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

 

Date:                            

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Wednesday, 11 October 2017

3.00pm

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

 

Te Anau Community Board Agenda

OPEN

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Chairperson

Rachel Cockburn

 

Deputy Chairperson

Sarah Greaney

 

Members

Shaun Cantwell

 

 

Mary Chartres

 

 

Kara Matheson

 

 

Tony O'Loughlin

 

Councillor

Ebel Kremer

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE

 

Committee Advisor

Jenny Labruyere

 

Community Partnership Leader

Simon Moran

 

Chief Financial Officer

Anne Robson

 

Strategic Property Manager

Kevin McNaught

 

 

 

 

 

 

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.

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

 

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

7.1         Council Report                                                                                                                                                   15

7.2         Financial Report to Te Anau Community Board for the year ended 30 June 2017   33

7.3         Strategic Framework 2018 - 2028 Long Term Plan                                                                       47

7.4         Te Anau Community Board - Local Budgets for the Long Term Plan 2018-28             53

7.5         Te Anau Airport Manapouri - Local Budgets for the Long Term Plan 2018-28           89

7.6         Support for the 2018 GODZone Event                                                                                              107

7.7         Receipt of feedback on proposal to remove only one tree from the Henry Street reserve                                                                                                                                                                                  109

7.8         Consideration of the submissions and objections in relation to the proposal to remove the trees from the Henry Street reserve                                                                                         129

7.9         Request from the Te Anau Boating Club for Council to take over the swimming platform in Lake Te Anau                                                                                                                                              147

7.10       Te Anau Community Rating Boundary Review - Milford Sound                                       161

7.11       The Pontoon Project                                                                                                                                   169

7.12       Welcome Ambassador Pilot                                                                                                                    171

7.13       Southland Regional Development Strategy (SoRDS) Submission                                  173  

CHAIRPERSON’S Reports

Councillor's Report  


1             Apologies

 

An apology for non-attendance has been lodged by Member Cockburn.

 

2             Leave of absence

 

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

 

3             Conflict of Interest

 

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

 

4             Public Forum

 

Mr Lloyd Matheson will be present to speak in the public forum section of the meeting on the following subject;

 

·         Civil Defence

 

5             Extraordinary/Urgent Items

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

6             Confirmation of Minutes

6.1          Meeting minutes of Te Anau Community Board, held on 13 September 2017 .


 

 

 

Te Anau Community Board

 

OPEN MINUTES

 

Unconfirmed

 

 

 

Minutes of a meeting of Te Anau Community Board held in the Distinction Te Anau Hotel & Villas, 64 Lakefront Drive, Te Anau on Wednesday, 13 September 2017 at 1.30pm.

 

present

 

Chairperson

Rachel Cockburn

 

Deputy Chairperson

Sarah Greaney

 

Members

Shaun Cantwell

 

 

Mary Chartres

 

 

Kara Matheson

 

 

Tony O'Loughlin

 

Councillor

Ebel Kremer

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE

 

Committee Advisor

Jenny Labruyere

 

Strategic Manager Property

Kevin McNaught

 

Strategic Manager Transport

Hartley Hare

 

Safety Systems Roading Engineer

Roy Clearwater

 

 

 

PUBLIC GALLERY

 

P Applegarth, A Carran, M Cullin, G Garden, S McNamara, A Petrie, A Suchanski, M Sliva, J Turner

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

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

 

There were no conflicts of interest declared.

 

4          Public Forum

 

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

 

·           Consideration of the submissions and objections in relation to the proposal to remove the trees from the Henry Street reserve.

 

Mrs S McNamara

 

Mrs McNamara read a letter on behalf of K & R Stones 19 Henry Street who are in support of the removal of the beech trees in the Henry Street reserve due to their property being directly adjacent to the trees and believe the non-removal of the trees is not being considerate to neighbouring properties.

 

Mrs McNamara stated that she personally is also in support for the removal of the trees or at least a reduction by a third of the height.

 

Mrs P Applegarth

 

Mrs Applegarth read a letter on behalf of S & V McCallum 20 Henry Street who are in support of the removal of the trees or the trimming of the trees in the least, although they recognise the on-going cost of trimming and maintenance as not being ideal.

 

Mrs Applegarth presented her own personal submission in support of removal of the trees and feels their removal will have little impact on birdlife in the area but recognises that a trimming/maintenance programme will have an on-going cost to the ratepayers however believes if the trees are allowed to continue growing the problem will only worsen in the future.

 

A Suchanski

 

Ms Suchanski stated she is an objector to the removal of the beech trees in the reserve due to the visual impact and the habitat provided for native bird life in the stand of trees.  Ms Suchanski provided detail of a survey she undertook of local residences and tis survey clearly shows that all are in support for the retention of the trees as they stand.

 

 

 

 

M Sliva

 

Mr Sliva stated he also objects to the removal of the trees and is infact in favour of the planting of more such stands of trees in the town stating that he believes Te Anau is one of the few township to have so much native birdlife in a suburban area.

 

A Petrie

 

Mr Petrie outlined the background history to Henry Street Reserve and the planting of native trees in the park, with the permission of such plantings coming from neighbouring properties.

 

In his submission Mr Petrie bought the Board’s attention to the Reserve Management Act 1977 and the Resource Management Act 1991 in regard ‘the maintenance and enhancement of amenity values’ and that the beech trees in question are the largest grouping of native trees in the township.  Mr Petri added the stand of trees form the natural habitat for numerous native forest birds species which form an integral part of the flora and fauna within the town.

 

Mr Petrie asked that the request to remove the trees from the reserve be declined.

 

Moved Member O’Loughlin, seconded Member Greaney and resolved that the Te Anau Community Board moves out of public forum.

 

5          Extraordinary/Urgent Items

 

There were no Extraordinary/Urgent items.

 

6          Confirmation of Minutes

 

Resolution

Moved Member O'Loughlin, seconded Cr Kremer 

Confirms the minutes of Te Anau Community Board meeting, held on 16 August 2017.

 

Reports

 

 

7.1

Consideration of the submissions and objections in relation to the proposal to remove the trees from the Henry Street reserve

Record No:         R/17/8/19521

 

Mr K McNaught (Strategic Property Manager), advised the purpose of the report is to consider the submissions and objections in relation to the proposal to remove the trees from the Henry Street reserve as well as make a decision after considering the submissions and objections.

Mr McNaught outlined that the Board at its meeting in April 2017 this year considered a report and legal advice in regard to a request by some neighbours to remove the stand of Beech trees in the Henry Street reserve.

3        Mr McNaught stated that the Board agreed with the request, but the Board’s decision was subject to public notification of the proposal and to seek feedback from the wider community.   In addition to the latter conditions a separate decision made at the meeting was that after the public notification process the Board either confirms or amends its position on the request.  Six submissions and objections were received on the proposal.

4        Mr McNaught added that Council has delegated to the Community Board the authority to hear and decide on the submissions and objections, as opposed to the Board considering these separately and having to make a recommendation to Council. 

At this point Mr McNaught outlined the legal and statutory requirements the Board must comply with noting that as the trees are located on a reserve which is subject to the provisions of the Reserves Act 1977.

In discussing the report presented and considering comments from the public forum members suggested whether it was possible for a variation to the decision such as; the removal of one tree closest to the adjacent boundary would meet the provisions while retaining the value of the asset.

In discussing this option the Board agreed to give further speaking rights to the submitters present so as to seek clarification from the submitters as to whether they would consider such an option.

Mrs McNamara spoke on behalf of those seeking the removal of the trees advising she would be in agreement to consider the option.

Mr Petrie spoke on behalf of those who do not wish to see the removal of trees stating that he believed this option would need further consideration before committing  any decision.

Mr McNaught advised the Board could consider the potential alternative to the recommendation outlined in the report and suggested a letter be sent to all submitters for further feedback with the altered report to be resubmitted to the Board’s October meeting.

The Board agreed for an amendment to the recommendation and the report “lie on the table’ pending further consultation and response from the submitters in regard to the option for the possible removal of one tree adjacent to the neighbouring property.

 

 

 

Resolution

Moved Cr Kremer, seconded Member Matheson 

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Consideration of the submissions and objections in relation to the proposal to remove the trees from the Henry Street reserve” dated 7 September 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 after considering the objections and submissions in relation to the proposal to remove the stand of Beech trees from the Henry Street reserve that the report ‘lie on the table’ and await further response from the submitters in regard to the potential to remove one tree immediately adjacent the neighbours property at the eastern end of the reserve.

Adjournment of Meeting

 

Moved Cr Kremer, seconded Member Matheson and resolved that the meeting be adjourned to allow the completion of a workshop that staff were required for and then enable staff to leave the meeting.

 

1.40pm  At this point the meeting was adjourned to allow for the conclusion of a workshop at which members of the staff were permitted to take part.

 

Reconvening of Meeting

 

2.00pm Moved Chairperson Cockburn, seconded Deputy Chairperson Greaney and resolved that the meeting be reconvened.

 

 

7.2

Milford Crescent Minor Improvements

Record No:         R/17/8/20390

 

Moved Member Cr Kremer, seconded Member Greaney and resolved that Te Anau Community Board go into public forum to allow members of the public to speak.

 

A Carran

 

Mrs Carran informed the Board of her own survey that she conducted to capture numbers of users of the existing crossing area and how she considered the relocation of the crossing on Milford Crescent would not solve the issues of jaywalkers and how best to make the area work for all.   Mrs Carran requested the Board reconsider the plans and go back to the community for further consultation to seek additional advantages for not moving the crossing.

 

Mrs Carran was advised that the concept was about the whole of the crescent traffic control and not just the proposed moving of the existing crossing.

 

Moved Member Matheson, seconded Member O’Loughlin and resolved that the  Te Anau Community Board moves out of public forum.

 

Mr H Hare (Strategic Manager Transport) and R Clearwater (Roading Engineer) presented the report entitled “Milford Crescent Minor Improvements”.

 

1          Staff outlined to the Board that Council (SDC) are proposing to carry out some minor improvements on Milford Crescent in Te Anau to improve the safety and performance of this road.  These improvements also will tie-in with the Wong Way development.

Comment was made that numerous issues on this particular project have been previously raised with Council and staff have proposed a number of interventions to assist in resolving such as;

·         Upgrade the existing pedestrian crossing by the school so that it is raised similar to the courtesy crossing at the other end of Milford Crescent.  This will result in traffic calming and reduce the speed of vehicles westbound on Milford Crescent.

·         A painted median (wide centreline) in the centre of the Milford Crescent will take up redundant space and give a ‘feel’ of being narrow which will also be a good traffic calming intervention.  This will also provide the safety benefit of additional lane separation and provide more tracking space for larger vehicles.

·         Relocate the existing pedestrian crossing outside the ‘The Lane’ down to the supermarket entrance.  This ties in nicely with the Wong Way development and will hopefully mitigate the majority of Jay-Walkers on Milford Crescent.  The Supermarket entrance will be relocated up to where the existing crossing point is to improve conflict points in the car park (this however is not a council project).

·         The kerbs either side of the lane will be removed to provide more space for wider lanes, median separation and wider carparks on the north side.  This will also allow cyclists to safely traverse westbound without encroaching live traffic lanes.

·         A number of plantings will be installed that both improve safety aspects as well as improving the general aesthetics of the area.

·         Funding for this proposal is through SDC Roading under NZTA work Category 341 – Minor Improvements.

2          Staff noted that the most contentious proposal is the relocation of the existing pedestrian crossing and although the location ties in nicely with the walkway between the supermarket and Mitre 10 carpark, however from a safety perspective this conflicting location between left turning vehicles from ‘The Lane’ and pedestrian movements is less than desirable. The most desirable location given some infrastructural obstructions is at the proposed new location in front of the supermarket.  Previously council could not relocate to this location due to the existing supermarket entrance, but with their proposed new access location Council can now relocate to here. 

3          Staff advised that results from a survey support that the pedestrian crossing would be better relocated to the proposed location and sought the Board’s support to proceed the project as proposed.

 

Following a lengthy discussion on the report Members agreed to the majority of the proposal, however did not agree to the relocation of the pedestrian crossing but that it remain in-situ.  

 

Members did consent to retain the existing crossing and remove some of the car parks on the western side of the crossing to allow for better visibility for vehicles when entering/exiting the newly proposed Supermarket entrance.  Members believed the close proximity of the entrance to the existing crossing would mean drivers would not have the space to be travelling at speed leading up to the crossing.

 

Members also agreed that a review of the of the Pedestrian crossing area  and impact of the changes be carried out within the next 12 months to assess the impacts of not relocating the pedestrian crossing.

 

 

Resolution

Moved Cr Kremer, seconded Member O'Loughlin 

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Milford Crescent Minor Improvements” dated 7 September 2017.

 

b)         Agree to support the proposal and for the Southland District Council’s Roading Department to proceed with the project as proposed with an amendment of the existing pedestrian crossing to remain in-situ and a number of car parks to be removed on the western side of the newly proposed supermarket entrance to allow for better visibility.

 

c)         Agrees that the retention of the pedestrian crossing and improvement works be reviewed in the next 12 months to assess the impacts and such to be included in conjunction with the Board’s town planning programme.

 

 

Committee Reports

 

 

 

Chairperson's Report

Record No:         R/17/9/21304

 

There was no report from the Chairperson.

 

 

 

Councillor's Report

 

 

 

Councillor's Report

Record No:         R/17/9/21307

 

There was no report from Councillor Kremer.

 

 

 

 

The meeting concluded at 4.20pm                CONFIRMED AS A TRUE AND CORRECT RECORD AT A MEETING OF THE Te Anau Community Board HELD ON 13 SEPTEMBER 2017.

 

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Council Report

Record No:        R/17/9/21162

Author:                 Simon Moran, Community Partnership Leader

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Chief Executive

Civil Defence Review

1        As noted previously Central Government have appointed a Technical Advisory Group to review the policy settings within which Civil Defence across NZ operates. The appointment of the Group follows on from a number of recent events in which questions have been asked about the effectiveness of the response.

2        The Group which was appointed by Government to carry out the review has now completed its engagement and consultation with local government. Their engagement process has included attending local government sector meetings and the LGNZ Conference, as well as individual meetings across the country.

3        The Group is on track to provide an interim report to the Minister of Civil Defence. It is expected that the report will contain a number of recommendations on how the current system can be improved. It can be expected that this will include a strengthening of regional capability and the setting of defined standards that will need to be maintained.

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

Southland Regional Development Strategy (SoRDs)

5        It was intended that the Statement of Proposal to form a new Southland Regional Development Agency as a council controlled organisation would be released at the beginning of August.

6        The release of the consultation document had to be delayed, however, while the Invercargill City Council (ICC) worked through a process to determine whether they needed to amend their Long Term Plan prior to providing for the formation of the proposed new Agency.

7        The delay was disappointing given that ICC could have considered and resolved the issue several months ago as occurred with the other Councils. The proposal was subsequently released in early September and submissions closed on October 2nd.  

8        Submissions received will be considered by a Joint Committee of the four Councils. Following their deliberations the Committee will prepare a report and recommendations to be considered by each of the four Councils individually.

9        The use of the Joint Committee approach will streamline the community consultation exercise and ensure that there is a common set of recommendations provided back to each of the Councils.

Biodiversity

10      LGNZ has recently released a ‘think piece’ report on the future of biodiversity management. The report identifies a need to clarify the roles and responsibilities of the different agencies involved, such as local government, the Predator Free 2050 project and community organisations. It also calls for the setting of a clear overall biodiversity goal and plan to achieve it.

11      The report makes five recommendations for change:

·    The need for strong leadership and clarity of roles and responsibilities;

·    The need to agree where we should focus our efforts at national, regional and local level;

·    The importance of a national plan and delivering joined-up action across all players;

·    The need to understand what success looks like, and how to measure it; and

·    The need for modern, fit-for-purpose frameworks, including legislation, to help to achieve our goals.

12      The document is intended to stimulate debate on the issues relating to biodiversity management and how they might best be addressed. A copy of the document is available on the LGNZ website (www.lgnz.co.nz).

Climate Change Issues

13      On 27 July 2017 the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Dr Jan Wright, released her report titled, Stepping stones to Paris and beyond: Climate change, progress, and predictability.  In her report Dr Wright emphasises that climate change requires a cross-party response that outlives governments.

14      The reports key recommendations include:

·    Development of a Climate Change Transition Bill that contains at least one greenhouse gas emissions target and a requirement for it to be met;

·    That the Minister for Climate Change Issues sets five-yearly carbon budgets, and prepares policies and proposals to enable those budgets to be met;

·    Establishment of an independent Climate Change Commission to advise the Minister on setting carbon budgets and report on progress towards meeting those budgets; and

·    A requirement that officials prepare and publish five-yearly risk assessments of the impacts of climate change on New Zealand.

15      Earlier this year the Government asked the Productivity Commission to undertake an inquiry into how New Zealand can maximise the opportunities and minimise the costs and risks of transitioning to a lower net-emissions economy. Under the Paris Agreement, New Zealand has committed to reduce its emissions by 30% below 2005 levels by 2030, and under the Climate Change Response Act 2002, has committed to reduce them by 50% below 1990 levels by 2050.

16      The purpose of the inquiry is to “identify options for how New Zealand could reduce its domestic greenhouse gas emissions through a transition towards a lower emissions future, while at the same time continuing to grow incomes and wellbeing”.

17      As part of its inquiry process the Commission has recently released an Issues Paper for public consultation. The paper outlines the context for the Commission and is focused on two broad questions:

·    What opportunities exist for the New Zealand economy to maximise the benefits and minimise the cost that a transition to a lower net-emissions economy offers, while continuing to grow incomes and wellbeing?

·    How could New Zealand’s regulatory, technological, financial and institutional systems, processes and practices help realise the benefits and minimise the costs and risks of a transition to a lower net emissions economy?

18      At a national level 48% of NZ greenhouse gas emissions come from agriculture and a further 40% from energy usage for industry, transport and electricity generation. Given the dependence that Southland has on the rural sector the issues related to greenhouse gas emissions are clearly of interest to this region.

19      A copy of the issues paper is available on the Productivity Commission website (www.productivity.govt.nz). Submissions needed to be lodged by 2 October 2017.

Freshwater National Policy Statement

20      On 9 August 2017 Central Government released its revised Freshwater National Policy Statement (NPS).

21      The new NPS, which must be given effect to through regional council planning documents confirms the previously announced national target of 90 per cent of rivers and lakes being swimmable by 2040.

22      Regional Councils are now required to set targets for their contribution to the overall national goal by March 2018. They are also required to develop targets for each lake and river across the region. Progress in achieving these targets must then be reported against every five years.

23      The revised NPS is obviously of significant interest to this Council in its role as an infrastructure provider and community leader.

Future of Local Government

24      At the end of the recent LGNZ annual general meeting outgoing President, Lawrence Yule outlined what he saw as being the key challenges for the sector to grapple with in the next few years. They included:

·    The speed of change within the sector needs to increase to reflect the reality of the world in which we live.

·    Shared services haven’t gone into major service delivery areas anywhere in NZ and they need to.

·    Look internationally at other models and how they do things. There is a lot to be learnt by looking at other models including Australia. 

·    Be transparent in the work we do.

·    Create a centre of excellence for the 3 waters.

·    Climate change and protection of the environment are important mainstream issues which the sector needs to grapple with.

·    The sector needs to determine what might constitute appropriate service delivery models if amalgamations aren’t appropriate. The sector needs to deliver sizeable efficiency gains to meet the challenges that lay ahead.

25      There are a number of useful messages for all local authorities to consider from the challenges outlined above.

Milford Opportunities Project

26      Central Government have now formally approved the business case and terms of reference for the Milford Opportunities Project. A formal funding agreement is now being finalised with the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment (MBIE).

27      Work is underway to confirm the members of the proposed project governance group and organise their first meeting.

Customer Support

28      To assist with training for our customer support staff new Call Monitoring technology has recently been installed successfully.  Customers are notified that their calls may be monitored for training purposes when they call 0800 732 732.  We will be working with staff over the next six - eight months to establish call quality standards.

Library Services

29      Our Winton library is running the “Stepping UP – Free Computer Training” programme, which has been a huge success.  With up to a four week waitlist for customers to join the courses, we have demand for the program across the district. 

30      Modern library services are more than books – connecting people with information and technology.  This means we can support our Southland residents with the challenge of the digital age we live in.  The Winton library is also refreshing the DVD collection for customers and have seen issues rise from, on average, two per week to now 32 per week.  New titles will continue to be provided and will be reviewed across the District longer term.

 

Customer Service Delivery Scoping Project

31      The purpose of this project is to consider how Council delivers its front line customer support services for each of the District’s communities.  

32      The objectives of this project are:

·       to consider the types and levels of services required;

·       to determine how these services might best be delivered;

·       where they could most effectively and efficiently be delivered from; and

·       who should deliver these services, including looking at shared service options. 

33      The project objectives also include consideration of how Council manages user expectations, what capital and operational expenditure resource allocation needs to be considered to deliver the “ideal” solution and what is a realistic time frame to deliver said solution.

34      The scope of works planned includes:

·        A community and business survey;

·        Demand analysis for each area office and library;  and

·        Key stakeholder engagement – including geographical and sector based engagement.

 

Services and Assets

Forestry (IFS)

35      Harvesting has continued at Ohai, with 9,500 tonnes harvested to date for the year, generating $1M in income.  The 2017/18 logging target is 43,584 tonnes.  There will be no further harvesting until the last quarter in the year.

36      In conjunction with the completion of Council’s annual report the forestry asset (timber value) has been revalued at 30 June 2017 to $13.179M, which is up $0.8M on last year.

 

 

Strategic Water and Waste

Three Waters Review

37      The Government established an inquiry into the issues relating to the contamination of the Havelock North Water Supply last year. 

38      Stage 1 of the inquiry addressed matters relating directly to the Havelock North water contamination incident and the response to that incident.  The stage 1 findings were released in May and included:

·    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 contributing factor.

·    Lack of contingency planning by the District Council.

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

39      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.

40      Stage 2 of the Inquiry is addressing the broader systemic issues and will provide recommendations about managing water supplies 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. This stage will contain recommendations that will be of significance for all local authorities.

41      In late July Central Government announced a review of the way in which water, wastewater and stormwater (3 Waters) are managed by local government. The review, which is to be conducted over the next 18 months, is to assess whether “local government practices and system oversight are fit for purpose”.

42      The review will initially focus on areas related to financial incentives; asset management practices; and compliance and monitoring but it is also expected that the review will provide a basis for consideration of possible future reform options.

43      It can be expected that the outputs from this review, along with the recommendations relating to broader sector performance that will come from phase 2 of the Havelock North Water Inquiry report will provide a basis for future government decision-making about possible reform of the water sector. The need for change in these areas has been signalled for some time. LGNZ has, for example, been advocating for the introduction of a sector led co-regulatory regime in an attempt to improve current management practices.

          Te Anau Wastewater Discharge Project

44      At its 17 May meeting Council instructed officers to proceed with the development of a business case for the Kepler option based on the consent option. Officers were also asked to include in the business case an option based on changes to the irrigation area and with an improved level of treatment.

45      Work is being progressed to develop a draft business case in line with the resolutions passed by Council. At this stage officers expect to have a first draft completed in October. It will then need be presented to the Te Anau Wastewater Project Committee and the Finance and Audit Committee for comment as well as Council.

46      In parallel with development of a business case for the Kepler option Council also asked for work to be completed to develop criteria and a process via which it might be able to identify possible alternative land disposal sites.

47      The criteria developed were presented to the Te Anau Wastewater Project Committee at a meeting on Friday 11 August 2017. Following that meeting the criteria have been publicly advertised and an expression of interest process has been commenced. It is intended that information relating to any blocks of land identified through this process will be able to be presented to Council at the time that the Kepler business case is put forward for consideration.

Land and Water Plan Implementation

48      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 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.

49      To assist with addressing the impacts of these changes on local authority infrastructure Environment Southland have formed a Three 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.

50      Council staff, consultants and legal counsel prepared evidence and presented at a hearing in September where submissions on the proposed Water and Land Plan were heard.  Evidence was 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.

Roading Contracts

51      Council has recently been through a process to tender its roading reseal work for a three year period. Downer were the successful tendering party and will have responsibility for the resurfacing of approximately 3,000,000 m2 of urban and rural roads across the district over the next three years.

52      Council has also recently granted approval for a project to replace all street lighting in the District with new LED lights. The use of LED lighting will deliver electricity and financial savings for Council.

53      Council has also recently completed tendering of its roading professional services contract, which has up until now been held by MWH. The contract for the core services component of these services, which covers asset management, pavement renewal capital works, reseal programmes, maintenance intervention strategies, network controls and network safety has been awarded to Opus.

 

Community and Futures

Corporate Performance Framework Project

54      Council is progressing the development of a Corporate Performance Framework to support stronger business planning and performance management practices within the organisation.

55      The overall aims of the framework include:

·    To align Council’s intended direction to outcomes delivered by teams and individuals, providing a strategic ‘thread’.

·    To provide a comprehensive planning and reporting regime, supporting strong performance management.

·    To link externally focussed deliverables to internal business support.

·    To design a suite of documents that will support the ongoing operation of the framework.

Community Futures 2040 Project

56      Work is now underway with a research and data analysis project needed to assist Council to work strategically and shape the future development of the District.

57      In essence this project and the three sequential research pieces of work identified will be concerned with answering broad questions about community (social) and economic conditions in the District and its communities. Principally these are:

1.   Where are we now?

2.   Where are we heading?

3.   Where do we actually want to be?

 

The three main elements included in the first phase include –

1.   Situational Analysis – current social and economic conditions in the District as a whole and its principal communities of interest.  These datasets will include amongst others information on employment, GDP, Business Units, Population, Education, Beneficiaries, Tourism, Income, External Migration, Building Consents and Home Ownership.

2.   Trend Analysis – analysing changes during the past decade and analysing the strengths and weaknesses (in terms of the direction in which key economic and social indicators are moving and by relating the indicators for the District with an agreed national benchmark) of the District and communities

3.   Identification of core industries – including analysis of the tourism sector – to identify and shine a light on the industries that drive the local economy by assessing each industry according to various criteria.

 

Phase 2 – Where we are heading? – Comprises two elements –

1.   Projection of future employment and population under BAU scenario

2.   Future industry growth and decline – in particular to understand why certain industries are likely to grow or decline, rather than simply being presented with forecasts that they will grow or decline. Knowledge of why particular industries are likely to grow or decline will enable Council to determine the areas in which there is scope for strategic action to address the issues and develop the opportunities.

 

58      On completion of phase 1 and 2 Council will consider the results of this work to then determine the next steps. 

Welcoming Communities

59      In late December 2016 the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) approached Council to seek support for the Southland District Council to jointly participate in the Welcoming Communities programme. Funding was officially approved in June 2017 by the Ministers of Immigration and Finance to develop and implement a two year pilot programme called Welcoming Communities – Te Waharoa ki nga Hapori.

60      Welcoming Communities is established under the auspices of the New Zealand Migrant Settlement and Integration Strategy and the New Zealand Refugee Resettlement Strategy. It is set up by Immigration NZ – alongside the Office of Ethnic Communities and the Department of Internal Affairs, with support from the Human Rights Commission.

61      The programme aims to encourage and support local councils and communities to play a leadership role in welcoming newcomers. This is a change in emphasis from earlier settlement initiatives that have focused on supporting newcomers rather than equipping the receiving communities to be welcoming. This innovation recognises that achieving good settlement outcomes requires a partnership between newcomers and the community they settle into. This partnership in turn needs to be supported by local businesses, and the public as part of the social license underpinning immigration.  

62      The pilot programme objectives include:

·    To proactively foster an environment of belonging and participation at the local level for both newcomers and receiving communities and in doing so contribute to protecting and enhancing social cohesion and cultural vibrancy.

·    To increase social and economic capability and resilience for newcomers and members of the receiving communities.

·    To contribute to the ability of businesses to attract, welcome and retain the skilled people they need to prosper.

·    To contribute to economic growth that benefits the participating regions New Zealand as a whole. 

63      With this in mind, the programme is intended to involve local government as part of its broader mandate to ensure their communities are resilient and well-functioning. Local government has an interest in making their communities as attractive to live and work in as possible for newcomers.  This includes making it a positive environment for newcomers to stay and belong.

64      The Southland Pilot Programme has established a Southland Welcoming Communities Governance Group – made up of an elected representative from each of the three local authorities, a board representative from Community Trust of Southland, a representative from MBIE and an Iwi representative. Cr Julie Keast is the Southland District Council representative on the Southland Welcoming Communities Governance Group. 

Annual Report 2016/2017

65      The Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 2017 was adopted at the Council meeting on 27 September.  The Annual Report outlines what was achieved during the 2016/2017 year compared to what was programmed in the LTP and Annual Plan for that year, both in terms of activity service delivery and financial performance. 

 

Long Term Plan (LTP) 2018-2028

66      Work is continuing on the preparation of the draft 2018 LTP with a significant amount of work to be progressed over the coming months.  Officers are working through the detail of the programme at the moment to finalise budgets and supporting information which feed into the LTP.  The aim is to have a draft of the supporting documents and final budgets for confirmation by Council in mid-December so that the Consultation Document can be prepared and audited in late January 2018 before being adopted by Council in February for consultation.

67      The key work currently underway related to the LTP includes: 

            Activity Management Plans

The first Council workshop was held in early August to discuss the issues identified from the draft Activity Management Plan (AMP’S) and budgeting process.  The AMP’s underpin a lot of the thinking and detail of what Council is planning for the next 10-30 years.

There were further AMP workshops September for the remaining activities. Budgets for the LTP 2018-2028 will now be finalised and used to prepare estimates reports (local and district) with prioritisation and options to be considered by Council and Community Boards/CDAs over the next two months.

            Key Performance Indictors (KPI)

Workshops with officers and committee chairs are being held to review the KPI’s which the Council uses to monitor its performance.  The objective is to identify a series of indicators which clearly link to the Council’s strategic objectives and provide meaningful performance information to management, elected members and the community about the benefits of the services provided. 

68      The outcomes from these workshops will be used to agree KPI’s which will be included in the AMPS and LTP and reported on from 1 July 2018.

Local Electoral System Update

69      The Council is required to consider which electoral system it will use for the next local authority elections which will be held in 2019.  A report was presented to Council in September seeking a decision on whether to use the First Past the Post (FPP) or Single Transferable Voting (STV) electoral system. In the past Council has used FPP.

70      Both systems have advantages and disadvantages.  For FPP advantages are what is seen as the simplicity of the process including the way votes are cast, counted and announced.  Disadvantages relate to the results of the election – including the generally ‘less representative’ nature of FPP councils, the obstacles to minority candidate election and the number of wasted votes.   

71      The advantages of STV include that it potentially achieves broad proportionality in multi-member wards, majority outcomes in single-member elections, more equitable minority representation and a reduction in the number of wasted votes.  Disadvantages relate to the public being less familiar with the system and possibly finding it harder to understand, matters of process such as the way votes are cast and counted and the information conveyed in election results.

72      Following the Council decision to retain FPP a public notice was placed in the newspaper advising of the right to demand a poll on the electoral system to be used.  Five percent of electors are required before a valid poll can be received – that amount is approximately 994 valid signatures – three months are provided get the signatures.  This would need to be received by 21 February 2018. 

Community Governance Review Update

73      A Project Plan has been prepared for the Community Governance Project and Representation Review.   The Elected Representative Working Group comprising the Mayor, three Councillors,  two Community Board Chairs, and two Community Development Area Subcommittee Chairs.  This Working Group will continue to meet throughout the project. 

74      A community engagement plan is being prepared.  While preliminary consultation is not mandatory for a Representation Review it is recommended good practice.  The Community Governance Project has been underway for 18 months and will input into the Representation Review. The Council is keen to encourage groups within the district to have discussions within their own networks. The topic will be a focus for the next round of community conversations. Meetings will also be arranged for members of Community Boards and Community Development Area Subcommittees.

75      The aim is to encourage a discussion prior to the formal consultation period about what a relationship between Council and its communities might look like.   We want to encourage the public to think about where their communities of interest are and acknowledge that they may be different depending on whether it is for school or work or sporting activities.  We also would like the public to start thinking about the number of people needed to represent their communities both at a local level and what does local mean and at the district level.

76      The aim is to enhance community and individual involvement or influence so that the Council Governance structures are fit for the future and fit for purpose.

77      We are preparing for a report with a proposed model/initial proposal to be informed by the Community Governance Review to go to Council and then out for consultation in April 2018.  The actual date will then specify the remaining dates as set down in the Local Electoral Act 2001.  Following the consultation period, hearings will be held and a final proposal considered and sent to the Local Government Commission (the Commission). It is likely that this will occur in June/July. At that point there will be an opportunity for appeals and objections to be considered by the Commission who will make the final decision. 

78      This process does not provide for reorganisation or amalgamations with other Councils – there are other provisions in the Local Electoral Act for that.

Residents’ Opinion and Satisfaction Survey

79      Council conducts a Residents’ Opinion and Satisfaction Survey every three years.  It recently conducted the latest version of this survey which provides useful feedback to Council on residents; perception of Council services. The survey purpose is

·    To measure and monitor residents opinions and satisfaction levels and to assist in providing effective services

·    The outcome of the survey is used to measure progress towards the key performance indicators identified in Council’s Long Term Plan

·    The survey results are also used by SDC to identify areas for improvement for activity managers.

A link to the survey and the five ward reports is available on the council website:

http://www.southlanddc.govt.nz/my-council-/plans-and-reports/residents-satisfaction-and-opinion-survey/

 

Community Leadership Plans

80      In March/April a number of workshops were held with Council’s Community Boards and Community Development Area Subcommittees (CDA’s) to start the development of Community Leadership Plans. The initial focus was on gaining an understanding of the future vision and direction of individual communities and the district as a whole for the next three, 10 and 30 years.

81      The next phase of this process is to run similar workshops with key stakeholders within the community by the end of the calendar year.  Following this, phase three will involve a much wider discussion with communities as a whole to gain their thoughts on the future of their townships and District.  This will be undertaken by June 2018.  The Community Leadership Plans are something to be owned by our communities, and generate a way of working together that guides the future direction of the Southland District.

District Tour

82      In July the District Councillors continued with their Southland Tour, and spent a day in the South Eastern area of the District.  Councillors had the opportunity to view local and District projects, as well as spend time with the Edendale/Wyndham Community Board Chair and Operations Managers of the Catlins Sealing project.  Key themes discussed by Councillors throughout the tour included Community Housing, Freedom Camping and Tourism, District Facilities, the upcoming Representation Review, Ease of Doing Business, Museums, and declining populations and opportunities for small communities.

83      Later in the year the Southland District Tour will continue with Councillors spending time in the Northern Central area of the District.

Stewart Island Wharves Report

84      Council received the report Stewart Island Wharfing Provision; Community and Stakeholder Engagement.  This report was commissioned to gather the views of the community and stakeholders around the future ownership, management and development of wharves on Stewart Island following an indication from South Port that they want to exit the ownership of (or close) the Golden Bay wharf given that it is in a poor condition and in urgent need of replacement.

85      The Golden Bay wharf is of strategic significance to the Stewart Island tourism and aquaculture industries. It currently provides water taxi access to Ulva Island, which is visited by over 23,000 people each year and is also used by cruise ship tenders. A number of recommendations relating to the governance, funding, management and ownership of the wharves on Stewart Island have been made in the Stewart Island Wharfing Provision report.

Stewart Island Community Planning Project

86      The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) have approved financial support for a Council led community planning process on Stewart Island. The project, which follows from the Bonamia Ostreae response, will essentially enable Council to ‘fast track’ the Community Leadership Plan process for Stewart Island. Having the Plan developed will provide a clear strategic view on what is needed to take that community forward into the future. This will be of assistance to both Council, the local community and other agencies.

Bylaw Reviews

87      Council has been consulting on a proposed amendment to the Freedom Camping Bylaw for Lumsden. Some 150 submissions have been received with a wide diversity of views expressed. A date for hearing those who wish to be heard by Councils is yet to be determined, however they are likely to be in October and will be heard by all of Council.

88      Council has also begun a review of its Water Supply, Stormwater Drainage and Wastewater Drainage Bylaws. At its 6 September meeting Council approved their notification for community consultation which closed on the 9th of October.

89      Officers are also beginning preliminary consultation to identify possible amendments to the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw. If amendments are to be made, it is likely a proposal will be put out for consultation early next year.

Lumsden Railway Precinct Upgrade

90      An application to the MBIE Tourism Infrastructure Fund for a grant to assist with the costs associated with the Lumsden Railway Precinct Upgrade has been submitted.

91      The scope of works include an upgrade of the toilet and carparking facilities. The Services and Assets Committee has recommended to Council that unbudgeted expenditure for these projects be approved subject to the Lumsden CDA agreeing to co-fund 50% of the local project.  The CDA has agreed to this with the Mararoa Waimea Ward also contributing $5,000. 

Southland District Story

92      Council’s new Southland District Story was presented to community board and CDA members at a series of meetings in September and launched publicly on 2 October.

93      It was also presented to our key shared services – Wastenet, Emergency Management and Venture Southland, and our contractors. Communications staff are working on pulling all the elements together for the public launch, including the final signoff on building signage and district signage. Part of the story will be standardisation of signage for Council facilities and reserves and this will happen after 2 October.

94      The rebranding project is Council’s first since its formation in 1989. It is a major project designed to ensure Southland District Council is best positioned to meet the challenges of our rapidly changing social and economic landscape, while building on the values and standards that have earned Council its reputation for reliability.

95      Council’s brand values are: leadership, honesty, responsibility, working together, pride, innovation, respect and service.

Open Spaces Project Update

96      Council currently has an Open Spaces Strategy which sets out a strategic direction to guide the provision of and planning for, and the consistent management and maintenance of reserves and open spaces within Southland District, to meet current and future needs.

97      Increasing visitor numbers and shifting demographic/recreational trends are changing who, how, where and why people use (or do not use) Southland District’s open spaces and associated facilities.

98      Council is looking to move towards a more strategic and co-ordinated approach to its open space management to ensure residents and visitors have a good experience when using open spaces. The aim is to create pride from a local resident’s perspective, maintain and improve the reputation of the district as a visitor destination, and potentially support the development of new economic opportunities in the District.

99      This will require Council to move towards a “people, places and spaces” approach versus an infrastructure-focussed approach. It will also require Council to consider what is needed to deliver a better result district-wide and what this means in terms of management, consistency of level of service and funding requirements/mechanisms.

100    As a result there is need to determine whether the Council’s existing open spaces are capable of meeting the expectations and demands being placed on them by users now and in the future.

101    To achieve this, Council is seeking to assess the situation and better understand:

 

·      what is currently being provided in open spaces/facilities and the experience from a user’s perspective;

·      how this compares to what users expect (in particular for visitors);

·      how user demand and expectations are expected to change in the future;

·      what this means for Council in terms of what open spaces/facilities should be provided where, for whom and to what level/standard;

·      what the priorities are and what needs to be done to address any gaps/issues;

·      what level of expenditure/funding is needed and options for how this should be funded. 

 

Environmental Services

Waituna Partnership

102    The Waituna Lagoon is one of the best remaining examples of a natural coastal lagoon in New Zealand, and is unique in the Southland region and to New Zealand. From time to time, the lagoon has been mechanically opened to the sea initially for fish passage and latterly to help manage drainage for surrounding farms. Waituna Wetland is a taonga (treasure of high significance) to Ngāi Tahu and was formally recognised by a Statutory Acknowledgement under the Ngāi Tahu Claims Settlement Act 1998. 

103    Historically, the lagoon was surrounded by peat bog wetland, the drainage from which gave the lagoon its characteristic clear brown stain. In addition, it is highly valued for its aesthetic appeal, its rich biodiversity, duck shooting, fishing (for brown trout primarily), boating, walking, and scientific values.

104    The Waituna Partners’ Group has recently been successful in gaining $5 million of funding from the Government’s Freshwater Improvement Fund to further the work already underway in the Waituna catchment.

105    The Partners (Environment Southland, Department of Conservation, Southland District Council, Te Runanga o Awarua and Te Rūnanga o Ngāi Tahu) have been working together in since 2013, and in conjunction with Living Water (Fonterra's 10-year partnership with the Department of Conservation), have agreed to contribute significantly in terms of cash and in-kind support to continue the programme. Over the next few months the Group will be further developing the work programme and providing more detail as required by the fund criteria.

Predator Free Rakiura

106    Council has been part of the Predator Free Rakiura Governance Group for several years. A recent meeting of the Governance Group was held in early August, which was a very useful stocktake of where the Group is at.

107    DOC is commissioning social research on Rakiura in September, in order to seek to better quantify the community appetite for predator-free initiatives and how these may be best structured to achieve community buy-in and progress.

 

Building Control

108    There has been an unexpected upsurge in activity issuing 107 consents in July, this was up from 94 for the same period last year.  The past three months have recorded an increase in activity when compared to the same period as last year.

Environmental Health

Smoke Pollution in Winton

109    Staff are working with the Winton Community Board concerning the level of smoke pollution in the town that is being monitored by Environment Southland.  It is proposed to do a community survey presenting the facts to the community and options available.

Animal Control

New Fee Discounts

110    The new fee discounts were introduced in July this year.

111    Immediate benefits have been an increase in dogs being microchipped, fewer infringements being issued (with the new use of warning letters that are recognised in the responsible owner discounts), and fewer wandering dogs and attacks.

Resource Management

New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) Notice of Requirement to Designate Land for State Highway Purposes

112    Appointed Commissioner Mr Allan Cubitt considered this matter at a Hearing on Wednesday, 16 August 2017. The Commissioner recommended that the requirement to designate the SH 1 realignment at Edendale be confirmed and that conditions be imposed.

113    The NZTA has advised it accepts the recommendation in whole. Accordingly a copy of the decision has now been served on submitters and landowners – this appeal period will close early October 2017.

Rakiura Heritage Centre

114    An approved resource consent was issued for the Rakiura Heritage Centre on Stewart Island.  Project plans are being developed for some landscape, heritage and climate change work streams.  Once these plans have been formulated they will be reported to the Regulatory and Consents Committee for endorsement.

People and Capability

115    In July 2017, Council approved the Health and Safety Plan 2017/18, this included a commitment to care for the wellbeing and safety of our people and those who interact with us.  

116    An action plan has been developed.  There are five key focus areas including completing the implementation of the Health and Safety Framework, critical risk, health and safety participation, incident management and measuring and monitoring. 

Te Anau

Community Consultation

117    The Board have worked through the suggestions that were made through the consultation process. It became clear that there were a number of suggestions that would need to be grouped together for further consideration because together they are likely form a significant work programme at a substantial cost.

118    In order to give these larger programmes the consideration they need it was decided to work through the planning and decision making processes over the next 24 months. In the meantime a number of other smaller scale projects have been chosen to be included in Te Anau’s project list for the next Long Term Plan.

 

Finance

119    The budgets are currently running as expected except for the Luxmore subdivision business unit.

120    The Luxmore subdivision business unit shows no income year to date because interest on reserves is only calculated annually at the end of the financial year. Expenditure is significantly higher than budgeted due to the previously unbudgeted grant to the Fiordland Retirement Housing Trust of $40K.

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Council Report” dated 3 October 2017.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.  

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Financial Report to Te Anau Community Board for the year ended 30 June 2017

Record No:        R/17/8/19238

Author:                 Nick Lewis, Community Engineer

Approved by:       Anne Robson, Chief Financial Officer

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

1       These financial results are subject to review by Audit NZ in September, and therefore may change.

Community financial performance for the year

2       The graph above shows what actually happened (Actuals), what the original budget was (Original annual budget) and then what was expected to occur by year end (Reforecast annual budget) for each of the Income, Expenditure, and Capital Expenditure categories.

3       The ‘Reforecast’ totals show the effect of unbudgeted expenditure, projects that have been put on hold or are to be completed in 2017/2018 and/or expected changes to income and operating expenditure over the year.

4       Monthly reports provided to you by the community engineers compared the actual YTD against reforecast YTD totals.

5       Any significant variances between the ‘Actual’ and ‘Original budget’ totals are explained below. The details are provided in the attached annual report figures.

Significant Variances to the Annual Budget

Income

6       Income overall has come in slightly above budget.

7       The Administration business unit’s interest on reserve applied to the general reserve was over budget by $11,374 because the value in the reserve is significantly higher than what was budgeted at the time of the last LTP. This was offset by the Luxmore Subdivision business unit being less than budgeted by $10,818 due to the actual interest rate applied to the reserve being less than the rate budgeted.  This was due to Council receiving less interest income in the year.

8       The Parks and Reserves General business unit’s income was higher than expected by $23,720. This reflects the capital grants received from the Community Trust of Southland and Meridian Energy for the pump park and track project.

9       All other business units’ incomes were on track.

Expenditure

10     Expenditure overall has come in slightly under budget.

11     Board members salaries within the Administration business unit is slightly under budget at year end ($3,400).  Library expenditure is over budget in salaries by $9,951 this was to cover additional hours worked over breaks when both the Area Office and the Library was required to be open.

12     Operating Costs was slightly higher than budgeted through increased electricity costs for the new BBQs and legal costs associated with the waterfront lease.  Refuse Collection expenditure was over budget due to the change in contract rates which came into effect during the financial year.

13     Stormwater Drainage, Beautification, Sportsground/ Boating and Parks & Reserves General expenditure costs were all under budget due to the level of budgeted expenditure not being required during year, the use of some of these budgets is often influenced by weather conditions.

14     The Lakefront business unit had a $50,000 unbudgeted project for maintenance of the Lakefront Trees.  This came in at approximately $36,000 and was to remove dead and dangerous branches and trees.

15     Cemetery costs are over budgeted due to an increase in the cost and number of internments.  Updated Internment fees came into effect in 1st July 2017.

16     All other business units’ expenditures were on track.

Capital Expenditure

17     Capital Expenditure was under budget. Refer to the project list under item 25.

18     Streetworks capital expenditure had budget values for Footpaths, Kerb & Channel and Streetlights had minor footpath and K&C works. The Streetlight budget has been held back with the District Wide LED project through the Roading Department. The Te Anau LED conversions will be undertaken in conjunction with the district project.

19     Beautification capital expenditure, being the Town Entrance Sign ‘Gateway to Fiordland’ ($20,000) was not spent as this project was placed on hold to be considered in the Te Anau Development Plan and maybe subject to change once finalised.

20     The Lakefront business unit had the New Pontoon wharf project but this was placed on hold to be considered in the Te Anau Development Plan and maybe subject to change once finalised.

21     Parks & Reserves General projects include the Skate Park Upgrade. The Pump Track had $66,405 of expenditure and Lions Park Playground had $45,257 expenditure on the Flying Fox and Expression Swing. The Water park track was put on hold for consideration in the Te Anau Development Plan and maybe subject to change on finalised.

Schedule of Loan Balances

 

Balance
June 2016

Uplifted Loan

Principal Repayments

Balance June 2017

Years Remaining

Sandy Brown Road

$41,760

-

$13,137

$28,623

2

 

Financial Considerations

Reserves

22      Interest has been allocated to the reserve accounts. Interest is calculated on the average balance of the reserves for the year at an interest rate of 3.27%. The budgeted interest rate was 4.19%.

Development and Financial Contributions

23      Contributions are collected to fund community growth projects. The use of these funds are considered by Council staff when projects are in the planning stage. Certain policy and legislative requirements must be met before these contributions can be applied to projects.

24      The total balance of Development and Financial contributions for your community as at 30 June 2017 is in the table below. 

 

Parks

Roading

Total

$77,133

$201,049

$278,182

 


 

Project List

25     Community projects that were budgeted to be undertaken in the 2016/2017 year are in the table below.

Activity

Project Name

Financial Year

AP Budget

Actual cost

Status

Officer’s Comment

Community Facilities

New Pontoon

2016/17

$204,800

$7,899

Investigated

Project on Hold due to current Te Anau Development Plan by the CB

Library Services

Reconfigure & refurbish library building

2014/15

$16,575

$3,184

Completed

 

Parks and Reserves

Removal & Maintenance work of Lakefront trees

2016/17

$35,230

Completed

Completed in December 2016

Parks and Reserves

Skate Park upgrade

2015/16

$79,500

$66,405

In progress - Construction

Pump track completed, ancillary items progressing, being Drinking fountain, shade sail, seating

Parks and Reserves

Lions Park Playground Improvements

2014/15

$21,054

$22,629

Completed

Completed. Included with PR0012.B Flying Fox and Expression Swing installed Dec 2016. Subsequently a take-off platform has been identified as being needed.

Parks and Reserves

Water Park - New Track

2015/16

$30,000

-

In progress - Investigation

Project progressing in Te Anau Development Plan by the CB

Parks and Reserves

Lions Park - New slide

2015/16

$30,000

$22,629

Completed

Completed. Flying Fox and Expression Swing installed Dec 2016

Parks and Reserves

Town Entrance Signs

2016/17

$20,000

-

In progress - Investigation

Progressing at investigation stage, CPL has meet with Community group to progress and will be included with Te Anau Development Plan

Public Conveniences

Te Anau Boat Harbour Dump Station

2015/16

 $5,300

$5,234

Completed

Completed in August 2016

Roading & Transport

Street Lighting

2016/17

$20,500

-

Not started

In conjunction with Roading team project on LEDs

Roading & Transport

Footpath Renewals

2016/17

$10,250

$3,978

In progress - Construction

Minor renewals/ repairs ongoing

Roading & Transport

K&C renewals

2016/17

$10,250

$7,136

In progress - Construction

Minor renewals/ repairs ongoing

Roading & Transport

Street Lighting

2015/16

 $20,500

-

Not started

In conjunction with Roading team project on LEDs

 

 

Te Anau

Schedule of Reserve Balance

 

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Financial Report to Te Anau Community Board for the year ended 30 June 2017” dated 4 October 2017.

 

Attachments

a         Te Anau Annual Report figures for the year ended 30 June 2017    

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Strategic Framework 2018 - 2028 Long Term Plan

Record No:        R/17/9/23094

Author:                 Nicole Taylor, Project Co-ordinator Corporate Planning

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

 Purpose

1.       The purpose of this report is to update Community Boards, Community Development Area Subcommittees and other local Council committees on the revised Strategic Framework that has been developed by Council for the Long Term Plan 2018-2028.

2.       The report presents the framework for information and highlights the key changes to the Council’s intended areas of focus in response to the key strategic challenges facing Southland District over the next twenty years.

3.       The report also aims to remind members of the wider strategy work that is expected to be undertaken as part of and following the development of the 2018-2028 LTP programme to develop a proactive response to the fundamental shifts occurring in our communities and operating environment. (eg Community Futures 2040 Project / Community Leadership Planning).

Background

4.       The Mayor and Councillors have undertaken a review of the Council’s strategic planning framework following a Strategy Workshop in February 2017.

5.       The Strategic Framework (Appendix A) is the basis on which the Long Term Plan (LTP) 2018-2028 is developed.

6.       The framework outlines where the Council wants to be (Vision), what the end result looks like (Community Outcomes), how the Council will work (Mission) and what the Council needs to do to get there (Strategic Priorities).

7.       The four aspects combine to explain what the Council will focus on and what it will deliver over the coming three years and beyond.

 

Vision: Southland: one community offering endless opportunities

 

Community Outcomes:

-        Proud, connected communities that have an attractive and affordable lifestyle

This means Southland District is a place where people have everything they need to live, work, play and visit; where they are connected to each other, the environment and the world outside Southland; and where they can enjoy a safe and fulfilling life in our unique natural environment.

 

-        Resilient communities that leave a legacy for tomorrow

This means Southland District is made up of strong communities that take a sustainable approach by considering the impact on the environment and the social, cultural and economic wellbeing of our communities now and in the future.

 

Mission: Working together for a better Southland

 

 

 

Our Approach:

-        We will work in partnership with our communities

-        We will constantly look for better ways

-        We will work as one team

 

Strategic Priorities:

We need to provide strong community leadership and work with our communities on how to adapt so that the infrastructure, local services and regulatory functions we provide are appropriate and support the achievement of our shared vision.

 

Our Focus

i.        Improve how we work

ii.       Provide appropriate infrastructure/services

iii.      Make informed decisions

iv.      More people

 

8.       The key changes to the framework include:

·    revised vision

·    reduction in number of community outcomes from three to two and change to wording

·    addition of approach statements under the mission statement

·    addition of strategic priorities with an overall statement supported by four key areas of focus.

9.       While the Council has endorsed the Strategic Framework as the foundation for the Long Term Plan 2018-2028, it is still draft pending public feedback on the Community Outcomes through the draft Long Term Plan public consultation process. These will be confirmed when the Council adopts its final Long Term Plan in mid-2018.

 

Discussion

10.     In considering what outcomes are wanted in the future (and therefore where Council and communities want to focus) it is useful to look at where the District is at today and some of the challenges that it faces for the future.

11.     There are some significant shifts happening in Southland communities that will impact on who lives in Southland, where they live, how they live and what services and infrastructure they will need from Council.

12.     Current demographic modelling indicates that the future Southland community is likely to:

·    be older (ageing population)

·    have fewer people (static or declining population forecasts with small pockets of growth)

·    live in, or, close to, larger urban centres (over smaller rural villages) for easier access to services/healthcare

·    have a higher proportion of people on fixed incomes

13.     Changes in technology and the move towards automation/robotics/artificial intelligence also raises uncertainty around employment options in the long-term.

14.     This raises the questions about whether Southland’s communities will still need or be able to afford the same infrastructure and services that they receive now from Council, particularly as these communities come under more pressure with increased compliance and regulation requirements, increased asset replacement/renewals costs due to ageing infrastructure, changing employment and economic conditions and the impacts of climate change and natural hazards.

15.     As such, the key strategic challenges facing Southland are around:

·     Working with communities to plan for and be realistic about what the future might hold

·     Working with communities to create great places

·     Ensuring that infrastructure that is needed to support economic and social activity within its communities is appropriate and affordable

·     Doing more with less both as a Council and a community which requires a focus not only on the efficiency of internal service delivery but it also requires Council to work collaboratively with other agencies and the community. By pooling resources across agencies and with the community we should be able to deliver more.

·     Being innovative and find new ways of delivering its services which reflect the changing needs of its communities and are both effective and efficient

·     Attracting and retaining people in communities with a number of the district’s communities facing static or declining population.

16.     Given this context, Council needed to develop a Strategic Framework for the 2018 LTP that defines the end-goal, recognises the strategic challenges and setting a path for Council’s response. Essentially, the framework becomes the mechanism for getting alignment and channelling resources towards the end-goal.

17.     As such Council’s review of the Strategic Framework focussed on ensuring that it reflects what the current Council is wanting to achieve and clearly define what the priorities are and the expectations in terms of how the Council intends to proceed.

18.     Because the framework provides a basis for all of Council’s activities, it is used to guide elected members and officers about the Council’s priorities providing direction for plans, policies and decision-making about services and activities and ensure that what happens day-to-day takes the Council towards its end-goal rather than in an opposing direction.

Vision and Mission

19.     The vision statement “one community offering endless opportunities” has been developed from the Council’s strategy workshop discussions. At the workshop Council emphasised the importance of developing a cohesive district wide approach to the way in which it sets policy, makes key decisions and manages the prioritisation and delivery of its services. It also reflects the importance of working together (across the whole district/region, with communities and with organisations who have shared issues/interests). This was seen as critical for the future and one of the best ways to face the challenges that Southland was facing given district, national and global trends.

20.     The current vision “to have thriving, healthy Southland communitieswas seen as limiting and not reflective of the need to be upfront with communities about the fact that many communities are decreasing in size.  Councillors acknowledged that there was a need to have the courageous conversations about infrastructure and affordability into the future. The feeling was that Council needed to ‘walk together’ with its communities and help them understand the likely future issues and provide a District wide context to the decisions being made. This will support our communities to make informed choices about the future, versus Council being perceived to be making decisions in isolation to individual communities. As such, the current vision was not seen as relevant or achievable given the developing challenges.

21.     Words like partnership and working together and looking for different opportunities came through strongly at the workshop. Council agreed that although Southland is made up of many communities, it was important to be one community with one voice working together, particularly when advocating at the regional and national level. Council acknowledged that the district wide, one community approach is a principle which will take time to develop and deliver. It also agreed that it wasn’t there yet and this is why it is a vision.

22.     So why endless opportunities? Council talked about the many options that exist right now for doing things differently and being innovative, but also that those opportunities will only increase if we are working together as one community with one voice.  Council also noted that it was important to communicate why people will want to come to Southland District because of the opportunities for them around lifestyle, business, community and regional strength. The opportunities wording gives a lot of leeway to link in with other initiatives such as SoRDS, tourism growth, and other developments.

Our Approach

23.     Much of what was discussed at the strategy workshop related to “how” Council does things as much as “what” Council does in terms of activities/services/actions.  Council agreed that there was a need to be clearer about a how it wants to work, so that these expectations can be clearly communicated to and understood by officers and elected members alike.

24.     As such, a series of “Approach” statements have been added into the Council’s Strategic Framework to support the Mission statement of Working together for a better Southland:

-      We will work in partnership with our communities

-      We will constantly look for better ways

-      We will work as one team

25.     These are intended to provide a steer on how the Council will work, where working in this way will assist Council to achieve its Vision/Community Outcomes as much as, if not more than, the specific infrastructure, services and functions it performs.

Community Outcomes

26.     The Community Outcomes describe what the Council aims to achieve in meeting the current and future needs of our communities – how we want the district to be. The Council cannot achieve these outcomes alone – it will require collaboration with other agencies and the community. A strong principle is that Council needs to be part of the solution – but does not have to be the solution.  In fact it is important the community and appropriate agencies take the responsibility accordingly.

27.     There was strong consensus among Councillors about what the sort of Southland they wanted to see develop. The concepts included:

-      a strong/proud/connected community

-      a community where people belong

-      building trust

-      working collaboratively with communities and other organisations across the region

-      valuing the environment

-      dealing with change.

28.     The Council’s current community outcomes have been reviewed to reflect these concepts and provide a clear direction.  As a result the Council developed two outcome statements that describe more broadly the type of community we are aiming to create to paint the picture of where we want to be:

i.    Proud, connected communities that have an attractive and affordable lifestyle

ii.    Resilient communities that leave a legacy for tomorrow

Strategic Priorities

29.     The Council has also developed a series of four Strategic Priorities into the framework which provide more context about the outcomes and how Council expects to achieve them. As a result they should also assist with prioritising Council’s activities. This is the first time that the Council has defined a set of Strategic Priorities as part of this framework.

30.     These priorities are the areas of the Council’s operations where elected members want to see a change in approach or increase in focus over the triennium and beyond.

31.     The priorities have been developed from the issues discussed by Council at the workshop and also existing initiatives. These are prefaced by a statement which reflects the purpose of local government.

Strategic Priorities - We need to provide strong community leadership and work with our communities on how to adapt to these changes so that the infrastructure, local services and regulatory functions we provide are appropriate and support the achievement of our shared vision.

Our focus:

1.       Improve how we work

2.       Provide appropriate infrastructure/services

3.       Make informed decisions

4.       Attract more people

32.     These are designed to provide greater detail around Council’s priorities and where the Council is focusing its efforts to achieve the community outcome. This priority setting approach means that the detail about what the “community outcome” means can be contained here rather than in high level community outcome statement.

33.     Taken together the Vision, Community Outcomes, Mission, Approach and Strategic Priorities are intended to be able to answer the “Why” question around anything Council does.

34.     The new Strategic Framework forms the basis for what the Council plans to focus on over the next three to ten years.

35.     The framework has been used by the Council and officers when preparing the 2018 Long Term Plan and associated Activity Management Plan programmes, budgets and performance information.

Next Steps

36.     Community Boards, Community Development Area Subcommittees and other local committees are also asked to consider the framework in their decision-making going forward. This may be as part of budgeting processes for the 2018 LTP, wider community leadership planning or more generally as part of day-to-day operations.

37.     Like Council, local committees are also encouraged to take a strategic perspective and critically consider the future challenges and opportunities now, and, be realistic in their planning to ensure that Council is being responsible and is preparing the ground for any hard decisions or courageous conversations that may be needed.

38.     The Council is encouraging officers and local committees to consider what they can do differently and how they can work in with each other to help implement the strategies needed to create the vision of “one community with endless opportunities”.

39.     Council is also considering how it delivers its services and giving consideration to a strategic decision-making approach.  This will consider the principle of ‘Think District, Act Local’ and developing overarching strategic frameworks for activity and service delivery.  This approach will consider opportunities associated with appropriate and affordable levels of service, equality vs. equity of service provision, minimum standards, functional hierarchy of provision and consistency across the district.

40.     This strategic framework approach will also inform and assist in the consideration of investment decision-making models and future rating affordability conversations Council will need to have and address related issues. The outputs from this work will be fed back to Community Boards/CDAs for comment once developed.

41.     The Council is also in the very early stages of looking at the changes that are needed and is considering what ‘big picture analytics’ type work needs to be undertaken to provide better data and insights to assist with the futures thinking decisions that will need to be made.

42.     While the Council intends to signal this in its 2018 LTP, the bulk of this work will happen over the next three years to inform a Community Futures 2040 programme. The outcomes and findings of this are expected to see fundamental changes to the way we do things and how we plan ahead of our 2021 LTP.

43.     In the meantime, the Te Anau Community Board are also asked to consider the long-term future issues in its decisions around budgets and programmes for 2018 LTP and to also consider how it can pitch in to support the Council’s long-term strategy.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Strategic Framework 2018 - 2028 Long Term Plan” dated 2 October 2017.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.  

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Te Anau Community Board - Local Budgets for the Long Term Plan 2018-28

Record No:        R/17/10/23573

Author:                 Nick Lewis, Community Engineer

Approved by:       Anne Robson, Chief Financial Officer

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        To set local budgets for 2018-2028 and propose rates for the year commencing 1 July 2018.

Executive Summary

2        This report provides an overview of the local activities and services for Te Anau for 2018-2028 which are provided under the governance of the Te Anau Community Board.  The report details the estimated costs of these activities over the 10 years as well as the draft rates.

3        The draft budgets will be incorporated into the Council’s draft Long Term Plan (LTP)
2018-2028 which will be released for consultation in March 2018.  Once the plan is finalised (and subject to any changes resulting from submissions), the budgets shown for 2018/2019 will be used to set rates for the year beginning 1 July 2018 (referred to as LTP year 1).

4        The information in this report and its attachments, has been sourced from previous discussions between the committee and community partnership leader/community engineer along with Activity Management Plans (AMPs) that officers have prepared.  The AMPs contain more detail about the activities and expenditure requirements.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Te Anau Community Board - Local Budgets for the Long Term Plan 2018-28” dated 6 October 2017.

b)           Determines that this matter 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)           Recommends to Council that the following rates and charges (including GST) for the year commencing 1 July 2018 be included in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

 

Rate

Rate GST inclusive

Te Anau CB Rate

$770,926

Sandy Brown Road Utility Loan Rate

$19,886

Fiordland Pool Rate

$36,034

 

e)            Identifies any issues/priority projects for the local area that need to be included in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan consultation process to encourage feedback from the local community (to be discussed at the meeting, and advised if any).

 


 

Background

5        The LTP is adopted every three years and provides the community with information on the role, scope, service level and priority of Council activities for 10 years.

6        In preparing the LTP budgets and programmes, Council reviews its strategic direction, various policies and Activity Management Plans (AMPs).  The Council also develops a series of assumptions about the environment that it expects to operate in during the 10 year period.  Council summarises this information in a document for consultation with the community.

7        The LTP Consultation Document is released to the public in March 2018 and the community has an opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed plan.  Council will decide on any changes to the draft plan before it is adopted in June 2018.

8        Year 2 and 3 of the LTP are used as the basis for the Annual Plan’s for those years.

Overview of the Process

9        The separate Strategic Framework paper on the committee agenda outlines some of the significant changes predicted in Southland communities and the Council’s operating environment in the future that will impact on our activities, services and rates affordability in the future.

10      Council has been discussing these changes as part of the development of the 2018 LTP and the implications in terms of affordability and appropriateness of Council services for the community in the future.

11      However, in order to be able to engage in a meaningful way with the community about the issues and options, Council has identified a need to gather better information to inform choices and develop a more strategic approach to responding to these issues across the District.

12      As such, as part of the 2018 LTP, Council is looking to begin developing this information over the next three years to inform these conversations ahead of the 2021 LTP, where specific choices and decisions will need to be made.

13      In the interim, the 2018 LTP is going to be a transitional plan, where budgets and work programmes are generally expected to be similar to previous years except in areas where there is legislative or regulatory compliance requirements, outstanding issues that need to be addressed or where work is needed to progress the Council’s strategic priorities (see diagram below).

14      This is expected to enable Council to start working on the more strategic/fundamental issues facing Southland in the future and get better information and analysis to assist the Council and communities to make informed decisions about how to adapt to these changes as part of the 2021 LTP and beyond.

15      As such each local committee (community board, CDA and water supply subcommittee) should also be aware that while the 2018 LTP has minimal change, there is likely to be a fuller review of activities and services and what is ‘fit for purpose’ and how they are funded over the next three years.  As part of the process, local committees will have an opportunity be involved in this work.

Issues

District Wide

16      There are a number of district-wide issues which Council has been considering as part of the 2018 LTP that local committees should also be aware of.  The key issues that have a link to local budgeting processes are detailed below.

Open Spaces

17      The Council has recently commissioned a report reviewing its open spaces (parks, reserves, playgrounds, picnic/rest areas, playgrounds, playing fields etc) across the District.  The review found that there was a significant amount of work needed if Council is to address the gap between the Vision and Objectives set by the Council’s Open Space Strategy and the current state of these spaces.  The Council considers that a more strategic approach is necessary to managing open spaces but has not decided on the way in which this will be done.  Officers are currently working through the report and assessing what can be done and when to close this gap.  It is expected that this work, along with recommendations about priority areas and levels of service will be completed during 2018/2019.  This will then enable Council to make decisions about how it would like to progress.  In the meantime it is worth community boards and community development area subcommittees being aware that any changes may affect the types of decisions that are made for the open spaces in their local area and potentially how this may need to be funded.

Freedom Camping

18      Freedom Camping is another area where Council is considering taking a more district-wide strategic approach.  It is developing a freedom camping strategy that will set the direction for future decision making about what is appropriate for Southland and where that may be.  It is expected that Council will be in a position to consult with communities during 2018 about any changes.

Land and Water Plan

19      The implementation of the Water and Land Plan (Plan) by Environment Southland will result in higher costs for the Council, particularly in the wastewater and stormwater activities.  Although what is actually needed to comply with the Plan is not yet known an estimate of the potential change to operational and capital costs has been included in the LTP.  This is a combination of monitoring costs and additional infrastructure needed to improve discharges from these activities.  The water activity may be impacted when additional water is required.

Revenue and Financing Policy

20      As part of the review of the Revenue and Financing Policy, Council is considering the most appropriate way to rate for library services across the district (along with a number of other changes to rates which are set at the district-level).  Under the current policy the rates for the library activity are collected from a combination of some local communities and the district at large.  The Council is considering whether the activity should only be funded from the district at large, given the greater proportion of residents now accessing library services online.  If this occurs then some local rates will be reduced and the costs will be included in the District General rate.  The draft policy including this information will be consulted on and the public will have opportunity to provide feedback.

Community Leadership Plans

21      Our communities will be finishing the Community Leadership Planning process with their community partnership leaders over the plan period.  While this process looks a lot wider than simply the Council’s activities and services, there may be initiatives or programmes that come out that fit within the local committee’s areas of responsibility.  Council is encouraging local committees to deal with these as they arise through the annual budgeting process (via the Annual Plan) or via the unbudgeted expenditure process rather than putting aside funding in the 2018 LTP budgets for any “possibilities”.

Local Budget Development

22      The draft budgets for the Te Anau community for 2018-2028 have been prepared.  Figures for these budgets have flowed out of the review of Activity Management Plans as well as discussions between local committees and community partnership leaders/community engineers over the past few months.

23      The aim of this has been to ensure that all projects and changes to expenditure have been discussed prior to the budget meetings so that the meetings are focussed primarily on the rates recommendation.  This approach has been taken because the LTP is audited and officers need budgets to be finalised earlier to enable to the audit to occur.

24      While we are aiming to have few changes at budgets meetings, we realise that some committees may want to carry our further investigations before finalising their programme.  If this is the case, we would encourage committees to keep their changes to a minimum if possible and consider whether these can be processed through the annual budget/project review (via the Annual Plan) or through the unbudgeted expenditure process.

25      The objective of this budget report is to highlight issues, confirm priorities and plan expenditure and funding for the next 10 years for the Te Anau Community Board’s consideration as part of the Council’s LTP.

26      If approved by Council via the LTP, the Te Anau Community Board will be able to spend the Council funds allocated in accordance with the budgeted expenditure.  This occurs via Council officers approving purchase orders.  If the board wishes to spend funds that are unbudgeted, including monies from reserves, the board has a delegation to approve up to $10,000 otherwise the decision will need Council approval. 

27      In preparation for the 2018-2028 LTP, Council officers are reviewing and updating Council’s various Asset/Activity Management Plans (AMPs).

28      Included in Attachment A (Section C) of this report is a summary of all planned projects for the Te Anau community for the next 10 years as extracted from the draft AMPs.  Copies of the full draft AMPs can be obtained by contacting the relevant Council officer who manages the asset portfolio.  Summaries of Council’s AMPs will also be available online throughout the duration of the LTP consultation period.

Local Community Issues

29      Key issues that the committee need to be aware of for the Te Anau community over the next 10 years are:

·    The impact of the Water and Land plan and the expected monitoring requirements under any resource consents has been included in budgets from 2019/20 onwards.  A project has been included in 2025/26 for improvements of the discharge to groundwater that is likely to be required.

·    The estimates provided in this report are based on the current Revenue and Financing Policy.  The Te Anau Community Board rate includes library funding of $90,841 (GST exclusive) for 2018/19.  If the draft Revenue and Financing Policy adopted by Council later in the year includes a change for this activity the rates (and associated costs) for the Te Anau library will be removed

·    The Te Anau Community Board has recently consulted with the community on the types of projects that they would like to see for their community.  It is clear that the Lake Front Development and Town Planning work-streams in particular will need to be worked through as the types of projects that have been suggested will need to be co-ordinated, likely to have reasonably significant costs, and need some further discussion with the community.

·    At this stage it is too early to specifically identify costs for these larger work programmes because there simply isn’t enough detail. It has therefore been decided to do the work over the next few years to get these work programmes in the next LTP.  In the interim a number of smaller projects have been included in the first three years of this LTP.

·    It is also important to note that the ‘sealing Whitestone Road to the Cemetery’ project is indicative only and not guaranteed to be done. Before this can be confirmed as a project a specific decision will need to be made by Council as the Road Controlling Authority, separate to the LTP process, about whether the proposal is appropriate.

30      Attachment A is organised into four main sections as follows:

(A)    Overview

This section includes details of the proposed rates for the Te Anau community (compared to the previous year).  The section also includes an overview of reserves and loans.

(B)    Rate Type Financial Information and Activity Summary

          This section is organised by rate type and is broken into four subparts:

i.     This part contains a graph showing income and expenditure projected over the 10 years.

ii.    This part contains a summary of the financial budgets.  It shows the expenditure and income projected over the 10 years, the amount of rates required and the rate calculation summary.

iii.   This part shows the business unit costs making up income and expenditure for the rate type.  This financial information reconciles with the rate type financial summary mentioned above (ii).

iv.   This part contains a schedule of fees and charges showing the current fee and charge (2017/2018) with a column for the committee to consider charges to be set for 2018/2019.

(C)    Planned Projects

This section includes a list of the maintenance and capital projects planned for the Te Anau community for the next 10 years.

Where applicable, this includes the water and wastewater programme for the community for the 10 years.  The water and wastewater programme is determined and rated at Council level, but has been included for the local committee’s information.

More detailed reports, outlining options for specific community projects will be submitted to the board closer to the implementation dates as is appropriate.

(D)   Appendices

The appendices contains detailed reports in support of information in the body of the report as follows:

(i)        Reserves Report - this shows the balance of every reserve the community has for each of the 10 years.

(ii)       Loan Report - this shows the balance of every internal and external loan the community has for each of the 10 years.


 

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

31      The draft budgets (including details of projects) will form part of the activity statements and financials in the Council’s LTP 2018-2028.  The LTP (and associated Consultation Document) is a requirement of the Local Government Act 2002. 

32      There is a statutory requirement to adopt an LTP before rates can be set in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.

Community Views

33      Any significant issues affecting local communities may be included in the official consultation document which will be publicly available from early March to mid April 2018.  The consultation document will be posted out to each household throughout the District.

34      The broader local budgets for all the communities will be summarised in the financial projections which will be available as background information to the public consultation.

35      Local committees are also asked to advise officers of any local issues/projects that they would like to be highlighted in the consultation material where they are wanting to encourage feedback from the local community or let the community know of any significant projects.

36      Any submissions received from the public on local issues will be forwarded to the relevant community partnership leader (and Chairperson and board/committee if required) for comment.  As a result of the submission process, amendments may be made prior to Council formally adopting the finalised LTP by 30 June 2018.

Costs and Funding

37      The financial considerations are set out in Attachment A of this report.  Key financial aspects to be aware of include:

Stormwater Monitoring Costs

38      Stormwater budgets have been increased from 2019/2020 to reflect expected monitoring costs following discussions with Environment Southland on draft resource consent conditions.  The implementation of the Water and Land Plan is expected to increase these costs.

Assumptions

39      In preparing the 10 year forecasts, the Council has used a number of assumptions as follows:

·    Estimates are built from the levels of service desired by the community.

·    Estimates have been included for expected costs in relation to the Water and Land Plan

·    Interest has not yet been included in the projected reserve balances for the 10 years of the plan.  Once the budgets have been finalised, interest will be calculated and transferred directly to the relevant reserves (later in 2017).

·    The estimates include an allowance for price level changes (inflation) which is a financial reporting requirement.  For the plan inflation has been assumed at between 2-2.8% per annum.

·    Interest on borrowings has been charged at 4.65% per annum.

·    No allowance has been made in the estimates for any possible increases in contract rates for contracts being re-tendered.

·    Reserves used to fund project/capital work where possible rather than internal loans.

·    Where loan funding is required for key community projects, it is assumed that these loans will be obtained internally in the first instance.

Policy Implications

40      The report is a summary of plans prepared in respect to all of the services the Te Anau Community Board intends to provide in the Te Anau community during the 10 year period from 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2028.  The information including the estimates will be incorporated in the draft 2018 LTP Consultation Document and final LTP 2018-2028.

Analysis

Options Considered

41      The community partnership leader has discussed with the community board the projects to be included in the Long Term Plan and the remaining budgets have been reviewed and updated by the community engineer.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Accept the estimates as proposed in this report

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Enables the Long Term Plan to be complied and audited with the set timeframe

·        Rates recommendation to Council is finalised.

·        Budgets and project estimates can be updated or reviewed annually as part of the Annual Plan budgeting process (or approved via unbudgeted expenditure process).

·        None identified

Option 2 – Amend the estimates proposed in the report

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Changes can be made to the Long Term Plan budgets.

·        Rates requirement may need to be recalculated.

·        May impact the delivery of the Long Term Plan within the set timeframe.

Assessment of Significance

42      The decision to be made by the community board is not likely to be a significant decision on its own under the Council’s significance and Engagement Policy.  However, the Long Term Plan (into which the committee’s budgets are incorporated) is considered significant and will be consulted on in March/April 2018.

Recommended Option

43      Option 1 Accept the estimated reports as proposed in this report.

Next Steps

44      The draft 10 year budgets and rating information for 2018-28 for the Te Anau Community Board will be included in the draft LTP financial information for confirmation by Council in February 2018 and consultation through March-April 2018.

 

Attachments

a             Te Anau Estimates and Local Activity Plan Information for the Draft Long Term Plan (LTP) 2018-2028 (Attachment A)    

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


 


 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 





Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Te Anau Airport Manapouri - Local Budgets for the Long Term Plan 2018-28

Record No:        R/17/10/23977

Author:                 Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

Approved by:       Anne Robson, Chief Financial Officer

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        To set local budgets for 2018-2028 and propose rates for the year commencing 1 July 2018.

Executive Summary

2        This report provides an overview of the local activities and services for Te Anau Airport for 2018-2028 which are provided under the governance of the Te Anau Community Board.  The report details the estimated costs of these activities over the 10 years as well as the draft rates.

3        The draft budgets will be incorporated into the Council’s draft Long Term Plan (LTP)
2018-2028 which will be released for consultation in March 2018.  Once the plan is finalised (and subject to any changes resulting from submissions), the budgets shown for 2018/2019 will be used to set rates for the year beginning 1 July 2018 (referred to as LTP year 1).

4        The information in this report and its attachments, has been sourced from previous discussions between the community board and community partnership leader/community engineer along with Activity Management Plans (AMPs) that officers have prepared.  The AMPs contain more detail about the activities and expenditure requirements.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Te Anau Airport Manapouri - Local Budgets for the Long Term Plan 2018-28” dated 5 October 2017.

b)           Determines that this matter 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)           Recommends to Council that the following rates and charges (including GST) for the year commencing 1 July 2018 be included in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan:

 

Rate

Rate GST inclusive

Te Anau Airport Rate

$128 per rating unit

 

e)            Requests Council sets the fees and charges (including GST) for the year commencing 1 July 2018 as follows:

Te Anau Airport

Fee Description                                                                                                                  Fee (GST Incl)

Landing Fees                                                                                                                                                     

Weight category [1]                                                                                                                                        

      < or = 2,000                                                                                                                                     $17.25

      2,001 - 4,000                                                                                                                                   $34.50

      4,001 - 5,700                                                                                                                                   $57.50

      5,701 - 10,000                                                                                                                              $115.00

      10,001 - 20,000                                                                                                                           $230.00

      >20,000                                                                                                                                          $322.00

      Helicopters                                                                                                                                     $17.25

Honesty Box Landing Fees                                                                                                                         

      < or = 2,000 (no GST)                                                                                                                 $17.00

      2,001 - 4,000 (no GST)                                                                                                               $34.00

      4,001 - 5,700 (no GST)                                                                                                               $57.00

      Helicopters (no GST)                                                                                                                 $17.00

Overnight Fee                                                                                                                                                    

      < or = 2,000                                                                                                                             no charge

      2,001 - 4,000                                                                                                                           no charge

      4,001 - 5,700                                                                                                                           no charge

      5,701 - 10,000                                                                                                                                $57.50

      10,001 - 20,000                                                                                                                           $115.00

      >20,000                                                                                                                                          $172.50

      Helicopters                                                                                                                             no charge

Ground Handling Fees                                                                                                                                  

The ground handling fees include runway inspection, marshalling, toilet servicing as required and security cones                                                                                                                                        

      With baggage                                                                                                                            $322.00

      Without baggage                                                                                                                    $241.50

      With baggage (two persons assist)                                                                              $339.25

      Additional person                                                                                                                      $80.50

      Ground power unit assistance (minimum one hour)                                         $172.50

      After hours call out fees                                                                                                         $80.00

Refuelling Fees                                                                                                                                                

      Standard Refuelling                                                                                                                  $57.50

      Additional person                                                                                                                      $80.50

      Function Centre Fees                                                                                                                            

      Per night fee                                                                                                                               $350.00

      Bond (refundable)                                                                                                                   $200.00

      Optional contract clean                                                                                                       $200.00

f)             Identifies any issues/priority projects for the local area that need to be included in the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan consultation process to encourage feedback from the local community (to be discussed at the meeting, and advised if any).

 


 

Background

5        The LTP is adopted every three years and provides the community with information on the role, scope, service level and priority of Council activities for 10 years.

6        In preparing the LTP budgets and programmes, Council reviews its strategic direction, various policies and Activity Management Plans (AMPs).  The Council also develops a series of assumptions about the environment that it expects to operate in during the 10 year period.  Council summarises this information in a document for consultation with the community.

7        The LTP Consultation Document is released to the public in March 2018 and the community has an opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed plan.  Council will decide on any changes to the draft plan before it is adopted in June 2018.

8        Year 2 and 3 of the LTP are used as the basis for the Annual Plan’s for those years.

Overview of the Process

9        The separate Strategic Framework paper on the committee agenda outlines some of the significant changes predicted in Southland communities and the Council’s operating environment in the future that will impact on our activities, services and rates affordability in the future.

10      Council has been discussing these changes as part of the development of the 2018 LTP and the implications in terms of affordability and appropriateness of Council services for the community in the future.

11      However, in order to be able to engage in a meaningful way with the community about the issues and options, Council has identified a need to gather better information to inform choices and develop a more strategic approach to responding to these issues across the District.

12      As such, as part of the 2018 LTP, Council is looking to begin developing this information over the next three years to inform these conversations ahead of the 2021 LTP, where specific choices and decisions will need to be made.

13      In the interim, the 2018 LTP is going to be a transitional plan, where budgets and work programmes are generally expected to be similar to previous years except in areas where there is legislative or regulatory compliance requirements, outstanding issues that need to be addressed or where work is needed to progress the Council’s strategic priorities (see diagram below).

14      This is expected to enable Council to start working on the more strategic/fundamental issues facing Southland in the future and get better information and analysis to assist the Council and communities to make informed decisions about how to adapt to these changes as part of the 2021 LTP and beyond.

15      As such each local committee (community board, CDA and water supply subcommittee) should also be aware that while the 2018 LTP has minimal change, there is likely to be a fuller review of activities and services and what is ‘fit for purpose’ and how they are funded over the next three years.  As part of the process, local committees will have an opportunity be involved in this work.

Issues

District Wide

16      There are a number of district-wide issues which Council has been considering as part of the 2018 LTP that local committees should also be aware of.  The key issues that have a link to local budgeting processes are detailed below.

Revenue and Financing Policy

17      As part of the review of the Revenue and Financing Policy, Council is considering the most appropriate way to rate for library services across the district (along with a number of other changes to rates which are set at the district-level).  Under the current policy the rates for the library activity are collected from a combination of some local communities and the district at large.  The Council is considering whether the activity should only be funded from the district at large, given the greater proportion of residents now accessing library services online.  If this occurs then some local rates will be reduced and the costs will be included in the District General rate.  The draft policy including this information will be consulted on and the public will have opportunity to provide feedback.

Local Budget Development

18      The draft budgets for the Te Anau Airport for 2018-2028 have been prepared.  Figures for these budgets have flowed out of the review of Activity Management Plans as well as discussions between local committees, airport manager/asset manager over the past few months.

19      The aim of this has been to ensure that all projects and changes to expenditure have been discussed prior to the budget meetings so that the meetings are focussed primarily on the rates recommendation.  This approach has been taken because the LTP is audited and officers need budgets to be finalised earlier to enable to the audit to occur.

20      While we are aiming to have few changes at budgets meetings, we realise that some committees may want to carry our further investigations before finalising their programme.  If this is the case, we would encourage committees to keep their changes to a minimum if possible and consider whether these can be processed through the annual budget/project review (via the Annual Plan) or through the unbudgeted expenditure process.

21      The objective of this budget report is to highlight issues, confirm priorities and plan expenditure and funding for the next 10 years for the Te Anau Community Board’s contribution as part of the Council’s LTP.

22      If approved by Council via the LTP, the community board will be able to spend the Council funds allocated in accordance with the budgeted expenditure.  This occurs via Council officers approving purchase orders.  If the community board wishes to spend funds that are unbudgeted, including monies from reserves, the Board has a delegation to approve up to $10,000 otherwise the decision will need Council approval. 

23      In preparation for the 2018-2028 LTP, Council officers are reviewing and updating Council’s various Asset/Activity Management Plans (AMPs).

24      Included in Attachment A (Section C) of this report is a summary of all planned projects for the Te Anau Airport for the next 10 years as extracted from the draft AMPs.  Copies of the full draft AMPs can be obtained by contacting the relevant Council officer who manages the asset portfolio.  Summaries of Council’s AMPs will also be available online throughout the duration of the Long Term Plan consultation period.

Issues - Local Community

25      Key issues that the committee need to be aware of for the Te Anau Airport over the next 10 years are:

·    The ongoing issue of how to actively promote the full use of the airport and its surrounding hangers.  In 2016, Council undertook an external report around the operations of the airport.  This report looked at the current arrangements and future potential opportunities.  Over the next three years Council officers will be working with the community board to set some clear objectives, create development plans and ensure there implementation.  Part of this development plan will include discussion around options to lease the mixed use hanger sites.  The agreement with the current lessee over their exclusive option to lease is due to expire on 1 September 2018.

 

Attachment A is organised into four main sections as follows:

(A)    Overview

This section includes details of the proposed rates for the Te Anau community (compared to the previous year).  The section also includes an overview of reserves and loans.

(B)    Rate Type Financial Information and Activity Summary

          This section is organised by rate type and is broken into four subparts:

i.     This part contains a graph showing income and expenditure projected over the 10 years.

ii.    This part contains a summary of the financial budgets.  It shows the expenditure and income projected over the 10 years, the amount of rates required and the rate calculation summary.

iii.   This part shows the business unit costs making up income and expenditure for the rate type.  This financial information reconciles with the rate type financial summary mentioned above (ii).

iv.   This part contains a schedule of fees and charges showing the current fee and charge (2017/2018) with a column for the committee to consider charges to be set for 2018/2019.

(C)    Planned Projects

This section includes a list of the maintenance and capital projects planned for the Te Anau Airport for the next 10 years.

Where applicable, this includes the water and wastewater programme for the community for the 10 years.  The water and wastewater programme is determined and rated at Council level, but has been included for the local committee’s information.

More detailed reports, outlining options for specific community projects will be submitted to the Board/Committee closer to the implementation dates as is appropriate.

(D)   Appendices

The appendices contains detailed reports in support of information in the body of the report as follows:

(i)        Reserves Report - this shows the balance of every reserve the community has for each of the 10 years.

(ii)       Loan Report - this shows the balance of every internal and external loan the community has for each of the 10 years.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

26      The draft budgets (including details of projects) will form part of the activity statements and financials in the Council’s LTP 2018-2028.  The LTP (and associated Consultation Document) is a requirement of the Local Government Act 2002. 

27      There is a statutory requirement to adopt an LTP before rates can be set in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.

Community Views

28      Any significant issues affecting local communities may be included in the official consultation document which will be publicly available from early March to mid April 2018.  The consultation document will be posted out to each household throughout the District.

29      The broader local budgets for all the communities will be summarised in the financial projections which will be available as background information to the public consultation.

30      Local committees are also asked to advise officers of any local issues/projects that they would like to be highlighted in the consultation material where they are wanting to encourage feedback from the local community or let the community know of any significant projects.

31      Any submissions received from the public on local issues will be forwarded to the relevant Community Partnership Leader (and Chairperson and board/committee if required) for comment.  As a result of the submission process, amendments may be made prior to Council formally adopting the finalised LTP by 30 June 2018.

Costs and Funding

32      The financial considerations are set out in Attachment A of this report.  Key financial aspects to be aware of include:

Assumptions

33      In preparing the 10 year forecasts, the Council has used a number of assumptions as follows:

·    Estimates are built from the levels of service desired by the community.

·    Estimates have been included for expected costs in relation to the Water and Land Plan

·    Interest has not yet been included in the projected reserve balances for the 10 years of the plan.  Once the budgets have been finalised, interest will be calculated and transferred directly to the relevant reserves (later in 2017).

·    The estimates include an allowance for price level changes (inflation) which is a financial reporting requirement.  For the plan inflation has been assumed at between 2-2.8% per annum.

·    Interest on borrowings has been charged at 4.65% per annum.

·    No allowance has been made in the estimates for any possible increases in contract rates for contracts being re-tendered.

·    Reserves used to fund project/capital work where possible rather than internal loans.

·    Where loan funding is required for key community projects, it is assumed that these loans will be obtained internally in the first instance.

Policy Implications

34      The report is a summary of plans prepared in respect to all of the services the Te Anau Airport intends to provide during the 10 year period from 1 July 2018 to 30 June 2028.  The information including the estimates will be incorporated in the draft 2018 LTP Consultation Document and final LTP 2018-2028.

Analysis

Options Considered

35      The Community Partnership Leader has discussed with the Committee the projects to be included in the Long Term Plan and the remaining budgets have been reviewed and updated by the Community Engineer.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Accept the estimates as proposed in this report

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Enables the Long Term Plan to be complied and audited with the set timeframe

·        Rates recommendation to Council is finalised.

·        Budgets and project estimates can be updated or reviewed annually as part of the Annual Plan budgeting process (or approved via unbudgeted expenditure process).

·        None identified

Option 2 – Amend the estimates proposed in the report

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Changes can be made to the Long Term Plan budgets.

·        Rates requirement may need to be recalculated.

·        May impact the delivery of the Long Term Plan within the set timeframe.

Assessment of Significance

36      The decision to be made by the community board is not likely to be a significant decision on its own under the Council’s significance and Engagement Policy.  However, the Long Term Plan (into which the committee’s budgets are incorporated) is considered significant and will be consulted on in March/April 2018.

Recommended Option

37      Option 1 Accept the estimated reports as proposed in this report.

Next Steps

38      The draft 10 year budgets and rating information for 2018-28 for the Te Anau Airport will be included in the draft LTP financial information for confirmation by Council in February 2018 and consultation through March-April 2018.

 

Attachments

a             Te Anau Airport Estimates and Local Activity Plan Information for the Draft Long Term Plan (LTP) 2018-2028 (Attachment A)    

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Support for the 2018 GODZone Event

Record No:        R/17/9/23167

Author:                 Simon Moran, Community Partnership Leader

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        To seek a recommendation from the Te Anau Community Board to Council that it approves $20,000 of previously unbudgeted expenditure to support the GODZone event being held in Te Anau in March 2018.

Background

2        The 2018 GODZone event has been officially announced to be held in and around Te Anau from March 1-10.

3        The Fiordland event itself is going to be one of the biggest and longest GODZone races having been extended from the usual 7 days to 10 days, with 90 local and international teams competing. Along with the support crews for GODZone Pursuit teams this makes it a significant event to be held in Te Anau and the wider Fiordland area.

4        Support from the local community, including financial support, was part of early discussions around where the event was to be held. The Council agreed to provide $30,000 to support the event and the Community Board has previously discussed providing $20,000.

Community Views

5        No formal consultation with the community has been undertaken, however, this report is to be considered in open meeting therefore there is an opportunity for people in the community to make their thoughts known to the Board prior to any recommendation being made.

Funding

6        The funding for this will be from the Te Anau Community Board General Reserve which was approximately $550,000 as at 1 July 2017.

Legal

7        At $20,000 the value of the financial support exceeds the financial delegation of the Board. Therefore if the Board is in favour of the grant it will need to recommend that the Council approves the unbudgeted expenditure.

Assessment of Significance

8        The unbudgeted expenditure of $20,000 by the Te Anau Community Board is not considered significant in terms of Council’s Significance Policy.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Support for the 2018 GODZone Event” dated 2 October 2017.

b)         Recommends to Council that it approve the Te Anau Community Board unbudgeted expenditure of $20,000 from the Board’s general reserve to support the hosting of the GODZone event in Te Anau.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report. 

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Receipt of feedback on proposal to remove only one tree from the Henry Street reserve

Record No:             R/17/10/23328

Author:                      Kevin McNaught, Strategic Manager Property

Approved by:         Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Background

1        At the Board meeting on 13 September 2017 to consider a report on the trees situated on the Henry Street reserve, an alternative proposal was presented whereby only one tree be removed and the rest remain.

2        The report being considered was “left on the table” and no decision made, while this alternative proposal was presented to all the applicants and submitters to consider and provide feedback on.

3        Attached is the responses received.  They vary from yes remove one only to no leave them all with other options presented including remove another one to topping some others. Obviously there is not going to be a clear consensus obtained.

4        There is no doubt that removing one tree from the stand will have a visual effect, however what is unknown is the effect the removal of one tree will have on the others.  This was raised by three of the parties.

5        The question therefore relates to whether the Board is prepared to make decision on something that may have unintended consequences to the rest of the trees. Given the time constraints there has been no opportunity to seek advice from any professionals on this matter. That being the case staff consider that the original report be considered as previously presented.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Receipt of feedback on proposal to remove only one tree from the Henry Street reserve” dated 6 October 2017.

 

b)           Consider the Report presented to the Board on 13 September without change.

 

 

Attachments

a             Response from Sandra McNamara 

b             Response from P and P Applegarth 

c             Response from K and R Stones 

d            Response from Alina Suchanski 

e             Response from Martin Sliva 

f             Response from Sue Peoples 

g            Support from Alan and Sheila Petrie - Council's report to Community Board regarding beech trees at Henry Street Reserve    

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Consideration of the submissions and objections in relation to the proposal to remove the trees from the Henry Street reserve

Record No:        R/17/8/19521

Author:                 Kevin McNaught, Strategic Manager Property

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        To consider the submissions and objections in relation to the proposal to remove the trees from the Henry Street reserve as well as make a decision after considering the submissions and objections.

Executive Summary

2        The Board at its meeting in April this year considered a report and legal advice in regard to a request by some neighbours to remove the stand of Beech trees in the Henry Street reserve.

3        The Board agreed with the request, but made their decision subject to public notification of the proposal, to seek feedback from the wider community.  A separate decision made at the meeting was that after the public notification process the Board either confirms or amends its position on the request.  Six submissions and objections were received on the proposal.

4        Council has delegated to the Community Board the authority to hear and decide on the submissions and objections, as opposed to the Board considering these separately and having to make a recommendation to Council.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Consideration of the submissions and objections in relation to the proposal to remove the trees from the Henry Street reserve” dated 2 October 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 after considering the objections and submissions in relation to the proposal to remove the stand of Beech trees from the Henry Street reserve that the status quo should prevail in that the stand of trees are to remain as is.

 

 

Content

Background

5        The Board at its meeting on 12 April this year received a report and legal opinion in relation to a request from some neighbours to the Henry Street reserve that the stand of Beech trees be removed.  A copy of the request is attached.

6        While the basis for the request were not primarily in accordance with the Reserves Act 1977 in relation to the removal of trees, consideration was based on what would a good neighbour do in this situation.

7        The Board agreed with the request, but made their decision subject to public notification of the proposal, to seek feedback from the wider community given that the request related to trees situated on a community reserve.  A separate decision made at the meeting was that after the community consultation the Board either confirms or amends its position on the request.  Six submissions and objections were received on the proposal.

8        This report is in line compliance with the Board decision, in that it be given the opportunity after the community consultation to either confirm or amend its previous position.

9        Given that the Reserves Act 1977 requires a hearing to be held by Council as the administering body, to consider the objections and submissions, Council has delegated to the Board the authority to hear and decide on these at the same time as the Board is confirming or amending its previous position.

Issues

10      The main issue identified is clearly the different position between the parties in relation to the removal or retention of the trees.

11      This report, the consideration of the objections and submissions to the proposal, and subsequent decision will obviously not suit everyone, however a fair and transparent process has been followed and a decision is required.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

12      As the trees are located on a reserve subject to the Reserves Act 1977, that is the legislation that drives the process.

13      There is specific requirements in the act as it relates to the removal of trees and bush (Sec.42), and it has already been acknowledged that the reasons for the request were not in line with these requirements, therefore public input was imperative prior to a final decision being made.

14      Section 120 of the Act sets out the rights of objection and making decisions. Sec120 (1) (c) allows for those who have made submissions or objections the right to appear before those considering the objections or submissions. This opportunity has been given to all as well as the original applicants.

15      The same section also make reference that those considering the objections or submissions may be heard by “… or a person nominated by the administering body…”  Legal advice received is that this can be delegated to the Community Board so Council at its meeting on
6 September resolved to delegate to the Board the authority to hear and determine those submissions and objections.

16      Subsection (d) of Section 120 requires full consideration to every objection or submission received before deciding to proceed with a proposal.

Community Views

17      Public notification of the intention to remove the trees was given and six submissions or objections were received.  These are all attached for the Board’s information.

18      All the submissions or objections were to not remove the trees.  The themes in the reasons for retention were - birdlife, visual amenity, privacy, shade, ecosystems, act as play equipment.

19      That fact that submissions or objections were received shows clearly that people care about the proposal and that the system of community input on decisions is working.

Costs and Funding

20      Removal of the trees would incur some cost to the Board in replanting the site on the basis that the applicants covered all removal costs.  This was part of the Board’s previous decision.

21      If however there was to be “a value” placed on the trees if removed, then using the standard model for tree evaluation (STEM) by the Royal NZ Institute of Horticulture equates to $15840. This figure has been calculated and provided by Mr Alan Petrie. The assessment covers many issues like size, location, appearance, historical value, functional value etc. This is one of many considerations relating to the issue at hand, but is a method to place a monetary value if required.

22      Trimming the trees is an option and does come at an initial and ongoing cost.  Following are the comments from Graeme Humphries to Community Engineer, Nick Lewis:

“Our idea of using the hedge trimmer is in our opinion the cheapest way to prune the trees in the Henry Street reserve.

 

However due to the community interest in this area, it does concern me that using a hedge trimmer may not result in a very neat and professional job that pruning of trees in a town reserve should have.

 

If council proceeds with this plan, it would be ideal to increase the cost by about $3000.00 to ensure that the trees could be pruned to the standard that everyone would be happy with.

 

This cost would cover the weekly cost of a 12 metre spider lift (cherry picker type machine ) and associated labour costs.

 

We would remove about 1/3 of the height of these trees.

 

Prune and shape the branches to keep the trees from looking like they had been pruned, ( much like we have just done to the beech trees in the town centre, although this will be harder to achieve  as they have never been  pruned in the last 35 years).

The initial cost of $2000.00 would still be needed for the Pruning machine and the clean-up of the bulk branches”.

23      Leaving the trees as is, comes at no costs.

Policy Implications

24      The Reserves Management Plan makes no mention of the trees nor any need for removal or retention.  However, Council’s recently adopted Reserve Management Policy states that the retention of indigenous vegetation is a priority even though in this situation, as the trees were planted no resource consent would be required for their removal.

Analysis

Options Considered

25      The options are considered to be retain the trees, trim the trees or remove the trees.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Retain the trees

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Allows the status quo to remain.

·        Allows all the benefits of the trees as raised by the submitters to be retained.

·        Is in line with Council’s policy position of retention of indigenous vegetation as a priority.

·        Does not resolve the issues raised by the neighbours in their request to have the trees removed.

Option 2 - Trim the trees

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Will go part of the way to dealing with the issues that the neighbours raise as it only reduces the height by 1/3.

·        Has an initial and ongoing costs to be funded by someone.

·        Will need to be done on a recurring cycle.

·        The visual amenity of the trees will change dramatically initially after every trimming.

·        Will have an effect on the issues raised by the submitters as the reason why the trees should stay eg, birdlife, and shading.

Option 3 - Remove the trees

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Resolves the light and shading issues for the neighbours.

·        Removes from the reserve all the benefits that the submitters have raised that the trees provide to the reserve and the locality.

Assessment of Significance

26      This is not considered to be significant.

Recommended Option

27      Option 1 being retention of the trees is recommended after considering the following:

28      Firstly, while the request for removal was considered reasonable, on the other hand the reasons for retention of the trees as set out in the submissions and objections are also considered to be reasonable.

29      Secondly, the trees were in existence when all the applicants purchased their property. 
This is a consideration for the Court when considering issues regarding trees on a reserve.

30      Thirdly, Council’s Reserve Management Policy states that the retention of indigenous vegetation is a priority.

Next Steps

31      Notify the all parties of the decision.

 

Attachments

a         Complaint regarding 12 beech trees in park at Henry Street, Te Anau

b         Request from Alan and Sheila Petrie to keep the Beech trees in the Henry Street Reserve

c         Objection from William Petrie - Removal of beech trees from Henry Street Reserve

d         Objection from Alina Suchanski - Proposed removal of beech trees from Henry Street Reserve

e         Submission regarding the removal of beech trees on Henry Street reserve Te Anau

f          Objection from Martin Sliva to removal of Beech trees from Henry Street Reserve

g         Opposition from Carolyn Wilson - Removal of beech trees from Henry Street Reserve    

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 



Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

PDF Creator


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Request from the Te Anau Boating Club for Council to take over the swimming platform in Lake Te Anau

Record No:        R/17/9/22416

Author:                 Kevin McNaught, Strategic Manager Property

Approved by:       Ian Marshall, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        To consider a request from the Te Anau Boating Club for Council through the Te Anau Community Board to consider being responsible for the swimming platform on Lake Te Anau.

2        This will require the Community Board to be responsible for a replacement platform and to take over the concession from DOC for the structure, as well as the resource consent from Environment Southland.

Executive Summary

3        The existing swimming platform on Lake Te Anau was installed by the Te Anau Boating Club over 20 years ago. The platform is coming to the end of its life and the Boating Club have resolved they will not be purchasing a replacement platform as this is not in line with purpose of the Club.

4        Given they consider the platform to be a community asset, they have written requesting that Council through the Te Anau community Board take over responsibility for the platform including its replacement as well as the concession from DOC and the resource consent from Environment Southland.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Request from the Te Anau Boating Club for Council to take over the swimming platform in Lake Te Anau” dated 4 October 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)         Notes the request from the Te Anau Boating Club to give consideration to funding a replacement pontoon and taking ownership of the replacement.

e)         Resolves to take ownership and responsibility for the existing swimming pontoon on Lake Te Anau from the Te Anau Boating Club on the condition the DOC concession and the resource consent can be transferred to the
Southland District Council.

f)          Resolves to replace the existing swimming platform with a 6m x 3m Medium Density Polyethylene pontoon from Anchorage Pontoons Limited for a cost of $16,000 plus GST

g)         Resolves to fund the new swimming pontoon from its Administration Budget for General Projects.

 


 

Content

Background

5        The existing swimming platform on Lake Te Anau was installed by the Te Anau Boating Club over 20 years ago. The platform is coming to the end of its life and the Boating Club have resolved they will not be purchasing a replacement platform as this is not in line with purpose of the Club.

6        Given they consider the platform to be a community asset, they have written requesting that Council through the Te Anau community Board take over responsibility for the platform including its replacement as well as the concession from DOC and the resource consent from Environment Southland.

7        The club have offered in the letter assistance with the installation of any new platform.

Issues

8        The issues are identified as being the residual life of the existing structure, cost of a replacement and ongoing operational costs.

9        While the Boating Club writes that the pontoon will most likely not see the upcoming season through, this has not been verified however given their historical knowledge of the structure this should be taken as being correct.

10      The Board have requested therefore that replacement plans need to be initiated immediately to have a now structure in place as soon as possible. With that in mind staff have approached two known suppliers, Anchorage Pontoons and Total Marine Services.

11      Unfortunately to meet our timeframes for this report, Total Marine Services were not able to provide a cost for a concrete pontoon as they were awaiting prices for raw materials and whether they could extend their building occupancy. What this means is that costs have only been obtained from Anchorage Pontoons Ltd for a Medium Density Polyethylene structure.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

12      Legally the transfer of ownership of the existing structure can be undertaken by way of letter between the Boating Club and Council however there will be formal processes to be undertaken to transfer both the DOC concession and the Environment Southland resource consent.

13      The DOC concession expires on 28 February 2023 and the resource consent expires on 14 August 2020.

Community Views

14      There has been no formal community consultation on this proposal, whether that is required is up to the Board, or alternatively the Board may make a decision as its represents the community.

 

Costs and Funding

15      The prices (plus GST) received from Anchorage Pontoons Ltd are $11,200 plus $1250 freight for a 3x4 pontoon and $14,500 plus $1500 freight for a 3x6 pontoon. The pontoon’s come supplied with a ladder, floats and a rope around the edge but excluding a mooring block.

16      There will be costs in relation to the transfer and renewal of the DOC concession and the resource consent, however these are unknown at this stage but are unlikely to be of any significance.

17      At this point in time no assessment has been made of the current anchorage for the existing pontoon, and the Community Engineer is not aware of any issues. Given the recommended pontoon of 6x3 is approximately of the same size as the existing structure then an assumption has been made at this point in time that the existing anchorage will be sufficient.

18      Annual operating costs are not known but are not likely to be significant if a new pontoon is installed. No allowance has been made for removal of the existing structure and installation of the new pontoon, on the grounds that the boating club have offered assistance towards this but if any costs do incur, then these are not seen as being significant.

19      It is recommended that this be funded from the General Project budget from the Board Administration budget.

Policy Implications

20      None identified at this stage.

Analysis

Options Considered

21      The options are seen as to either decline the offer or accept the offer and put in place plans to replace the pontoon as soon as possible.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Decline the offer

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        No cost or liability to Council

·        Significant probability that pontoon will either be removed or not replaced when fails.

·        Negative public and community perception to  the loss of a long standing public recreational structure.

 

Option 2 – Accept the offer and replace pontoon as soon as possible.

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Pontoon and consents come under community control.

·        More modern replacement facility will be installed.

·        Continue to provide the well-used public recreational structure

·        Council through Board having to fund initial capital expenditure and ongoing operational costs.

 

 

Assessment of Significance

22      Not considered significant.

Recommended Option

23      Option 2 to accept the offer replace pontoon as soon as possible.

Next Steps

24         The next steps are to advise Boating Club of decision, arrange for transfer of DOC concession and Environment Southland resource consent and for Community Engineer  purchase and install new pontoon

25         .

Attachments

a         Te Anau Boating Club Inc - Swimming Platform

b         Anchorage Pontoons    

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Te Anau Boating Club (Inc.) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


11 July 2017

 

Te Anau Community Board,

Te Anau

 

 

Dear Board Members

 

SWIMMING PLATFORM

 

The swimming platform at the swimming beach near the marina entrance was installed by the Te Anau Boating Club more than 20 years ago. As the floating jetty components were surplus to the club’s requirements at the time it was decided to ‘donate’ this asset for community use.

 

Over this time, the club has retained ownership of this asset, being responsible for:

·    obtaining and renewing Department of Conservation consents

·    obtaining Environment Southland consents and meeting annual consent administration charges

·    insurance

·    repairs and maintenance

 

Concerted attempts by the current committee during the past year to repair the pontoon and extend its life have been unsuccessful.

 

It now appears that the swimming platform is very near to the end of its life.  The committee anticipates that the pontoon most likely will not see the upcoming summer season through.

 

The committee of the Te Anau Boating Club have resolved that the club will not be purchasing a replacement pontoon.  In making this decision, the committee considered the purpose for which the boating club exists and resolved that the funds currently held by the club are earmarked for capital projects in the pipeline that fit that purpose, namely for marina development and maintenance of existing infrastructure.

 

The club acknowledges that the swimming platform is an  important community asset, that is extensively used by children (and adults), whether locals or visiting tourists.  It’s location is popular and a much frequented facility by families enjoying the beauty of Lake Te Anau.

 

With that in mind, the club is requesting that the Community Board consider funding a replacement platform and take ownership of the new replacement along with any associated costs.

 

Our research indicates that the replacement cost will be approximately $13,000 + GST for a 6 x 2.4 metre floating concrete platform. This price excludes any freight or installation costs.  Members of the boating club  would happily assist with the installation and liaison with suppliers if need be.

 

It is anticipated that maintenance would be minimal with a floating concrete structure, and boating club members would be available to assist with this if necessary.

 

 

While the existing swimming platform was removed for a length of time prior the Christmas 2016, there were many comments in the community wondering where it had gone, if it was coming back and when it would be re-installed.  Most people assume it is owned by the Community Board.

 

It would be disappointing to see this asset disappear from the community, therefore the Te Anau Boating Club committee would be greatly appreciative if you could give consideration to funding a replacement and taking ownership of the replacement.

 

If you have any further enquiries on this, please contact the Club via the Club President,  Roger Cunninghame at email sureshield@xtra.co.nz. or  phone 0274328536, or Russel McDonald address below.

 

Yours sincerely,

 

 

 

 

 

Russel McDonald

Senior Vice President.

 

Email r.n.mcdonald@xtra.co.nz

Phone 03 2497725.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

475486-0 (Swimming pontoon letter to Kepler Lions).docx

 

 

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


 


 


 


 


 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Te Anau Community Rating Boundary Review - Milford Sound

Record No:        R/17/8/19226

Author:                 Shelley Dela Llana, Accountant

Approved by:       Anne Robson, Chief Financial Officer

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        For the Te Anau Community Board to review the current Te Anau local rating boundary in light of a request from the Milford Community Trust for the Milford area to be excluded.  

Executive Summary

2        Council has received a request from the Milford Community Trust to review the Te Anau Community Board boundary to exclude the Milford Sound.  The Trust believes that the concession they pay to the Trust and the Milford Sound Tourism Limited (MSTL) are for similar services to those paid to the Te Anau Community board.  As such they believe they are paying twice.

3        The Milford Community Trust was set up in 2008 and in July 2009 started to invoice concessionaires within Milford Sound to pay for Community Leadership and infrastructure services/projects deemed required by the Trust.  The MTA also invoice those in Milford for related infrastructure related costs.

4        Rating of Milford Sound within the Te Anau Community Board local rate occurred from the 1 July 2014 when the local rating area was expanded to match the voting boundary for the Te Anau Community Board.

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “Te Anau Community Rating Boundary Review - Milford Sound” dated 4 October 2017.

b)         Determines that this matter 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)         Recommends to Council that the area of Milford Sound as defined by the map within this report be removed from the Te Anau Community Board local rating boundary effective from 1 July 2018 and that this be consulted on as part of the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.  

 


 

Content

Background

5        Further to discussions within the Milford Community Trust (Trust), Council received a letter on the 13th January from the Trust asking Council as part of its Long Term Plan, consider amending the Te Anau Community Board rating boundary to exclude Milford Sound. The Trust is concerned that those paying rates in Milford are paying twice because they pay a concession to the Trust and/or a payment to the MSTL as well as local rates to the Council. The Trust believes both payments relate to community leadership and management of relevant infrastructure services to the community.

6        The Te Anau Community Board rate pays for Community Board salaries, library, footpaths, stormwater, reserves and playgrounds, refuse collection, cemetery and other items as agreed by the board. The ratepayers in Milford Sound get invoiced from Milford Sound Tourism Limited for the maintenance of the area including refuse collection, toilets etc and they also gets invoices from Milford Community Trust for Chairpersons salary, emergency services provision and other items as agreed by the Trust.

7        In 2014 Council agreed to realign all Community Board and Community Development area rating boundaries.  Up until this date the boundaries were aligned to the services provided by the communities, in 2014 they were changed to align with the voting rights of the ratepayers, Ward rates were also expanded to everyone within the ward opposed to only ratepayers outside the township boundaries. The ratepayers in Milford area pay the Te Anau Community Board rate and the Mararoa Waimea Ward rate which pays for contributions to the Te Anau library, cemetery and sportsgrounds.

8        When this boundary realignment was actioned there was no specific consideration of the Milford area.

Issues

9        Is it appropriate for Milford Sound to be excluded from the Te Anau Community Board local rate.  Currently there is 14 ratepayers paying rates within Milford Sound.

10      If Milford Sound is excluded from the local rate, the remaining Community Board ratepayers will have an increase. 

11      The below map shows the Milford Sound Township area. Not all rating units are currently paying the Te Anau Community Board rate as some areas are non-rateable.

12     

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

13      Any targeted rate needs to be set in accordance with the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002.  Schedule 2 of the Act provides the list of matters that may be used to define categories of rateable land, including where the land is situated.  In practice Council uses rating boundaries to define where the land is situated and the relevant consultation process will need to be completed as part of the 2018-28 Long Term Plan.

Community Views

14      The community has not been approached specifically for feedback on this issue. If a change is recommended it will require formal consultation that we can do as part of the LTP process. 

Costs and Funding

15      There are 14 rate payers in the Milford Sound Area.  If they are to be removed the table below has reflected what the rates would have been for 2017/2018.

 

Actual

2017/2018 (Including GST)

Current

Units

Total Rates Collected 2017/2018 (Including GST)

Proposed Units to Remove

Revised

2017/2018

(Including GST)

Te Anau CB Rate - Commercial

$671.49

181

$121,540

4

$686.66

Te Anau CB Rate - Residential

$335.75

1,772

$595,116

8

$337.28

Te Anau CB Rate - Rural

$83.94

527

$442,235

2

$84.26

 

Policy Implications

16      There are no policy implications identified at this stage.

Analysis

Options Considered

17      There are three options for consideration by the Te Anau Community Board regarding the local community board boundary. These are detailed below:

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Recommend no change to the current Te Anau local community board rating boundary.

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Rates remain the same next year no increase due to unit changes.

·        Milford Community Trust will continue to oppose and get the rating boundary reviewed.

 

Option 2 – Exclude Milford Sound as defined by the Map in 12 above from the Te Anau Community Board Rate Boundary

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Milford Community Trust area gets charged once for governing costs.

·        None

 

Option 3 – Revised Boundary as recommended by the Board

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        The Board gets the area they believe they service.

·        Implications not reviewed.

 

Assessment of Significance

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

19      However consultation on any change will be undertaken as part of Councils 2018-2028 Long Term Plan.

Recommended Option

20      Council staff recommend Option 2 – Exclude Milford Sound as defined by the Map in 12 above from the Te Anau Community Board Rate Boundary.

Next Steps

21      Any further investigation will be made as necessary. 

22      Recommendations from the Community Board will be incorporated into the report to Council on the matter with any change incorporated into the Long Term Plan as required.

 

Attachments

a             Te Anau Community Board Current Rating Boundary

b             Request to consider amending the Te Anau Community Board rating boundary to exclude Milford    

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

 

 



Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

The Pontoon Project

Record No:        R/17/9/23227

Author:                 Simon Moran, Community Partnership Leader

Approved by:       Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                              Recommendation                         Information

 

  

 

Purpose

1        To ask the Community Board to formally remove the proposed Pontoon Jetty from the current project list.

Background

2        Initially there were concerns that in the case of emergencies for boaties on Lake Te Anau it was difficult to get people off the boats and that a new jetty was needed to address the problem. The pontoon jetty project was estimated to cost $200,000 but after preliminary investigation and design it was considered that the cost was likely to be in the order of $300,000. More recently however, it has been clarified that there is access for the emergency services to a boat club jetty if required.

3        This year there has been a consultation process with the Te Anau community and a number of significant projects have been identified. As a result there will need to be some detailed work to prioritise what projects will be funded and how they fit into a coherent strategy for the development of Te Anau.

4        One of the key themes that came out of the consultation is the desire for Lake Front Development (LFD) programme. The pontoon is identified as one of the possible LFD projects and therefore it can be considered as part of working out the key projects to be supported and funded.

Outcome

5        Formally removing the pontoon jetty project simply reflects the Board’s recent discussions. The previously budgeted expenditure will remain in the Reserves and the project itself can still be considered as part of the ongoing Lake Front Development planning that has come out of the community consultation.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)         Receives the report titled “The Pontoon Project” dated 2 October 2017.

b)         Removes the pontoon jetty from its current projects list.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report. 

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Welcome Ambassador Pilot

Record No:             R/17/10/23397

Author:                      Michelle Stevenson, Community Partnership Leader

Approved by:         Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Executive Summary

1        The purpose of this report is to inform the Te Anau Community Board of a proposed Welcome Ambassador pilot project, as detailed in the Letter of Expectation between Southland District Council and Venture Southland Community Development Priority Projects.  This project will have peripheral connection with the Welcoming Communities Pilot being initiated throughout Southland Region by Immigration NZ.

2        The purpose of the project is to develop and deliver a pilot in Te Anau that has a focus of intentional welcoming. The intent behind this project is to have Welcome Ambassadors which are community volunteers who intentionally connect people in their communities, and who may also encourage and enable opportunities for people to feel included and able to connect.

3        The pilot will be developed and run over the course of the next financial year, and will be close to completion by June 2018.  There may be a requirement for the pilot to extend into the 2018/19 financial year depending on the interest and support still required by the volunteer Welcome Ambassadors at this time.

4        The pilot, as part of the Letter of Expectation will engage the Venture Southland Community Development team to deliver, and has already gained initial interest and support from the local Community Family Worker in Te Anau.  Although facilitated initially through Council, the intention is to have a fully community-led and sustainable project continue in Te Anau and beyond, without further need for Council involvement.

Project Overview

5        Welcome Ambassadors was a project successfully undertaken in North Canterbury 2015/16. Permission has been received from the community involved in Pegasus Town, and Local Authority to trial a similar project here in Southland. 

6        The Pilot will be trialled in Te Anau, where community workers have expressed interest and the geographical isolation and demographic of high tourism and seasonal workers, alongside a growing domestic and international population base makes the area suitable to investigate further.

7        Welcome Ambassadors have the commitment of intentional welcoming.  In rural, geographically isolated communities there can be hidden isolation, often without a conscious choice to be so.  The notion of moving to an idyllic rural location can be more difficult and challenging in reality than people in our communities may realise.  Being a welcoming community can significantly enhance the experience of residents, ratepayers, and visitors to the area.

8        As a District and Region hoping to attract over 10,000 new people to the Region, it is imperative that we have communities ready and willing to receive and welcome new people into their existing lives.


 

9        The Welcome Ambassador pilot also recognises that many individuals and organisations are already welcoming, and have skills and behaviours relevant to being welcoming that are utilised on a daily basis. Our communities have natural ‘welcoming ambassadors’; they do what they do because of who they are.

10      The success of the pilot in North Canterbury was in the volunteer Welcome Ambassadors being the pillars that held up the tent, rather than the ring master.  They were the backbone of the community, the people who smiled naturally in the supermarket, the friendly hello at the local café; they were friendly and had natural attributes as ‘welcomers’. The North Canterbury pilot gave the Ambassadors ‘permission’ and opportunity to meet and connect at a wider level with other people in the community.

11      In Southland, and more specifically Te Anau as a pilot, these unofficial Welcome Ambassadors already exist.

12      The purpose of this pilot is to enable and facilitate a project that gives these community members the permission to be intentional in the way they welcome people to their communities.  Their role will be to raise awareness of activities and groups already active in the community, and to establish new and creative ways for people to connect into the community.

13      The pilot will involve a small number of public meetings to gauge interest and support in this project, and the establishment of a steering group to move the pilot forward if wanted by the community.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Welcome Ambassador Pilot” dated 3 October 2017.

 

 

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report. 

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

Southland Regional Development Strategy (SoRDS) Submission

Record No:             R/17/10/23406

Author:                      Jenny Labruyere, Committee Advisor/Customer Support Partner

Approved by:         Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        To ratify the Te Anau Community Boards submission to the Southland Regional Development Strategy (SoRDS) consultation document which closed 2 October 2017.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Te Anau Community Board:

a)            Receives the report titled “Southland Regional Development Strategy (SoRDS) Submission” dated 4 October 2017.

 

b)           Ratifies retrospectively the Te Anau Community Board’s submission to the Southland Regional Development Strategy (SoRDS) consultation document.

 

 

Attachments

a             Southland Regional Development Strategy (SoRDS) – Submission- Te  Anau Community Board    

 


Te Anau Community Board

11 October 2017

 

 

When replying please quote:  240/20/24/1    Jenny Labruyere

 

 

2 October 2017 

 

SRDA Proposal

Environment Southland

Private Bag 90116

Invercargill 9840

 

service@es.govt.nz

 

SOUTHLAND REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY (SoRDS) – SUBMISSION - TE ANAU COMMUNITY BOARD

 

The Te Anau Community Board (TACB) wish to express its concern regarding the lack of consultation and involvement the Fiordland community has had in the development of this strategy. 

 

We are a diverse and growing community with increasing demands on our infrastructure and services due to increasing tourism, population and business growth.   With a mature tourism market, being the gateway to Fiordland and Milford, and having an independent Regional Tourism Organisation (RTO), it is concerning that no consultation has been undertaken with our broader Fiordland community. 

 

The format of the document and short time frame during a busy time of the year make a submission of value very difficult.

 

Other Community Boards across the Southland District are largely unaware of SoRDS and are therefore very unlikely to submit.   We would support further detailed consultation being carried across Southland during an extended period to ensure people are aware of the proposed changes.

 

The 2017 consultation document states:

 

‘Extensive public attention and discussion following the launch in November 2016 to a local audience of 550 people’.

 

That’s only 0.5% of the Southland population in total and did not seem to cover the wider community such as sporting, community organisations, ethnic groups, not-for-profit, social, tourism and health sectors.

 

We have consulted a variety of large and small tourism business in Fiordland and they are potentially warm to the idea of SoRDS, but unanimous in their views that Destination Fiordland needs to stay as a separate entity.

 

The Department of Conservation (DOC) also don’t seem to be involved in this consultation and yet 60% of Southland is DOC estate.

 

 

 

Empowering the Local Community

 

The new Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) model looks to have very little community interface and a lack of any defined community development support. 

 

Unlike Invercargill or Gore, the Southland District is made up of over 30 disparate communities who require support for issues relating to their local community development from agencies such as Venture Southland. 

 

This new agency looks to ignore this requirement which is very concerning to the Te Anau Community Board.   We rely heavily on community development support and seek to ensure it is retained and strengthened if the new structure goes ahead.

 

The TACB strongly believes that keeping decision making and community development functions as close to the community as possible assists in creating robust and resilient communities. 

 

In order for people to stay involved and assist in creating attractive and interesting places to live and work, we need to continue to encourage and enable individuals, community groups and organisations to be involved. 

 

We would strongly support retaining the community development function as a key mechanism in creating resilient communities across Southland.

 

Tourism

 

The performance of the tourism sector is critical to the future prosperity of Southland’ (pg13 SoRDS proposal)

 

The Te Anau Community Board wishes to endorse the Destination Fiordland (DF) submission relating to tourism in our area.  We fully support the issues raised in their submission.

 

The SoRDS proposal states that the Board would need to consider early on whether the two Regional Tourism Organisations (Southland & Fiordland) should combine.

 

The TACB does not support the combining of the RTO’s for the following reasons:

 

·    It is impossible to market the region as a whole effectively when Southland and Fiordland are such totally different propositions and have vastly different markets.

·    Fiordland attracts 75% International visitors / 25% domestic.  Southland is the mirror opposite.

·    Fiordland, particularly Milford Sound, attracts a hugely significant proportion of the group & wholesale market. DF has more experience in this area. Maintaining relationships and understanding the dynamics and specific requirements for this market is hugely different to the Freedom Independent Traveller (FIT) sector which is the only real opportunity open to Southland tourism. 

·    Southland will never be seen by the group market as an alternative or additional destination on their limited and organised itinerary.   Fiordland has had to fight hard over the past 40 years to be recognised as a potential stopover on their itinerary.   A combined Southland based RTO will weaken our position.

·    The majority of international long haul marketing takes place with Southern Lakes International Marketing Alliance (IMA) partners Destination Queenstown and Lake Wanaka Tourism.  The Southern Lakes Group is the strongest IMA out of 9 throughout NZ and each has a Memorandum of Understanding with Tourism New Zealand.   Southland is part of a different IMA.   Amalgamation of the two RTO’s has a high risk of creating confusion and loss of identity for each.

·    DF has 300 voluntary members who largely fund the IMA with Southern Lakes.  If the push comes to combine RTO’s the members are more likely to align with Southern Lakes as there are greater benefits to our community.

·    It should be noted, however, should Te Anau tourism businesses join with Southern Lakes, Destination Queenstown will own the ‘Fiordland Brand’.   Queenstown will be known as the gateway to Fiordland and our community and the greater Southland region will lose the jewel in their crown regardless of any geological boundary line stating differently.

·    The Fiordland community and tourism business community has consistently insisted during various consultations processes over the past 40 years that Fiordland should retain its own brand.   Fiordland Promotions and latterly Destination Fiordland have worked for decades to promote Fiordland, Te Anau and Manapouri as the gateway to Fiordland and the community wishes to continue this. 

 

We support the fact that Southland needs to put more energy, focus, infrastructure and skill into promoting Southland, but just not at the expense of one of its ‘star players’.   Fiordland has more experience at Destination marketing and could give assistance to Southland Promotions as a complimentary brand, rather than joining them together and dragging DF down.

 

Southland needs to:

 

·    Create a Destination Strategy

·    Rebranding to help dispel negative perception of Southland

·    Address the lack of distinctiveness for Southland

·    Create or support more commissionable tourism products

·    Address the infrastructure issues such as connectivity, roading & signage

·    Easement of the structures on development of DOC estate via Fiordland National Park Plan

a)      

Formation of a Council Controlled Organisation (CCO)

 

We do not support the proposed shareholding structure and consider that the new organisation should be entirely owned and funded by the four local councils.   If the organisation is 100% publicly owned, then its accountability and focus would be much clearer and more specific.

 

The Consultation Document suggest six funding partners but we feel each has strong conflicts of interest, and obvious flaws in their ability to be a member that we have serious concerns about their ability to be a member.

 

·    Ngai Tahu is a regulatory body.  Many development proposals will require their specific consent, consultation and input.  We would prefer this input be provided in the context of their regulatory role without being confused with being a shareholder.

·    Ngai Tahu also has significant commercial interests in property, tourism, farming and fishing to name a few.  It would be unfortunate if one commercial operator, through being a shareholder, had a position of precedence over others.

·    Southern Institute of Technology is a likely direct beneficiary of education (and population) initiatives in the plan.  It is difficult to see why they should receive preferential and direct representation over others (including schools).

·    Community Trust of Southland is a likely future funding partner for a wide range of development initiatives.  It is difficult to see how they can discharge this role when also a shareholder of the applicant.

·    Invercargill and Mataura Licencing Trust are also likely future funding partners and have the same conflict as CCO’s.  More significantly they are both trading entities that are active and dominant in the tourism, accommodation and hospitality industries.  It is difficult to see why they should have a preferential right to sit on the development organisation ahead of their competitors and others working the same industries.

·    The Chamber of Commerce provides fragmented representation of the province.  Its membership list includes few Fiordland operators or indeed few from the wider tourism industry.  It would be better if the Chamber was an independent submitter to the CCO on its various plans and proposals rather than being locked in as a shareholder.

 

In summary, the Te Anau Community Board would like to see more expressions of interest sought for Shareholders before any commitment was made.   We are also strongly in opposition to the idea of the Fiordland and Southland RTO’s being merged into one as we do not believe that it would achieve any mutual advantage.

 

The Te Anau Community Board wishes to speak to this submission.

 

 

 

 

Rachel Cockburn

Chairperson

Te Anau Community Board

0274952954

grant.rachel@xtra.co.nz