assessment of all facilities available for community use or hire across the District on behalf of Southland District Council. Over the past few months, the team have been in contact with facility managers and users and have gain valuable feedback on what is available and community needs. We are very appreciative of the community’s assistance with this process. The community consultation has now ended and the final report – with information that will hopefully be useful for facility planning to meet current and future needs by Council and the community -  is due to be submitted to SDC at the end of August.

 

 

 

Environmental Services

Resource Management Act Amendments

79      Now that the Resource Management Act amendments have been enacted, staff are working through the implications of these. A report was presented to Council at its meeting on 21 June 2017 explaining the key changes.

80      It will be important to ensure that the Council’s RMA delegations to staff accurately reflect the new provisions of the Act. A report seeking approval for consequential amendments to these delegations is being developed.  This is important to enable staff to give effect to new provisions such as streamlined processing times for simple consents.

81      The Ministry for the Environment presented a seminar on the new National Planning Templates under the amended legislation at ICC on 21 June 2017, which a number of staff attended, although these are in their early stages and the information provided was hence fairly general.

Earthquake Prone Amendments to the Building Act 2004

82      As previously advised the Building (Earthquake-prone Buildings) Amendment Act 2016 No. 22 have now taken effect from 1 July 2017. 

83      Councillors will recall that key elements of this can be briefly summarised as setting timeframes for assessing buildings identified as potentially earthquake prone, and timeframes for strengthening such identified buildings. The assessments are based on the risk zone within which they are located (Southland District contains High, Medium and Low zones), the use of the buildings and their potential for collapse on key thoroughfares.

84      Council’s Team Leader Building Solutions Michael Marron and Senior Building Inspector Peter Meikle are developing an action plan for giving effect to these legislative amendments.

National Policy Statement for Fresh Water

85      On 5 July a number of officers and elected representatives attended a briefing and interactive discussion on the National Policy Statement for Fresh Water from the Deputy Secretary for the Environment and other senior Ministry for the Environment staff, at Environment Southland.  Officers also attended a focused session on the same topic earlier on the same day, which was more focused around discussing the implications of the delivery of this National Policy Statement for territorial authorities.

Building Control

86      The issued consents for May 2017 are down by 17%.  However, this is in the lower level consent processing category.  New houses and house alterations are up slightly.  Heating units are back significantly on the same period as last year.  The value of consented work is up by 38% which would reflect the complexity of work associated with processing the consents. 

87      There is a spike in the average cost of a new home up by 65% to $219,512 and the cost per square metre has also increased 41% to $223.66 on the same period as last year.  The department also completed 414 inspections which is also a noted increase.

88      June has shown an increase on the number of consents issued for the same period last year.  There is a noted rise in the number of consents issued for new dwellings up from 8 to 16.  This represented an additional two to three days of consent processing time.  The team also carried out 300+ inspections for the month. 

89      The size and complexity of the houses issued this month appears to be predominantly simple in design and smaller in size, this type of dwelling is typically associated with a second home or a rental property more than a large retirement or dream home. 

90      The consents issued this month will generate 414 inspections over the coming year if all work is completed in a 12 month period. 

91      Overall, the 2016/2017 financial year has proven to be similar to last year in relation to the number of consents issued - only down by 4% however the value of work has increased by 4%.  This is a reflection on the greater complexity of work being consented. 

Dog Registrations

92      Officers have been with dog registration renewals, with a number of queries being received concerning the new discount regime.  Most dog registrations are expected to be processed by around August.  Immediate benefits are expected to be high levels of compliance with the microchipping requirement, and in time a reduced rate of wandering dogs and dog nuisance. 

Food Act

93      All food businesses that were required to transfer to the new Food Act 2014 regime by 30 June 2017 have done so.  The Ministry of Primary Industries has a transfer timetable in place and it is in three phases over a three year period ending in early 2019.  The first large group of businesses, those with alcohol on-licences, have successfully transferred over.  Officers are focussing on the next group of food businesses that are required to transfer by mid-2018, a group including food service businesses without on-licences (eg some cafés and restaurants).

Combined Local Alcohol Policy

94      Gore District, Invercargill City, and Southland District Councils are starting discussions on the review of the Combined Local Alcohol Policy that is due next year.  It was adopted in 2016 and its key content was setting hours of business for alcohol licences in the region.  The other Southern Councils have yet to adopt a Local Alcohol Policy.

Rakiura Heritage Centre

95      Resource consent was lodged on 1 March to construct a heritage centre at 6 Argyle Street, Oban.  This application was limited notified to adjoining residents and two submissions were received in support.  As no submissions were received in opposition a decision can be made under delegated authority without the need for a hearing.  In late July the Rakiura Heritage Centre received a resource consent from Council.

Notice of Requirement (Edendale)

96      The submission on the proposal to realign State Highway 1 closed on 11 May.  A total of 18 submissions were received and an indicative timeframe for holding a hearing will be late August.  An Independent Commissioner will hold the hearing and make a decision on the application.

District Plan Appeals

97      The Environment Court mediation on the Proposed District Plan will be held between 8-11 August.  All five appeals will be discussed with the aim of resolving these appeals without going to a court hearing, provided that can be achieved without compromising key environmental bottom lines.

 

 

Non-notified Resource Consents and Other RMA Items

98      Resource consent application numbers being lodged with Council remain steady, with some moderate to large scale development, such as Golden Bush Mine, petrol stations, and a new Wrightson’s store currently occurring or proposed in the District. Most consents are being processed within the statutory processing timeframes.

 Fiordland/Rakiura Zone Update

99      At its meeting on 13 February 2017, the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board requested that planning staff report back in 12 months on the number and nature of resource consents required in the Fiordland/Rakiura Zone with respect to Stewart Island. This was in response to concerns raised by members of the community and the community board regarding the change in zoning and rules that apply to building on properties in the Fiordland/Rakiura Zone. 

100    As an interim update, staff can confirm only one application has been received since the February report. The application was returned in May 2017 as it was incomplete, but additional guidance was provided to the applicant to assist in completing and re-lodging the application.

101    At the 13 February meeting the Board also requested that staff include information about the new rules in the Stewart Island News. This was included in the February edition of Stewart Island News.

 

Services and Assets

Around the Mountains Cycle Trail - Business Case

102    Work is underway to look at how we might progress development of the business case looking at options for the completion of the Around the Mountains Cycle Trail.

103    The initial phase of the business case development will be an Investment Logic Mapping (ILM) workshop.  This is a workshop through which we will work through a process to identify the key problem issues and identify the options and benefits.

104    The latter part of the process develops the costs and risks of each option and so allows for the full business case to be drafted.  At this stage it is anticipated that the business case will be presented towards the end of the 2017 year.

Around the Mountains Cycle Trail - MBIE Improvements Funding

105    The Ministry for Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE) has been discussing with officers options for providing assistance to fund ‘safety’ improvements to the cycle trail on the section of road between Walter Peak and Mavora Lakes.  They have proposed a scenario where because of safety concerns for cyclists being caught in bad weather the MBIE will find the full cost of the improvements.  This will be subject to agreement with Council about future work and conditions around future funding requests. Discussions will progress with MBIE on this in the second week of July.  A teleconference is set down for Monday 10th July 2017.

Te Anau Airport - Manapouri

106    Runway works in the form of repair and maintenance is a subject that will addressed during the winter months with crack sealing commencing in the warmer summer months.  This will ensure that we get the most out of the overlay seal on the older portion of the runway.  Along with the crack sealing, runway markings will be renewed in portions of the runway effected by crack sealing and other areas that are becoming unserviceable.

107    The following statistics look over the last six years of operations and provides a steady level of overall growth in aircraft movements:

·    Large Aircraft:  On average, we get 49 movements during the summer season or just under 1.5 movements per week.  In the peak months, we get up to three movements per week and in the shoulder seasons we get one.  The percentage increase in aircraft movements over the six year period is approximately 10%.

·    Small Aircraft:  On average, we get 246 movements during the summer season or just under seven movements per week.  The season doesn’t have many highs and low and is mainly constant due to proximity of training organisations in Dunedin and Invercargill, helicopter transit flights from Queenstown and two resident commercial transport operations.  There is a slight decline in small aircraft movements this summer season of approximately 6%.  This is due to commercial transport operators using larger aircraft which is reflected in a slightly higher revenue take relating to higher landing charges.  Less private aircraft owners have additional discretionary income which has been reported by several small aerodromes adding to this decline.

SIESA (PowerNet)

108    The replacement of high voltage strain insulators didn’t progress during May as planned due to unavailability of resource from Invercargill.  The plan was to replace the ‘kidney’ strain insulators in Horseshoe Bay Road and Miro Street, this would have necessitated an outage for the commercial area of Oban.  The intention is now to complete some of the “end of circuit” replacements which can be managed by station staff.  The large section through Oban will be completed prior to the busy part of the tourist year begins.

109    As part of the line survey the four streetlight poles outside the school have been identified as not being suitable for further use with cracks in the concrete and electrical covers being “taped on”.  These will be replaced with bollard type lights, during LED Streetlight upgrade project.

110    The tripping issue with Unit 5 has been addressed. As part of the fuel line / day tank installation bunding pipes were installed across the station driveway and connection of pipework and installation of new pumps will be undertaken shortly.

SIESA Management and Service Delivery Review Update

111    Staff have approached consultants Morrison Low for a proposal to carry out this work.  The intention is to coordinate it with similar reviews for two other business units, those being the forestry unit and the Te Anau airport unit.  There are similarities with all three business units even though they are all very different services.  Carrying out reviews of the three units simultaneously will be more cost effective. 

112    The cost of SIESA share of this phase one scoping work is in the range of $3000 to $4000 dollars.  This can be funded from the Consultants budget.  

Envirolink Stewart Island Hydro Report Review Update

113    In relation to SIESA scoping a review of the Envirolink Stewart Island Hydro Report, staff are aware that the Stewart Island District Councillor has contacted Opus consultants, and provided them with a copy of the report.  Mr Ian Walsh from Opus has been asked to get in contact once he has viewed the report.

114    It is the understanding of staff that Mr Ian Walsh has indicated he intended to provide some advice at no cost to the Stewart Island Community Board.  If a report was then required then that would need to be scoped and paid for.

 

Stewart Island - Roading Bylaw Update

115    As the Roading Bylaw currently sits, Council are unable to make adjustments to the parking situation in Elgin Terrace on Stewart Island alone without triggering a full District Bylaw amendment/updating and submission process.

116    The Strategic Transport Department are in the planning stages of undertaking an update of the existing Council Roading Bylaw and Roading Policy and Policy Procedure documents. Due to the size of the District and implementing a number of changes (i.e. there are many other parking changes around the District that have been requested and are still awaiting confirmation), this process is likely to take in the vicinity of 6-8+ months to complete (probably longer when factoring in submission periods).

117    The Strategic Transport Department have recently had a new staff member join the team and this frees up some capacity to undertake this process more promptly.

118    There are possible options to make areas ‘no parking’ zones under Temporary Traffic Management for short periods of time, however this has a number of complications around legalities if any infringements are issued and contested.

119    The Strategic Transport Department would also encourage and support a wider community education and communication stance to support any longer term legislative and enforcement avenues taken.

Forestry (IFS)

120    Harvesting continues with 40,000 tonnes harvested to the end of May.  Log prices and yields continue to improve against budget, with a healthy net position forecast by year’s end of $2.9M.

 

Community Centres

121    Edendale hall is on the market for disposal by way of a fixed price given that only one tender was received, which was significantly lower than the market analysis.  No action taken yet on the disposal of the Hokonui hall.  Menzies Ferry is in a similar situation, however work has commenced to survey out the local war memorial to be retained by Council, prior to starting the local community consultation about closing the hall.

Community Housing

122    Occupancy still reasonably high across the district with the external painting project at Wyndham and Edendale completed.

Office Buildings

123    Refurbishment has been completed for some rooms in the Invercargill office, as the final step of the reorganisation to allow teams to operate together rather than continue to be separated.

Public Conveniences

124    Predominantly, business as usual when it comes to operations, however the budgets clearly show an increase in costs for those toilets situated on the main tourist routes.  The upgrade project at Colac Bay has been deferred until the Foreshore Road access issues have been resolved.

125    A project is currently underway to identify Council facilities that have wash basins or taps connected to non-Council provided water supplies. Once identified then the appropriate signage about its use will be provided.

 

Water Structures

126    Plans are underway to do some initial investigations of the Waiau River boat ramps to identify any urgent issues to be included in this Long Term Plan.  A more detailed inspection will be undertaken prior to the next Long Term Plan.

127    Licence Agreements with private berth owners at Riverton is progressing with a majority signed and returned.  The outstanding ones will be followed up.

Curio Bay Project

128    Ongoing with Council’s waste water project and Department of Conservation’s carpark completed.  The South Catlins Trust has the new camping amenities building operational as well as commencing construction on the new heritage building.  An ancillary project has resulted from all this development and the three parties in conjunction with other interest groups, are involved in a planting programme on the reserve to increase the habitat for the Yellow Eyed Penguins.

 

Land and Water Plan Implementation

129    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.

130    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.

131    Council staff, consultants and legal counsel have now prepared evidence for presentation at a hearing in September where submissions on the proposed Water and Land Plan will be heard.  Evidence has been prepared in conjunction with both Gore District and Invercargill City Councils given that the range of issues arising from the plan are likely to have an impact on each Territorial Local Authorities.

Havelock North Drinking Water Inquiry

132    The Government established an Inquiry into the issues relating to the contamination of the Havelock North Water Supply last year.  The inquiry was originally due to report back to Government by 31 March 2017.  The report back date has now been extended and split into two separate phases.

133    Stage 1 will address matters relating directly to the Havelock North water contamination incident and the response to that incident.  It will include findings of fact and fault.  Stage 1 findings were released in May.  Key findings include:

·      Contamination of drinking water was confirmed as the source of the outbreak

·      Contamination is understood to have arisen from inundation of neighbouring paddocks resulting in water from a pond entering the aquifer around 90m from the bore identified as the source

·      Failings on the part of both the District Council and Regional Council, although not directly responsible for the outbreak, were definitely a contributory factor

·      Lack of contingency planning by the District Council

·      Failure of technical advisers to adequately assess and report on security of the bore heads.

134    Water and Waste staff are currently working through understanding the implications of the findings in relation to the 12 community water supplies for which Council has responsibility.

135    Stage 2 will address the broader systemic issues and provide recommendations about managing water supply across New Zealand.  It will examine the existing statutory and regulatory regimes involved in delivering drinking-water to see if improvements can be made.  Stage 2 of the Inquiry is now due to be reported back by 8 December 2017.

136    The recommendations coming out of Stage 2 of the Inquiry are expected to be of significance for all local authorities.

 

Alternative Coastal Route Seal Extension Project

137    A sod-turning and blessing for the commencement of the Alternative Coastal Route Seal Extension Project was held in May.  

138    There is a high level of ‘enthusiasm’ and support from the local community for the project, which is making it easier for the contractors undertaking the work.

District-Wide Resurfacing Contract

139    The Services and Assets Committee have approved the release of tenders for two three-year road resurfacing contracts. The decision to combine the work into three year contracts was made to try and achieve better value for money and mitigate the ‘peak and trough’ variables which come from having single year contracts.

Community Engineering

140    The wind turbine is programmed for removal on the 23rd/24th August by Energy 3. An indicative price has been received and this in well within the budget outline of $40,000 approved at the April Community Board meeting.  Council staff will be overseeing the removal of the turbine and access to the property is being discussed prior to the work being undertaken. Council staff will organise any equipment required for the removal.

141    Aggregate supply both on and to the island is an issue at present. This may cause delays further down the track with projects if supply cannot be sorted as soon as possible.

 

Finance

142    Income for the Stewart Island Community Board in the year to date shows lower than expected. This is attributed to income planned but not yet received from the Stewart Island Visitor Levy (SIVL) applications for the 3 outstanding projects in the 16/17 Long Term Plan (LTP) (Golden Bay to Fuschia Walkway footpath, major walking track maintenance, and investigation of Mill Creek to Bathing Beach track).  Funding for these projects has now been approved, and work for these will be undertaken in 2017/18.  Income will correct at the final end of year report. 

143    Income for Moturau Gardens is over budget due to grants received for additional work undertaken.

144    Expenditure for the Stewart Island Community Board is lower than expected in the year to date budget.  This is due to savings in the required mowing at the cemetery, beautification of smaller walking tracks, normal maintenance at Traill Park not required and no maintenance or replacement of equipment required at the playground.

145    Capital expenditure for the Stewart Island Community Board is showing over budget.  This is largely due to emergency drain renewal of approximately $40,000.  Refuse collection is under budget as not required to budgeted level.  Street works is under budget due to footpaths and road sealing coming in under the budgeted amount.

146    The final 30 June budgets for SIESA were not available at the time of writing this report. The finalised 30 June report will be prepared and be available for the October Stewart Island Community Board meeting. If the financial graph is available prior to the next meeting it will be distributed to the Board as soon as it is available. 

 

 

Recommendation

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Council Report” dated 10 August 2017.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.  

 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

sdclogo

 

Stewart Island/Rakiura Golden Bay Wharf Update

Record No:        R/17/7/17381

Author:                 Michelle Stevenson, Community Partnership Leader

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        The purpose of this report is to advise the Stewart Island Community Board of the recommendations in relation to Golden Bay wharf adopted at the 21 June 2017 Council meeting.  The report submitted to Council was Publically Excluded under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, and Council resolved in the interests of community awareness to have recommendations from the report made public.

 

Executive Summary

2        On Wednesday 21 June 2017, Council received the report titled Stewart Island/Rakiura Golden Bay Wharf Ownership.

3        Council determined that this matter was recognised as significant in terms of Section 76 of the Local Government Act 2002.

4        Council resolved to accept the following recommendations:

a)   Supports the preparation of a report to Council for 6 September Council meeting that will include the capital development and asset management plan for Golden Bay wharf, and will also outline the engineering requirements, costs and any associated investment and health and safety implications for ownership of the wharf.

b)   Endorses staff to continue to work with Southport NZ to investigate Council ownership of Golden Bay wharf.

c)   Endorses staff to investigate the immediate, medium and long term costs and funding options associated with Golden Bay wharf as a Council asset as per the capital development plan and asset management plan preparation.

5        Council staff will proceed with the preparation of a report to the 6 September 2017 Council meeting, where additional recommendations will be made, based on the information provided to Council.

 

Recommendation

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Stewart Island/Rakiura Golden Bay Wharf Update” dated 31 July 2017.

 

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report. 

 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

sdclogo

 

Stewart Island Wharfing Provision Community and Stakeholder Engagement

Record No:        R/17/7/17352

Author:                 Michelle Stevenson, Community Partnership Leader

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        The purpose of this report is to submit to the Stewart Island Community Board the Stewart Island Wharfing Provision Community and Stakeholder Engagement report.  This report was commissioned by Southland District Council to an independent Consultant Sandra James from Connecting People and was received at the Community and Policy Committee Meeting 9 August 2017.

 

Executive Summary

2        The purpose of this community and stakeholder engagement project was to investigate a more strategic approach to the current and future provision of wharves on Stewart Island.  This includes the demand for each wharf, their usage and quality, and identify the need for an overall medium to long term capital development provision and maintenance plan.

3        Council determined in late 2016 it was important to understand what the residents, ratepayers and stakeholders believed were the best options for the wharves, including the five Southland District Council owned wharves, and Golden Bay wharf, currently owned by Southport NZ who wish to divest this wharf to the Council.

4        Halfmoon Bay wharf, the primary commercial and ferry wharf to the Island, currently owned by Southport NZ was specifically excluded from this consultation process.

5        There were three key objectives to be met in this research, linked to assessing the current situation and future opportunities and strategies.

·    Objective one was to identify the current use, user and owner needs of the wharfing infrastructure, and what opportunities need to be developed to support future provision requirements.

·    Objective two was to determine a community engagement and consultation process that will determine the short, medium and long term user needs of the wharves.  This should include but not be limited to; an understanding of how the wharves are perceived by the Islanders, the perceived and actual value of the wharves, the implications for Islanders of any reduction or privatisation in wharf access.

·    Objective three was to determine a key stakeholder engagement process that will include but not be limited to; tourism industry users, aquaculture users and freight companies; identify actual and perceived implications for any changes to the current wharfing infrastructure.

6        The report submitted to Council is well presented and informative.  It identifies a number of key issues for Council to consider and makes recommendations based on the information gathered throughout the community and stakeholder engagement process. 

7        The role of the consultant was to capture the views and opinions of the Stewart Island community and wider stakeholder groups in relation to the six wharves identified in this project.

8        The methodology for the engagement included face-to-face meetings with key stakeholders, drop-in sessions, a conversation café, correspondence via email and an online/paper survey.  There were 60 participants in the individual/group consultations and 102 respondents completed the online/paper survey.

9        The report identifies some key findings that include:

·    The wharves are identified by most respondents as critical infrastructure for the Island, likened to their State Highway One. 

·    Golden Bay and Ulva Island were seen as the most critical wharves, however most believed that all the existing wharves were important and should be kept.  There were some suggestions that should prioritisation be required, Little Glory could be sold as it was predominantly utilised by a single commercial operator and therefore not a ‘public’ wharf

·    There was a strong theme for the ownership of wharves to remain or be with Southland District Council as district assets, with local input into their management

·    The report identified from community and stakeholder feedback the need for the urgent replacement of Golden Bay and Ulva Island wharves.  Most reported that these wharves were neither safe nor functional in their current states (Ulva Island wharf is currently scheduled for full replacement in 2019/20)

·    To minimise current tensions at Golden Bay wharf, any future wharf should consider the needs of all users and ensure adequate access, parking and wharf facilities

·    Although specifically excluded from the scope of this report, those consulted with expressed that Halfmoon Bay wharf was also a strategic community asset to the Island, and should be seen as more than a commercial venture

·    The engagement uncovered a strong sentiment from the community and stakeholders that the wharves had been mismanaged under both private and public ownership, with little or no accountability.  This potentially left the community infrastructure vulnerable and having a direct impact on commercial, recreational and everyday living on Stewart Island

·    There was also a strong sentiment that there was no long term strategic planning or budget considerations for wharves, which led to a reactionary approach. There was a real desire for Council to take a leadership approach to managing the wharves with clear and accountable plans, which are developed in partnership with the Community.  There was a strong desire for this partnership approach to be developed and agreed jointly

·    There was unanimous agreement that the wharves should be self-funding and not a burden on rate payers alone.  Partnership funding opportunities included DOC, Environment Southland, better utilisation of the Stewart Island Visitor Levy, and user-pays in a more equitable system

·    There was an opportunity identified to review the function and tasks of the Jetties Sub-Committee

·    The report identified some frustrations and evidence of poor and competitive behaviours around the wharves.  There was an opportunity identified for better policing and regulations around the wharves 

·    The report identified a lack of opportunity for young people on the Island to be involved in decision making

·    An overall agreement that the process for the community and stakeholder engagement had been an independent and open opportunity.

10      The report makes a number of recommendations for Council to consider and has ranked these in order of priority based on the observations and assessment of the consultant, and the feedback received through the community and stakeholder engagement process.

Next Steps

11      Council staff, with the endorsement of Council, will assess the recommendations made by the independent consultant and determine any future opportunities in relation to Council activities and work streams.

12      Staff will assess any recommendations in relation to the on-going work around the future ownership of Golden Bay wharf.

13      The Stewart Island Wharves Community and Stakeholder Engagement report is a public document and available to the Island community.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Stewart Island Wharfing Provision Community and Stakeholder Engagement” dated 10 August 2017.

 

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.  

 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

sdclogo

 

Stewart Island Rakiura Community Facilities Assessment

Record No:        R/17/7/17351

Author:                 Michelle Stevenson, Community Partnership Leader

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        The purpose of this report is to submit to the Stewart Island Community Board the Stewart Island Rakiura Facilities Assessment.  This work was commissioned by Southland District Council to be undertaken as part of the Letter of Expectation to Venture Southland Community Development.  The research was subcontracted to Impact Consulting by Venture Southland.

2        The report was submitted and received by Council at the Community and Policy Committee Meeting 21 June 2017.

 

Executive Summary

3        The purpose of this research was to investigate the public community facilities on Stewart Island to gain an understanding of the current use and future sustainability of the facilities.  The research would also investigate if current community facilities were fit-for-purpose, and identify any planned community facilities for the Island.

4        The primary objective of this research was to provide an operational and financial assessment of the current use and likely future demand for facilities, and how this could be met in a sustainable and affordable way by the Stewart Island community.

5        There were two key objectives to be met in this research, linked to evaluating the current situation and assessing gaps and future options.

·    Objective one was to determine the current use of public community facilities and the costs and income associated with the facilities, and the likely demand for future use.

·    Objective two was to provide a summary of findings, observations and recommendations that might assist the Stewart Island community to have an appropriate level of fit-for-purpose and sustainable community facilities now and in the future.

6        For the purpose of this research, the definition of community facilities related to all facilities that were available for use by members of the community, either free of charge or by hire.

7        The report submitted to Council is well presented and in a clear and easy to read format.  It identifies that the Stewart Island community are currently well placed with community facilities that are largely well utilised, have flexibility in use, are volunteer driven, and debt free with a strong sense of community ownership.

8        The existing facilities are generally considered financially sustainable, and in most cases hold operational reserves and operate at break-even or surplus.

9        The research identified a potential gap in community facilities to cater for organisations seeking smaller professional spaces for meetings, and made some recommendations towards meeting this need.

10      The report authors have also suggested that given the static and unlikely increase in population for Stewart Island and as the current facilities are sustainable and fit-for-purpose, any anticipated future community facility demands are likely to be driven by tourism growth rather than the resident population.

11      The overall response from Stewart Islanders interviewed were that they are well catered for in community facilities that complement each other rather than compete, and that current facilities met the needs of the community.  There is limited value in investigating greater efficiency in community facilities use at this time.

Next steps

12      Council have endorsed staff to assess the recommendations and findings identified in the research and determine any future opportunities in relation to Council activities and work streams.

13      The Stewart Island Rakiura Community Facilities Assessment is available as a public document for the Island community.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Stewart Island Rakiura Community Facilities Assessment” dated 10 August 2017.

b)        

 

 

Attachments

a         Stewart Island Rakiura Community Facilities Assessment Final Report    

 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

 


 


 


 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

sdclogo

 

Review of the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy

Record No:        R/17/8/17652

Author:                 Robyn Rout, Policy Analyst

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        This report is to notify the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board (the Board) that Council is starting to review the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy (the Levy). Council is interested in receiving some preliminary information from the Board, about aspects of the Levy that may need to be changed.

Background

2        The Board will be aware that the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw has required all individuals travelling to Stewart Island/Rakiura to pay $5 by way of a levy or revenue, since October 2013 (unless the visitor is exempt under the Act or pays a local fare).

3        The Southland District Council (Stewart Island/ Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Act 2012 (the Act) states the levies and revenue collected must be used to:

-     fund activities used by visitors;

-     fund activities on the Island for the benefit of visitors;

-     mitigate the adverse effects of visitors on the environment of the Island.

4        A Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Subcommittee meet annually to review applications and allocate funding. The Subcommittee are supported by a Technical Advisory Group who provide strategic insight and technical expertise regarding funding applications.

 

Issues

5        As the Levy has been in place for nearly 5 years, Council is scheduled to undertake a full review of the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw.

6        Council is keen to receive information from the Board, at this preliminary stage of the review, on any aspects of the Levy that may need to be changed. There is not an unfettered ability to make changes to the Levy, as Council is bound by the requirements of the Act.

7        Council will also be sending letters out to other key stakeholders, seeking their input in this pre-consultation process.

8        After pre-consultation has been undertaken, if there is a desire to change aspects of the Levy, staff will be seeking Council to endorse proposed amendments to the Policy and/or Bylaw, and to release them out for full community consultation. At this stage it is looking like public consultation will take place for two months, starting in October this year.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Review of the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy” dated 8 August 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)         Notes that Council is starting to review the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy.

d)         Notes that Council is keen for the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board to provide feedback on aspects of the Levy that may need to be changed.                 

 

Attachments

a         Southland District Council Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw

b         Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy    

 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

 

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL

 

STEWART ISLAND/RAKIURA VISITOR LEVY BYLAW 2012

 

This Bylaw is made under the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Act 2012 in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002.

 

 

1.         TITLE AND COMMENCEMENT

 

(a)        This Bylaw may be cited as the Southland District Council
Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw 2012.

 

(b)        This shall come into operation on 1 October 2013.

 

 

2.         PURPOSE OF BYLAW

 

            This Bylaw is made to prescribe:

 

            (a)   The rate of the levy that shall be imposed on or in respect of visitors; and

 

(b)        The means by which the levy is to be collected.

 

This Bylaw does not apply to a person who travels to or from
Stewart Island/Rakiura under a contract of carriage with an Approved Operator (as defined in the Act) or who is otherwise excluded from the definition of visitor under the Act.  As at the date of this Bylaw the Approved Operators are Real Journeys Limited (on behalf of Stewart Island Experience Limited), Stewart Island Flights Limited and ISS McKay Limited (as agent for the cruise ship operators)

 

 

3.         INTERPRETATION

 

            In this Bylaw, unless the context requires otherwise:

 

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

 

"Council" means the Southland District Council.

 

"GST" means goods and services tax chargeable under the Goods and Services Act 1985.

 

"Levy" means the levy set under clause 4 of this Bylaw.

 

"Visitor" has the same meaning as in the Act.  For the avoidance of doubt, as at the date of this Bylaw this excludes a person who travels to or from
Stewart Island/Rakiura under a contract of carriage with an Approved Operator (as defined in the Act) or who is otherwise excluded from the definition of visitor under the Act.  

 


 

 

4.         LEVY FOR VISITORS TO STEWART ISLAND/RAKIURA

 

The levy for a visitor who travels to Stewart Island/Rakiura is $5 (inclusive of GST).  

 

 

5.         SURROUNDING ISLANDS

 

For the avoidance of doubt, a visitor who has paid a levy for travel to
Stewart Island/Rakiura shall not be required to pay an additional levy for return travel from Stewart Island/Rakiura to a surrounding Island. 

 

 

6.         MEANS OF COLLECTION OF LEVIES

 

Levies will be collected:

 

(a)        By the Council at its offices and on the Council's website (when available); and

 

(b)        By agents of the Council appointed to collect levies on its behalf.  Details of the agents who have been appointed to collect levies will be given on the signs erected by the Council at major points of entry on
Stewart Island/Rakiura under Section 5(3) of the Act and on the Council's website.  

 

 

7.         OFFENCES AND PENALTIES

 

A person commits an infringement offence under the Act who:

 

(a)   Evades the payment of a Levy payable by that person; or

 

(b)   Falsely claims that he or she is not a visitor.

 

The infringement fee for each infringement offence will be set by regulations made under the Act. 

 

This Bylaw has been made and confirmed by a resolution passed at a meeting of the Southland District Council held on Wednesday 12 December 2012.

 

 

THE COMMON SEAL of the                            }

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL                }

was hereunto affixed in the presence of:          }

 

                                                                           MAYOR

 

 

                                                                           CHIEF EXECUTIVE

 

 

 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 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.

 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 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. 

 

 


Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board

15 August 2017

sdclogo

 

Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board Representative on Rakiura Heritage Centre Trust

Record No:        R/17/8/17542

Author:                 Kirsten Hicks, Committee Advisor/Customer Support Partner

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        The purpose of the report is to decide whether to appoint a Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board representative to the Rakiura Heritage Centre Trust.

2        A request has been received from Margaret Hopkins, Chairperson of the Rakiura Heritage Centre Trust, asking the Community Board for representation on this Trust, which meets monthly.

3        Board Members are asked to consider nominating one member for this position.

 

Recommendation

That the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board Representative on Rakiura Heritage Centre Trust” dated 3 August 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)         Decides whether to appoint a Community Board member to the Rakiura Heritage Centre Trust.

 


 

Content

Background

4          In the past, the Community Board has had a representative on this Trust. Currently member Anita Geeson is involved representing the Stewart Island Promotion Association. As the Trust progresses to the construction stage of this project, it may be considered advantageous to have Board input.

 

Issues

5              Members need to be aware of the importance of declaring a conflict of interest, should the situation arise.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.