Notice is hereby given that an Ordinary Meeting of Southland District Council will be held on:

 

Date:

Time:

Meeting Room:

Venue:

 

Tuesday, 18 December 2018

9am

Council Chamber
15 Forth Street
Invercargill

 

Council Agenda

OPEN

 

MEMBERSHIP

 

Mayor

Mayor Gary Tong

 

Deputy Mayor

Paul Duffy

 

Councillors

Stuart Baird

 

 

Brian Dillon

 

 

John Douglas

 

 

Bruce Ford

 

 

Darren Frazer

 

 

George Harpur

 

 

Julie Keast

 

 

Ebel Kremer

 

 

Gavin Macpherson

 

 

Neil Paterson

 

 

Nick Perham

 

 

IN ATTENDANCE

 

Committee Advisor

Fiona Dunlop

Chief Executive

Steve Ruru

 

 

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

 

 

 


 


Council

18 December 2018

 

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 Council Minutes                                                                                                             7

Reports - Policy and Strategy

7.1         Draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw - Deliberations                  7

7.2         Combined Local Alcohol Policy - establishment of a joint committee                            67

7.3         Draft Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy                                                                                 91

7.4         Long Term Plan 2031 - Project Plan                                                                                                    105

7.5         Annual Plan 2019/2020 - Project Plan                                                                                               127

Reports - Operational Matters

8.1         Forecasted Financial Position for the year ending 30 June 2019                                     135

8.2         Proposed Road Stopping at 1830 Manapouri Te Anau Highway                                      147

8.3         Unbudgeted Expenditure for Upgrading the Drinking-water Quality Supplying the Curio Bay Recreation Reserve                                                                                                               153

8.4         Management Report                                                                                                                                   159

8.5         Unbudgeted Expenditure Approval to Undertake Refurbishment of the Kitchen and Toilets at the Lumsden Hall                                                                                                                    189

Reports - Governance

9.1         Draft Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee Heads of Agreement 2018 - 2025                                                                                                                                                                                  195

9.2         Minutes of the Community and Policy Committee Meeting dated 5 September 2018                                                                                                                                                                                  211

9.3         Minutes of the Regulatory and Consents Committee Meeting dated 6 September 2018                                                                                                                                                                                  213

9.4         Minutes of the Riverton Harbour Subcommittee Meeting dated 3 September 2018 215

9.5         Minutes of the Riverton/Aparima Community Board Meeting dated 8 October 2018 217

9.6         Minutes of the Tuatapere Community Board Meeting dated 9 October 2018         219

9.7         Minutes of the Athol Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 30 April 2018                                                                                                                                                           221

9.8         Minutes of the Garston Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 30 April 2018                                                                                                                                                     223

9.9         Minutes of the Waikaia Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 23 April 2018                                                                                                                                                     225

Public Excluded

Procedural motion to exclude the public                                                                                                       227

C10.1    Venture Southland Triennial Agreement

C10.2    Around the Mountains Cycle Trail Management options

C10.3    Public Excluded Minutes of the Community and Policy Committee Meeting dated 5 September 2018

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

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

 

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

 

4             Public Forum

 

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

 

5             Extraordinary/Urgent Items

To consider, and if thought fit, to pass a resolution to permit the Council 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 Council Minutes

There are no minutes to confirm.


Council

18 December 2018

 

Draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw - Deliberations

Record No:             R/18/11/26709

Author:                      Robyn Rout, Policy Analyst

Approved by:         Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        The purpose of this report is to provide information and to present options to Council, so that it can make decisions on the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw (the draft policy and bylaw).

Executive Summary

2        On 25 September 2018 Council endorsed a statement of proposal (see Attachment A), which included the draft policy and draft bylaw, for public consultation. On 29 November 2018, Councillors were given a copy of the 121 written submissions that were received on the proposal, and on 29 and 30 November 2018, Councillors heard those submitters who wished to speak.

3        In this report, staff have presented and discussed three potential options on how Council could proceed.

•   Option 1 – That Council proceed and make decisions now on all the issues identified for the draft policy and bylaw.

•   Option 2 – That Council proceed with the proposed policy and bylaw amendments, but keep the amount of the levy at $5.00 until such time as the strategic review of service delivery on Stewart Island/Rakiura has taken place and determines the proposed amount of $15.00 to be appropriate. The review will provide information on the funding needed to meet expenditure requirements from the levy. At a future date, if Council decides it wants to change the amount of the visitor levy, Council would have to undertake a formal consultation process.

•   Option 3 – That Council defer all the decisions on the draft policy and bylaw until after the service delivery review for Stewart Island/Rakiura.

4        This report is seeking a decision from Council to choose its preferred approach.

5        Depending on how Council would like to proceed, staff may present a draft bylaw or policy to Council in the New Year and/or provide more information to Council after staff have completed the service delivery review for Stewart Island/Rakiura.

6        Under Section 4 of the Southland District Council (Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy) Empowering Act 2012 (the Empowering Act) a levy is a sum of money collected from visitors arriving as freedom travellers, and revenue is money collected on behalf of Council by approved operators. For this report and the ‘Issues and Options’ report, to ensure clarity, both types of money collected (levy and revenue) will be referred to as “levy”.

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)        Receives the report titled “Draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw - Deliberations” dated 10 December 2018.

 

b)        Determines that this matter or decision be recognised as 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)       Considers the feedback received on the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw.

 

e)        Notes that on 25 September 2018 Council determined, pursuant to section 155(2) of the Local Government Act 2002, that the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw 2019 is the most appropriate form of bylaw, and does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

 

f)         Notes that it needs to have a clear rationale of the funds required over the course of a Long Term Plan to better provide services, facilities and amenities for visitors while they are on Stewart Island/Rakiura.

 

g)       Considers the options on how it could proceed.

 

h)       Endorses one of the following options:

i.             Option 1 – That Council proceed and make decisions now on all the issues identified for the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw; or

ii.           Option 2 – That Council proceed and make decisions now on all the issues identified for the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw, but keep the amount of the levy at $5.00 until such time as the strategic review of service delivery on Stewart Island/Rakiura has taken place and determines the proposed amount of $15.00 to be appropriate; or

iii.          Option 3 – That Council defer all decisions on the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw until after the service delivery review for Stewart Island/Rakiura.

 

i)         If it wishes to make decisions now on the issues identified for the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw, endorses the following options (these options are fully discussed in a separate Issues and Options report):

i.     That Council endorses the categories/guidelines that were proposed.

ii.    That Council endorses the multi-year funding that was proposed.

iii.   That Council endorses keeping the amount of the levy at $5.00 until such time as the strategic review of service delivery on Stewart Island/Rakiura has taken place and determines the proposed amount of $15.00 to be appropriate.

iv.   That Council endorses not having TAG and having a staff member/contractor giving advice.

v.    That Council endorses the retention of the current Subcommittee, with additional members being:

•     the chair of the Finance and Audit Committee

•     an independent person from Stewart Island/Rakiura, and

•     a member to represent iwi.

vi.   That Council endorses retaining the status quo, regarding who does not have to pay the visitor levy under the Empowering Act.

vii. That Council endorses the proposed changes to the draft bylaw regarding levy payment collection.

j)         If it endorses Option 3, decides not to amend the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw at this time.

 

k)        Endorses including in the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy that a ten year funding plan will be completed as part of each three year Long Term Plan cycle (currently the draft policy states this plan is optional).

 

l)         Acknowledges that the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy states that the Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw will be reviewed within 6 years of adoption.

 

Background

The current policy and bylaw

7        Council currently has a Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy (the current policy) and a Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Bylaw (the current bylaw).

8        Council sets and collects levies and obtains revenue from people who visit Stewart Island/Rakiura through the current policy, the current bylaw, and through contractual agreements.

9        The current policy and bylaw became operative, and the levy started being collected, in October 2013. The levy collected is currently $5.00 per person. Particular people are not required to pay the levy such as Stewart Island/Rakiura residents and ratepayers, and people visiting who are under 18 years.

10      As is required under the Empowering Act and the current bylaw, levies collected have been used to fund activities used by or for the benefit of visitors, and to mitigate the adverse effects of visitors on the Island.

11      A Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Planning report presented to Council in February 2018 by consultant Sandra James identified that the Island has yet to establish its ‘niche’ market and there is ambiguity around the strategic direction of the Island.

Review

12      Legal advice has outlined that there is no statutory requirement to review the current bylaw, as the Local Government Act 2002 (the LGA) review requirements do not apply and the Empowering Act does not have any review obligations. However, as bylaws made under the LGA are required to be reviewed within 5 years of being made, legal advice suggests it would be prudent to review the current bylaw at this time. The current policy also states that it will be reviewed within six years of adoption, which is December this year.

13      Staff undertook preliminary consultation and obtained feedback from internal and external stakeholders (staff members, members of the Stewart Island/Rakiura community and stakeholders involved with the levy) on this matter, which helped develop the draft policy and bylaw.

14      Staff presented a draft policy and bylaw to the Community and Policy Committee on 5 September 2018 and the Committee made recommendations. On 25 September 2018, Council endorsed the recommendations made by the Community and Policy Committee, and released a statement of proposal (including the draft policy and bylaw) for public consultation.

15      Some of the key changes in the draft policy that went out for consultation are:

•     increasing the amount of levy collected from $5.00 to $15.00

•     having the Community and Policy Committee allocate levy funding, with representatives from the approved operators and from iwi all having voting rights at the allocation meeting

•     discontinuing the Technical Advisory Group (TAG)

•     allowing applications and allocations for salary and wages

•     altering the allocation process by establishing categories for applications, and guidelines for the proportion of levy funds that the committee could give to each category

•     allowing multi-year funding, which could be used to service loans such as capital works projects.

 

16      Changes included in the draft bylaw that went out for consultation are:

•     increasing the levy amount collected from $5.00 to $15.00

•     removing that Council will collect levies on its website

•     outlining that levies will be collected in a collection box on the main wharf in Oban

•     amending definitions in the ‘Interpretation’ section

•     detailing the infringement fee that has been set by way of regulation.

17      Information about why these changes were included in the draft policy and bylaw can be found in a report to the Community and Policy Committee on 5 September 2018, and in a report to Council on 25 September 2018. These reports are publically available on Council’s website and Councillors can view them on the ‘hub’.

18      Council consulted on the draft policy and bylaw from 4 October 2018 to 9 November 2018. There were 121 submissions on the draft policy and bylaw, and nearly two thirds of the submissions were from submitters who live on Stewart Island/Rakiura. Council also heard those submitters who wished to speak to their submission at a Council meeting held on 29 and 30 November 2018. A full summary of the submissions received was provided in the report to Council on 29 November 2018.

Issues

19      In this report, three options have been presented on how Council could elect to proceed. The advantages and disadvantages of all the options are discussed on page 10 of this report.

20      For the first option, Council could proceed and make decisions now on all the issues identified for the draft policy and bylaw.

21      For the second option, Council could proceed and make decisions now on all the issues identified for the draft policy and bylaw, but keep the amount of the levy at $5.00 until such time as the strategic review of service delivery on Stewart Island/Rakiura has taken place and determines the proposed amount of $15.00 to be appropriate. The review will provide information on the funding needed to meet expenditure requirements from the levy.

22      A separate Issues and Options paper has been produced, which is included with this report as Attachment B. This report clearly outlines each issue that has arisen in relation to the draft policy and/or bylaw. For each issue, background information is given, there is a summary of community views, there is a discussion of the issue, and options are presented.

23      Council’s third option is to defer all decisions on the draft policy and bylaw until after the strategic review of service delivery for Stewart Island/Rakiura.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

The Empowering Act

24      The Empowering Act provides that Council may make bylaws in accordance with the LGA to prescribe:

•     the rates of levies that may be imposed on or in respect of ‘visitors’, and

•     the means by which those levies are to be collected.

25      The purpose of the Empowering Act is to provide a mechanism for Council to set and collect levies and obtain revenue from passengers travelling to Stewart Island/Rakiura, in order to better provide services, facilities, and amenities for those persons while they are on Stewart Island/Rakiura.

26      The Empowering Act identifies that the levy is a source of funding under section 103 of the LGA.

27      The Empowering Act defines “revenue” as being collected “by an approved operator in accordance with a contract entered into for the purpose with the Council”. People who pay revenue to an approved operator fall outside of the scope of the bylaw.

Consultation

28      Council has undertaken consultation on the draft policy and bylaw in accordance with the special consultative procedure outlined in section 83 and 86 of the LGA. The proposal was made widely available and people were encouraged to give their feedback.

29      The current policy and Council’s contracts with approved operators require Council to also consult on any proposed increase in the amount of levy/revenue collected through an annual plan process.

30      Under section 78 of the LGA, Council must, when making a decision on how to proceed, give consideration to the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by, or to have an interest in, the matter. There is not a requirement to please all of the submitters, but Council must take into account the views that have been expressed.

31      If Council endorses significant changes to the draft policy and bylaw, away from the options that were outlined in the statement of proposal and outside of feedback that was given by submitters, Council will be required to re-consult on the draft policy and bylaw.

LGA financial requirements

32      Under the LGA Council is required to manage its finances prudently and in accordance with sound business practice. It is also required to make adequate provision for meeting its forecast expenditure requirements.

33      As the levy is a source of ‘funding’ under the LGA, it is subject to the normal LGA financial management provisions. This means that Council needs to have a clear rationale of the funds required over the course of a LTP to better provide services, facilities and amenities for visitors while they are on Stewart Island/Rakiura. In the case of the Stewart Island/Rakiura visitor levy, such an assessment should have regard to the range of services that need to be provided, whether by Council or other service providers, to meet the needs of visitors.

34      There also needs to be a strong linkage between the amount being collected and the proportion allocated to different Council activities and community groups (for visitors to Stewart Island/Rakiura) in Council’s LTP.

35      Council must also show for its sources of funding how it has complied with section 101(3) of the LGA. This section requires Council to meet its funding needs for each activity following consideration of factors such as who is benefitting, the period over which any benefit will occur, and whether the actions of a particular group contribute towards to need to undertake the activity.

Contractual obligations

36      The approved operators are only required to collect revenue through their contractual commitments with Council. The current bylaw and Empowering Act do not place any obligations on the approved operators. Council cannot force/require the approved operators to collect the revenue from passengers. Under the contract they have the option to terminate the contract by giving 6 months’ notice of termination. Termination cannot take place during the peak months of October to April (inclusive).

37      Under the contracts with approved operators, Council is required to consult via its annual plan process before the amount of levy is increased and provide 15 months’ notice of the increase to the approved operators. A variation to the contract (regarding changing the amount of revenue to be collected) is made by giving notice in writing. It does not require agreement by the approved operators.

38      If any of the current approved operators terminated their contract with Council, alternative collection methods would have to be established.

39      Through their contract with Council, approved operators have the right to ‘nominate representatives to the Allocations Committee established under the Policy’. If Council decides to have the Community and Policy Committee allocate funding, this term of the contract should not need to be varied.

Delegations

40      If Council decides to alter who allocates levy funding, and/or it removes the TAG, changes will need to be made to update Council’s ‘Terms of Reference/Delegations’.

Determinations

41      Council was required, before commencing the process for making a bylaw, to determine a whether a bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem. Council made this determination on 25 September 2018. On 25 September 2018 Council also determined that the proposed bylaw is the most appropriate form of bylaw and that the draft Bylaw does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Enforcement of Bylaw

42      It is an offence under the draft Bylaw to evade the payment of the levy or falsely claim not to be a visitor. The draft policy sets out the procedures for compliance and enforcement. The infringement fee is set by way of regulation and is $250. The amount of the fee will be displayed on signs that are erected on the Island. 

43      Council Enforcement Officers may conduct spot checks and request proof of payment of the levy or proof of exemption.

Community Views

44      The community views captured through the formal consultation process on the draft policy and bylaw were outlined in the issues section of the report that went to Council on 29 November 2018. The full booklet of the feedback received through the formal consultation process was also included as an attachment to that report.

45      Submitters generally thought that the visitor levy should remain at $5.00 due to the perception that an increase in levy would deter visitors. People also said that there needed to be more information provided on why the increase was needed. Submitters showed support for levy funding being allocated towards infrastructure, but there were mixed views on whether levy funds should be allocated to operational costs. 

46      Feedback from submissions was also that levy funds should not be used when there was a more appropriate source of funding, and that central government grants could be a preferable source of funding to the visitor levy. There was general support for being able to commit to provide multi-year funding to applicants. In relation to who allocates levy funding, there was not a lot of support for the Community and Policy Committee allocating funding.

47      The community views captured through the preliminary consultation process were outlined in the report to the Community and Policy Committee on 5 September 2018.

48      All Council and Committee reports are available for Councillors on the ‘hub’, and they can be accessed on Council’s website.

Costs and Funding

49      Costs associated with staff time, advertising, travel and legal advice will be/have been met within current budgets. 

Policy Implications

50      If changes are made to the draft policy and bylaw, there are policy implications for:

•      visitors to the Island

•      future applicants to the levy

•      Council, including the Subcommittee and the Community and Policy Committee

•      the approved operators and other transport providers to the Island, and

•      local business and tourism operators on the Island.

The implications of particular issues are discussed further in other parts of this report and in the Issues and Options report.

Analysis

Options Considered

51      The following reasonably practicable options have been identified.

•      Option 1 – That Council proceed and make decisions now on the issues identified for the draft policy and bylaw.

•      Option 2 – That Council proceed and make decisions now on all the issues identified for the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw, but keep the amount of the levy at $5.00 until such time as the strategic review of service delivery on Stewart Island/Rakiura has taken place and determines the proposed amount of $15.00 to be appropriate.

•      Option 3 – That Council defer all decisions on the draft policy and bylaw until after the strategic review of service delivery for Stewart Island/Rakiura.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – That Council proceed and make decisions now on the issues identified for the draft policy and bylaw.

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Council has captured a lot of community views on the draft policy and bylaw and is in an informed position to decide on most issues.

·        the public will have an expectation that a decision will be reached on all aspects of the draft policy and bylaw.

·        Council will be closer to completing a review of the current policy and bylaw (which is in line with review time-period stated in the current policy and the LGA bylaw review timeframes).

·        any increase in the levy may assist strategic planning to provide for visitors. 

·        Council needs to have a clear rationale of the funds required over the course of a LTP to better provide services, facilities and amenities for visitors while they are on Stewart Island/Rakiura.

 

 

Option 2 – That Council proceed and make decisions now on all the issues identified for the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw, but keep the amount of the levy at $5.00 until such time as the strategic review of service delivery on Stewart Island/Rakiura has taken place and determines the proposed amount of $15.00 to be appropriate.

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Council has captured a lot of community views on the draft policy and bylaw and is in an informed position to decide on most issues.

·        Council could use the outputs of the strategic review of service delivery on the Island to ensure there is a clear rationale for the funding needed over the 10 year period of the LTP, and the levy rate that it sets. 

·        delaying the decision on the levy amount will allow Council more time to plan strategically.

·        this option is in line with the community view that there should be a clear rationale for the amount of the levy.

·        the public will have an expectation that a decision will be reached now on all aspects of the draft policy and bylaw.

·        keeping the levy at $5.00 may limit strategic planning to provide for visitors. 

·        there is a risk that the information needed to quantify the funds needed over the LTP period and the levy rate, may not be produced from the strategic review of service delivery on the Island.

·        a review and any consequential increase in the amount of the visitor levy would need to be made via a change to the bylaw and policy, through a consultative process.

 

 

Option 3 – That Council defer all decisions on the draft policy and bylaw until after the service delivery review for Stewart Island/Rakiura.

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Council could use the outputs of the strategic review of service delivery on the Island to ensure clear there is a clear rationale for the funding needed over the 10 year period of the LTP, and the levy rate that it sets. 

·        delaying the decision on the levy amount will allow Council more time to plan strategically.

·        this option is in line with community views - that there should be a clear rationale for the amount of the levy.

·        undertaking the review process slowly may mean there is more understanding about the levy and potential changes to it.

·        if a new proposal is put forward in the future, the Community may be more prepared for proposed changes.

·        this option could give Council time to consider and reflect.

·        the public will have an expectation that a decision will be reached on all aspects of the draft policy and bylaw.

·        Council may have to undertake another consultation process if it delays making decisions on the draft policy and bylaw – there are costs associated with consultation.

·        this option may contribute to consultation fatigue on Stewart Island/Rakiura.

·        this option may give the appearance that Council should have done more analysis before adopting a proposal.

·        keeping the levy at $5.00 may limit strategic planning to provide for visitors. 

·        there is a risk that the information needed to quantify the funds needed over the LTP period and the levy rate, may not be produced from the strategic review of service delivery on the Island.

·        it may appear Council is reluctant to make a decision on this matter.

 

Assessment of Significance

52      Any increase in the amount of the levy is likely to impact/have consequences for a large number of people. There is also a lot of public interest in this matter. For these reasons staff have assessed the decision being made in relation to this report as a significant decision (in relation to Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy and the LGA).

53      Council has undertaken a thorough review of the current policy and bylaw. Council has also considered the community views captured through the preliminary consultation and formal consultation processes. In relation to the decision being made Council has also:

·            identified the potential implications

·            identified the reasonably practicable options

·            assessed the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages, and

·            considered the likely costs.

Recommended Option

54      It is recommended that Council proceed with Option 2 and make decisions now on all the issues identified for the draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw, but keep the amount of the levy at $5.00 until such time as the strategic review of service delivery on Stewart Island/Rakiura has taken place and determines the proposed amount of $15.00 to be appropriate.

Next Steps

55      If Council proceeds with Option 2, staff will present the draft policy and bylaw to Council for adoption early in 2019. The draft policy and bylaw would incorporate the decisions Council makes at this meeting, and keep the levy at $5.00. The strategic review of service delivery on Stewart Island/Rakiura is likely to take about one year to complete. When it is completed, staff would present information to Council on the funds required to provide for visitors to Stewart Island/Rakiura, and discuss what the amount of the visitor levy should be. Council would then engage with stakeholders, and undertake consultation on a proposed draft policy and bylaw in accordance with the special consultative procedure. Council would also be required to consult on any increase in the levy amount, via the Annual Plan/LTP.

56      If Council proceeds with Option 1, staff will undertake consultation on the proposed amount as part of the consultation on the Annual Plan 2020/2021.

57      If Council proceeds with Option 3, staff will also present information to Council on the funding required to provide for visitors to Stewart Island/Rakiura, after the strategic review of service delivery has been undertaken.

 

Attachments

a             Statement of Proposal - Draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw

b             Key Issues and Options - Draft Stewart Island/Rakiura Visitor Levy Policy and Bylaw - Deliberations    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

18 December 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Combined Local Alcohol Policy - establishment of a joint committee

Record No:             R/18/10/25211

Author:                      Jane Edwards, Policy Analyst

Approved by:         Bruce Halligan, Group Manager Environmental Services

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

 Purpose

1        The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s endorsement to establish a joint committee to manage the review and adoption of a draft Combined Local Alcohol Policy (LAP) with Invercargill City Council (ICC) and Gore District Council (GDC) if these other councils are agreeable.

2        The current LAP is included as Attachment A.

Executive Summary

3        In 2016, Council adopted a combined LAP with ICC and GDC. A LAP, under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012, aims to minimise the harm arising in individuals and communities as a consequence of the consumption of alcohol. It is not compulsory to have a LAP, and in the absence of a LAP the District Licensing Committee defaults to the relevant statutory content. The current LAP states that a review will occur after two years of implementing the policy, and Council, ICC and GDC have, to this point, been liaising on undertaking a joint review.

4        At its Regulatory Committee meeting in November 2018, GDC committee members recommended to Gore District Council to discontinue the joint LAP and have its own Gore district LAP. This recommendation will be taken to the Gore District Council meeting on 11 December 2018 for a decision to be made.

5        The ICC Regulatory Committee recommended to the Invercargill City Council in November 2018 to continue with the combined LAP, with the understanding that it is likely to be only ICC and Southland District Council (SDC), and have nominated four councillors to be part of the joint committee (being Councillors Ludlow, Biddle, Crackett and Arnold)

6        Staff have discussed aspects of the combined LAP with elected representatives of SDC who have indicated support in principle for continuing with a combined LAP, while aware that early indications suggest that GDC will remove itself from the combined LAP process.

7        In order to continue the review process and until GDC’s decision is made final, staff are recommending that Council resolves to join with ICC and GDC (if participating) to re-establish the Combined Local Alcohol Policy Committee (the committee) with a membership of twelve, made up of four councillors from each of the councils (or a membership of eight if only ICC and SDC are participating in the combined LAP).

8        Staff are also recommending that Council resolves to cover any administrative and legal costs it is responsible for with regard to the set up and function of the committee.

9        It is intended that the draft LAP will be presented to Council for consideration in early 2019 after which Council will be asked to delegate its LAP functions to the committee.

10      The committee will have the power of decision that binds the three (or two) councils throughout the remaining lifecycle of the LAP until its final adoption.

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)            Receives the report titled “Combined Local Alcohol Policy - establishment of a joint committee” dated 11 December 2018.

 

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)            Resolves to re-establish the Combined Local Alcohol Policy Committee with the Invercargill City Council and the Gore District Council

e)            In the event that Gore District Council no longer wishes to be party to a joint Combined Local Alcohol Policy Committee, resolves to re-establish the Combined Local Alcohol Policy Committee with the Invercargill City Council.      

f)             Nominates four Councillors to be on the Combined Local Alcohol Policy Committee.

g)           Resolves to delegate to the Combined Local Alcohol Policy Committee the power to set its own procedure, quorum and rules relating to the appointment of a chairperson or persons.

h)           Resolves to cover the costs of Council’s representatives on the Combined Alcohol Policy Committee, and one third of administration and any other costs associated with meetings of the Committee.

i)             Resolves to pay one third of the legal cost of appeals, in relation to any appeal that relates to premises or issues in all three boundaries of the Gore District Council, Invercargill City Council, and Southland District Council.

j)             In the event that Gore District Council no longer wishes to be party to a joint Combined Local Alcohol Policy Committee, resolves to pay one half of the legal cost of appeals, in relation to any appeal that relates to premises or issues in boundaries of both the Invercargill City Council and Southland District Council.

k)            Resolves to pay all legal costs of any appeal in relation to premises or issues solely within the boundary of Southland District Council.

 


 

Background

11      Section 75 of the Sale of Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (the Act) states that territorial authorities may adopt a local alcohol policy. The Act allows two or more territorial authorities to adopt a single policy for their districts (section 76).

12      Council adopted a combined LAP with ICC and GDC in May 2016. The current LAP took three years to produce through a combined effort with ICC and GDC. The three Councils are regarded as a single territorial authority with a single district for the purposes of producing a LAP under the Act.

13      The purpose of the current LAP is recorded as follows:

“The policy reflects the intent of the Act, which is to ensure that alcohol is sold and supplied in a safe and responsible manner and to ensure that the harm arising in individuals and communities as a consequence of the consumption of alcohol is minimised. A LAP allows the Council to fine-tune the application of the Act through its own activities and those of the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority, to meet the needs of individual communities.

The policy will help to inform the decisions of the District Licensing Committees (DLC) on alcohol licences for the sale of alcohol in the Southland region, providing a direction as to whether they should be granted, and if so, the conditions that could be imposed.”

14      The purpose of a LAP is also to set a clear framework for the District Licensing Committee (DLC) and Alcohol Regulatory Licensing Authority when making decisions on licence applications in Southland, and to provide a guide to those applying for a licence in Southland.

15      As the current LAP and associated legislation were new and untested, the current LAP states that after two years of implementing the policy and gathering the information relating to alcohol related harm, the policy will be reviewed.

16      A meeting of the DLC was held in August 2017, to discuss the merits of reviewing the LAP.  Representatives from Council (including Councillors McPherson, Duffy and Douglas), ICC and GDC indicated that there was support for continuing to have a combined LAP. There was a general consensus that the LAP has been a useful tool and the consistent approach across Southland is beneficial for alcohol licence applicants and agencies and also generally consistent with the Southland Regional Development Strategy Ease of Doing Business work stream.

17      On 18 October 2017, Council resolved to undertake a joint review of the current LAP with ICC and GDC, and the review process has started. The review of the policy at this time enables some fine tuning to improve the policy and to ensure the policy is working as intended.

18      Previously, Council has committed to a combined policy to ensure consistency across Southland, and to deliver the objectives relating to the overall health and wellbeing of our communities. It was also felt that a combined policy facilitates inter Council co-operation and support which is beneficial for growth, experience and understanding of the issues for our Council, DLC members and staff.

19      Early indication from GDC indicates that the length of time it took to establish the combined LAP initially and its share of the costs involved in the process have influenced the GDC Regulatory Committee’s recommendation that it develop and apply a LAP to Gore District alone but with the intention to keep it generally consistent with the other councils.

 

Issues

Combined LAP Committee

20      In order to manage the adoption of the LAP, Council will need to reappoint members to the committee. A committee was previously established in 2014, so the committee could efficiently and effectively hear submissions on the LAP when it was being developed. This report recommends Council resolves to join with GDC and ICC in re-establishing the committee, with a membership of 12 people, made up of four Councillors from each of the three Councils.

21      The committee will have the delegated authority to set its own procedure, quorum and rules relating the appointment of a chairperson, whether one person for the whole process, or several.

22      If Council determines to create the Committee, there will be costs associated with attendance at hearings. Council will be required to cover the costs of its representatives on the committee and one third of any administration and other costs associated with meetings of the committee.

23      Council will also be required to pay towards the legal cost of appeals. This is suggested to be consistent with the original LAP process of one third in relation to any appeal that relates to premises or issues in all three boundaries of Council, ICC and GDC, and in full for any appeals that relate solely to premises or issues within Council’s boundary.  If only SDC and ICC are participating, then the cost allocations would be consequently adjusted as per the recommendations above.

24      It is intended that the draft LAP will be available for Council consideration early 2019. Council will be asked to consider and approve the draft LAP at that time, endorse it for public notice and to delegate all of its functions under Part 2, Sub Part 2 of the Act to the committee, with the exception of the discretion afforded under Section 88.  Section 88 gives the ability to discontinue with the LAP at any time, and this discretion should be retained by Council.

25      Delegating the authority under the Act to the committee creates an efficient way of hearing and deciding on submissions. The alternative would be that all submitters would need to be heard by all three (or two) councils before the councils could make a decision on the submissions and adopt the LAP. This could result in considerable complications and delays for both submitters and the councils, and possible additional costs to submitters of presenting to all three councils.

Joint review of the LAP

26      The review process of the LAP so far has highlighted some possible amendments that will be proposed for consideration.  These suggestions arose from discussions at the District Licensing Committee meeting in August 2017 and from feedback given by the licensing inspectors from the three councils. It is very important to note in this early stage of the process that these are possible amendments only, and have had no formal elected representative input at this stage. These suggestions include:

•     the requirements within the discretionary conditions to include a qualified manager on duty at non-sporting clubs during busy periods

•     new off-licences – revisiting the need for a social impact study or similar

•     proposed change of off licence hours from 7am–11pm to 7am-10pm

•     the addition of a section within on-licenses to include those establishments that are not already included eg lodges and boats in Milford, theatres, caterers and function centres

•     changing the format of the discretionary conditions so that they are listed within On, Off, Special and Club-specific categories

•     including provision of safe drinking information at off licences as a discretionary condition

•     suggestions for improving the layout and conciseness of policy.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

27      Key legislative points concerning LAPs are:

•      LAPs are quite restricted in their content (section 77 of the Act)

•      Council must not produce a draft policy without having consulted the police, inspectors and medical officers of health (section 78(4) of the Act).

•      if a Council decides to produce a LAP it must first produce a draft policy, that has regard to a number of matters (section 78(2) of the Act)

•      after producing a draft policy, Council must produce a provisional policy, using the special consultative procedure to consult on the draft policy (section 79).

Community Views

28      Community views have been sought in conjunction with the review of the current LAP with feedback received from the police, inspectors and medical officers of health. The current LAP has the support of the reporting agencies, with the further benefits of sharing costs and efficiencies, and ensuring cross-boundary consistency.

29      Wider community views will be sought when the draft LAP is endorsed for consultation using the special consultative procedure. It is felt that the community would be supportive of the committee establishment as it is a joint project with equal representation from each participating council.

Costs and Funding

30      If Council chooses to re-establish the committee, there will be costs associated with attendance at hearings. It is recommended that Council resolves to cover the costs of Councils’ representatives on the committee, and one third of administration and any other costs associated with meetings of the committee, or suitably adjusted as per recommendations if only two councils involved.

31      People who have made a submission on a draft LAP have the ability to appeal if they are unhappy with a provisional policy. Appeals can only be made on the basis that a provisional policy is unreasonable in the light of the objectives of the Act. Some councils have had a drawn-out review process, due to there being many appeals.

32      It is recommended that Council resolves to:

•     pay one third of legal costs of appeals, in relation to any appeal that relates to premises or issues in all three boundaries of the GDC, ICC and SDC.

•     pay all legal costs of any appeal, in relation to premises or issues solely within the boundary of Southland District Council.

33      Previously, the costs associated with establishing the committee to manage the adoption of the current combined LAP were met by ICC whilst SDC covered the costs associated with the establishment of the DLC.

34      At the time of writing this report, details around the specific costs of establishing the current combined LAP were not available but will be distributed to councillors as soon as they are received.

Policy Implications

35      The following are considered to be the key implications of the suggested amendments to the draft LAP under review:

•     requiring a community impact statement for new off-licences. This suggestion was raised by SDC licensing inspectors who recommend that this additional control will help avoid a proliferation of off-licences in higher risk areas.

•     changing the off-licence closing time to 10pm. This is one hour earlier than the national default time of 11pm. This is as a result of concerns raised by ICC licensing inspectors of the risks to the community associated with late closing times for off-licensed premises.

This will affect all hotels and taverns in the District that are currently permitted to be open until 11pm. It will also affect supermarkets in the District in the same way, however, most grocery stores with off-licenses will not be impacted as they have earlier closing times.

36      The District Plan has relevance to licensed premises however the LAP does not conflict with any of its provisions. Similarly there are some Council policies that have relevance, such as the gambling venue policy, again with no conflict.

Analysis

Options Considered

37      The options are as follows:

•     re-establish a Combined LAP Committee with ICC and/or GDC

•     continue the policy review without a Combined LAP Committee and apply it only in the Southland District

•     do not have a LAP


 

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – re-establish the Combined LAP Committee with ICC and/or GDC

Advantages

Disadvantages

·    a consistent approach across Southland is beneficial for alcohol licence applicants and is promoted by the Southland Regional Development Strategy

·    is consistent with the previous approach taken by Council

·    is part of a process that aims to assist in improving the overall health and wellbeing of our communities

·    facilitates inter-Council co-operation and support which is beneficial for growth, experience and understanding of the issues for our Council, DLC members and staff

·    Council may have to compromise on some issues in order for the committee to agree

·    the LAP results in more monitoring and reporting. As it is not compulsory, it could be considered as a further administrative process to be undertaken (there is a cost associated with the time staff spend on this)

 

Option 2 – reviewing the LAP and applying it only in the Southland District

Advantages

Disadvantages

·    aims to assist in improving the overall health and wellbeing of our communities

·    only having Council involved would make it easier to complete a review

·    only having Council involved may enable greater focus on issues in the Southland District

·    Council would not have to compromise on any issues (which it may have to do if other Councils were involved)

 

·    there might be an inconsistent approach across Southland, which may make it harder for alcohol licence applicants and agencies and is less consistent with the Southland Regional Development Strategy

·    this would mean Council was changing its approach (from when the LAP was developed and adopted, and from its resolution on 18 Oct 2017)

 

 


 

Option 3 – do not have a LAP

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        not having a LAP would eliminate some monitoring and reporting (there is a cost associated with the time staff spend on this)

·         would not assist with improving the overall health and wellbeing of our communities

·        there would be an inconsistent approach across Southland, which may be confusing for alcohol licence applicants.

·        this would mean Council was changing its approach to the LAP, which may be confusing to the public.

·        revoking the LAP may be confusing to people who run alcohol licence premises.

 

Assessment of Significance

38      The decision Council is being asked to make in this report has been assessed as not significant in relation to the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

39      At this stage it is important to emphasise that no decisions are being made on the content of the draft LAP, and a draft LAP is likely to be presented to Council early in 2019.

40      When the current LAP was produced, 584 submissions were received, with 60 submitters requesting to be heard in support of their submission. This indicates the large amount of interest that members of the community, including local groups, organisations and businesses, have in this issue.

Recommended Option

41      Staff recommend Option 1 - that Council proceed to re-establish a committee with ICC and/or GDC. The same approach has been recommended to ICC and GDC and both Councils have been recommended to proceed with the re-establishment of the Combined LAP Committee, albeit that the current indications are that GDC may opt not to.

42      Despite GDC’s indication to withdraw from the process, the creation of a combined committee to hear and determine submissions will ensure that the process is efficient for both submitters and the two participating councils.

Next Steps

43      It is intended that a draft LAP be ready for the various Council’s consideration and public notification, in early 2019

44      Public Notice will be given on the draft LAP and a submission period will follow.

45      At the close of submissions, the committee will hear those wishing to be heard in support of their submissions. The submissions will be heard at times, dates and venues decided by the committee.

46      A provisional LAP will then be prepared and ratified by the committee, taking into consideration the feedback received through the submission process.

47      The provisional LAP is publicly notified and is open to appeal. Only the police, medical officers of health, licensing inspectors and those who have made submissions to the draft LAP may appeal the provisional LAP.

48      The LAP comes into effect 30 days after it is publically notified, provided there are no appeals.  If any appeals are lodged to the provisional LAP, it comes into effect 30 days after all appeals are resolved.  The committee will have the power of decision that binds the Councils throughout the remaining lifecycle of the LAP until its final adoption.

 

 

Attachments

a             FINAL - Combined Local Alcohol Policy    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Draft Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy

Record No:             R/18/11/26596

Author:                      Jane Edwards, Policy Analyst

Approved by:         Matt Russell, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        The purpose of this report is to:

a)   seek Council approval to amend the Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) Policy (the policy) to include the Te Anau lakefront as a Restricted Area.

b)   seek the Council’s approval to amend the policy to clarify the distinction between Restrictions and Prohibited Areas.

2        The current policy is included as Attachment A.

3        The draft Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy (the draft policy) is included as Attachment B.

Executive Summary

4        The current Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy is an enabling policy that generally allows UAVs (such as drones) to be flown on or above Council owned or controlled land.

5        The policy sets out that where there are situations where flying UAVs is restricted, or where the use of UAVs is prohibited, Council approval is required.

6        The policy currently contains no prohibited areas.

7        Te Anau Community Board (the Board), at its meeting on 29 August, requested that Council make Council owned land from the Marakura Yacht Club to Blue Gum Point, a prohibited area in the policy.

8        Staff advised the Board that internal discussions have resulted in a proposal to Council to amend the confusing wording within the current policy.  At present, Restrictions and Prohibited Areas, are stated with similar requirements and limitations.   In each, UAV usage can be permitted with Council approval.

9        The amendment proposed will enable areas listed as restricted continuing to have the option of UAV usage with Council approval, while Prohibited Areas will state that UAV usage is prohibited in all instances with the exception of emergency services.

10      The Board, at its meeting on 24 October, considered the future level of control they would like for the Te Anau lakefront, as this is impacted by where it is placed within the policy. 

11      The amendment requested by the Board is to include Council owned land, from Marakura Yacht Club to Blue Gum Point, as a Restricted Area. The Board also requested that an education campaign be undertaken to help build the confidence of Te Anau residents in understanding the implications of any policy changes.

12      On 28 November 2018 the draft Policy was presented to the Services and Assets committee (the Committee) for feedback. The Committee recommended that Council approve the suggested amendments.

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)            Receives the report titled “Draft Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy” dated 11 December 2018.

 

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)           Endorses the following amendments to the draft Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy 2017:

 

i)          adding to section 4.2 Restrictions, a new sub-section titled ‘Restricted Areas’ which will state:

‘The Te Anau lakefront being all that area of Council owned and administered land from the Marakura Yacht Club to Blue Gum Point for a distance of up to 60 metres right angles from the physical edge of Lake Te Anau’

ii)        amending section 4.3 Prohibited Areas to state:

 

‘There are some areas where the use of UAVs is prohibited in all instances, with the exception of emergency services only’

 

 

 


 

Background

13      The policy was adopted by Council on 19 July 2017 with no prohibited areas specified.

14      The area over Lake Te Anau is in the Fiordland National Park and under the control of DOC. While flight operations are not in a controlled air space, Council land along the lakefront is one of the areas where the operators are located when flying UAVs.

15      Since the policy’s adoption, safety issues have arisen in regard to the interaction between drones and aircraft operating along the lakefront. To address this Council staff, in conjunction with operators and DOC, have installed signage in appropriate locations along the lakefront. This signage advises that it is a restricted area and that no drones may be flown without council approval. 

16      The Board have requested that Council also amend the policy to make the lakefront in Te Anau a restricted area with an aim to formalise the constraint and give it more authority.

17      At present, there are no methods in place to enforce either restrictions or prohibitions. 

Issues

18      The policy, in its current form, describes Prohibited Areas as follows:

“There are some areas where the use of UAVs is prohibited unless written approval has been granted by Council”

19      It is the opinion of staff that this statement is confusing and does not clearly define the difference between a prohibited area and an area with restrictions.

20      Consequently it is recommended that the policy be amended to provide distinction between prohibited (formally forbidden), and restricted (put under control or limits). A risk to note is that the recommended policy amendment to tighten control on Prohibited Areas will not allow recourse to Council for written approval for the use of UAVs. 

21      The proposed amendment to the policy will read as follows:

“There are some areas where the use of UAVs is prohibited in all instances, with the exception of emergency services only”.

22      In order that Council is able to continue giving written approval to fly UAVs in specific circumstances, it is recommended that the Te Anau lakefront area, with detailed geographical limits, is included as a Restricted Area.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

23      All the statutory requirements are set out in the policy, and establishes criteria for UAV usage over Council owned and controlled land within the District.

24      Given the varying width of the Council owned property from the Marakura Yacht Club to Blue Gum Point, that maximum distance that has been determined from the edge of Lake Te Anau to the property boundaries on the opposite side of Lakefront Drive and Te Anau Terrace is 60m.

25      For that reason the width of the requested restricted area on the Council land has been set at up to 60 metres right angles to the physical edge of Te Anau which is the boundary of the Fiordland National Park.

Community Views

26      No formal community consultation has been undertaken, however the Board’s request has been made following feedback from aircraft operators on the Te Anau lakefront.

27      A Board member reported at their meeting 24 October, that an informal discussion around the options available in the report had been undertaken with an aircraft operator along the waterfront, and feedback received was in favour of supporting the waterfront being included in the restrictions.

28      If Council approve the recommendation to add the lakefront as the restricted area, it is recommended that community education/engagement is undertaken in order to publicise the limits contained in the policy to the Te Anau community and visitors.

Costs and Funding

29      There will be staff time and advertising costs associated with an engagement process with the Te Anau community.

Policy Implications

30      If the current policy is amended to include the Te Anau lakefront (with clearly defined geographical boundaries) as a restricted area, this will give the Te Anau community specific detail to reference back to when communicating with UAV users. It is not able to be enforced currently and is still only publically communicated by the existing signage.  It does, however, enable permission for UAV usage to be given by Council in appropriate circumstances.

31      If the current policy is amended to provide distinction between Restrictions and Prohibited Areas, it will enable Council to expressly prohibit UAV usage in specific areas in the future.

Analysis

Options Considered

32      The options are as follows:

·    endorse the draft policy with the amendments recommended to clarify Restrictions and Prohibited Areas and to include Te Anau lakefront area as a Restricted Area 

·    endorse the draft policy with the amendment to include Te Anau lakefront as a Restricted Area but make no further amendments to the current policy

·    endorse the draft policy with the amendment to clarify Restrictions and Prohibited Areas, but do not add Te Anau lakefront as a Restricted Area

·    do not amend the current policy at this time

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Endorse the draft policy with the amendments recommended to clarify Restrictions and Prohibited Areas and to include Te Anau lakefront as a Restricted Area

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        The policy will clearly state the geographical boundaries of restricted UAV usage at Te Anau lakefront

·        May help reduce UAV usage in the area and the risk of a collision between a UAV and existing aircraft operations

·        Allows Council to consider requests for UAV usage and give written approval in specific instances within Restricted Areas

·        Allows Council to forbid UAV usage in areas that are deemed hazardous.

·        There is currently no ability to enforce restrictions

·        Restrictions still reliant on signage to alert UAV users

·        Signage has proved inadequate so far

·        No disadvantages to amending wording to clarify distinction between Restrictions and Prohibited Areas

 

 

Option 2 – Endorse the draft policy with the amendment to include Te Anau lakefront as a Restricted Area but make no further amendments to the current policy

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        The policy will clearly state the geographical boundaries of restricted UAV usage at Te Anau Lakefront

·        May help reduce UAV usage in the area and remove the risk of collision between UAV and existing aircraft operations

·        Allows Council to consider requests for UAV usage within areas listed as restricted and give written approval in specific instances

·        If an area were to be specified within the policy as prohibited, Council still has the flexibility to give written approval in specific instances

·        Language used in current policy means that restricted and prohibited have the same requirements and limitations

·        Language used in the current policy does not allow Council to expressly forbid UAV usage in areas that are deemed hazardous.

 

 


 

Option 3 – – Endorse the draft policy with the amendment to clarify Restrictions and Prohibited areas, but do not add Te Anau lakefront as a Restricted Area

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Removing the option of written approval from Council for Prohibited Areas provides clarity between a restriction and a prohibition.

·        Allows Council to consider requests for UAV usage in restricted areas and give written approval in specific instances

·        Allows Council to forbid UAV usage in areas that are deemed hazardous.

·        The current policy and  signage does restrict UAV usage over the Te Anau lakefront at present

·        UAV usage on the Te Anau lakefront reliant on signage only to alert users of restrictions

·        The current policy is not successfully mitigating the risk of UAV and aircraft interaction

 

Option 4 – Make no amendments to the current policy

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        The current policy does restrict UAV usage over the lakefront

·        Signage currently alerts people that they need permission to fly UAVs over the lakefront

·        Permission is able to be given by council in appropriate circumstances within both restricted and prohibited areas.

·        Language used in current policy mans that restricted and prohibited have the same requirements and limitations

·        UAV usage on the Te Anau lakefront still reliant on signage to alert users of restrictions

·        The current policy is not successfully mitigating the risk of UAV and aircraft interaction

 

Assessment of Significance

33      The recommended amendments to the policy are not considered significant.

Recommended Option

34      Staff recommend Option 1:

a)       that Council endorse the amendment to the policy to include the Te Anau lakefront as a Restricted Area with subsequent community education/engagement. This will clarify and tighten the restriction on the lakefront area while still allowing Council to give written approval for UAV usage in appropriate circumstances.

b)      that Council endorse the amendment to the wording within the policy to clarify the distinction between Restrictions and Prohibited Areas.  

Next Steps

35      If Council supports the approach taken in the draft Policy, staff will make any amendments/changes recommended, and present the draft Policy to Council for adoption at its next meeting in February 2019.

36      If the draft policy is adopted, it is recommended that a subsequent community education/engagement is undertaken in order to publicise the limits contained in the policy to the Te Anau community and visitors.

 

Attachments

a             FINAL Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy 2017

b             DRAFT Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Policy 2017    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

18 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

18 December 2018

 

Long Term Plan 2031 - Project Plan

Record No:             R/18/11/26558

Author:                      Chantelle Subritzky, Corporate Performance Lead

Approved by:         Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        The purpose of this report is to seek Council approval of the Long Term Plan 2031 (“LTP”) project plan.

Executive Summary

2        The long term plan process is an opportunity for Council to take a long term view of activities and their impact on the communities throughout the district.

3        The development of a long term plan requires significant planning and engagement with internal staff, councillors and communities to ensure that the final plan is robust and fit-for-purpose by 30 June 2021.

4        The attached plan is a 30 month work programme of key tasks and milestones that need to be undertaken, the terms of reference for the project and the key risks identified. This will result in integrated decision-making.

5        Staff recommend that councillors review the attached project plan and provide feedback. Due to the interdependent nature of the LTP work streams, it is important that any issues that may affect the plan are identified as early as possible so the required work can be scheduled.

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)            Receives the report titled “Long Term Plan 2031 - Project Plan” dated 11 December 2018.

 

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

 

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

 

d)           Approves the attached project plan for the Southland District Council Long Term Plan 2031

 


 

Background

6        Every three years the Southland District Council reviews the Long Term Plan to ensure that council activities and projects align with community outcomes.

7        The purpose of the Southland District Council LTP 2031 is to:

·     provide a long term focus for Council decisions and activities

·     provide an opportunity for community participation in planning for the future

·     define the community outcomes desired for the District

·     describe the activities undertaken by Council

·     provide integrated decision-making between council and the community

·     provide a basis for performance measurement of the Council

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

9        The attached project plan sets out the scope of work for the LTP which includes:

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

·     reporting to Council on the process and approval

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

·     preparation of a consultation document for public consultation

·     audit review

·     preparation of the final LTP

10      The project plan also includes broad timeframes for completion of the key items.  The dates beyond the 2019 elections will need to be revised once Council meeting dates have been set.

Issues

11      The development of the LTP 2031 will be subject to any upcoming legislative changes that impact on the LTP process.  At this stage, apart from the possible development of further mandatory benchmarks, it is not known whether there is likely to be further reform of the Local Government Act 2002

12      There are a number of other work streams occurring across Council during the development of the LTP including the representation review, Core Systems Review (and upgrade of the budget application), development of new asset management thinking, and the launch of new strategy and project planning software. Council staff have discussed the LTP timeline set out in the project plan in light of these projects.

13      As part of developing the LTP, it is important that the development of strategy occurs early on in the timeline.  Any ‘blue sky’ thinking would ideally occur in 2019/early 2020 rather than later on.  The plan is for the new Council to reconfirm the developing strategic direction in early 2020 following the local government elections.

14      It is important to complete the Financial and Infrastructure Strategy as early as possible so that the Activity Management Plans can be developed within the set framework.  While the development of the strategies will be an iterative process to a certain extent, the project plan aims to complete the strategies by early 2020. 

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

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

16      The LTP must include the information required in Part 1 of Schedule 10 of the Act including significant forecasting assumptions, a Financial Strategy and Infrastructure Strategy, a Revenue and Financing policy and a Significance and Engagement policy.

Community Views

17      To create a robust LTP, both early and formal engagement will be undertaken with the communities beginning in 2019. This engagement will seek to identify key outcomes and objectives for the local communities.

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

Costs and Funding

19      The budget for the development of the LTP is $58,744 over three years.  It is funded through the General Rate 15% and Uniform Annual General Charge 85%.

Policy Implications

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

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

Analysis

Options Considered

22      There are two options to be considered in this report:

Option 1: Council approve the LTP project plan, with amendments as required.

Option 2: Council not approve the LTP project plan.

Analysis of Options

Option 1: Council approve the LTP project plan, with amendments as required

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        early adoption of a project plan allows for the LTP project to progress and take full advantage to undertake quality planning.

·        there are no disadvantages, however it is worth noting that any setting of strategy by Council will need to be reconfirmed by the newly elected Council.

 

Option 2: Council not approve the LTP project plan

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        there are no advantages in not recommending to Council approving the project plan as amendments can be made during the development of the LTP as directed by Council.

·        not approving the project plan will delay the implementation phase of the project.

 

Assessment of Significance

23      While the LTP is an important process for Council, the adoption of the project plan has a low level of significance.

Recommended Option

24      The Community and Policy Committee recommended that Council support option 1, and the approval of the LTP project plan, with amendments as required.

Next Steps

25      If Council approve the LTP project plan 2021-2031 then staff will deliver on the milestones and actions accordingly.

26      The next step is to start implementing the project plan.  The Strategy and Policy team will develop an environmental scan document which involves compiling important statistical information for the District.  An early engagement process will be undertaken in February 2019. This will involve a number of meetings throughout the District to engage with the community around a number of arising issues.

 

 

Attachments

a             14.11.2018. Project Plan - LTP 2031    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

18 December 2018

 

Annual Plan 2019/2020 - Project Plan

Record No:             R/18/11/26559

Author:                      Chantelle Subritzky, Corporate Performance Lead

Approved by:         Rex Capil, Group Manager Community and Futures

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        The purpose of this report is to seek the approval of Council for the Annual Plan 2019/2020 project plan.

Executive Summary

2        The purpose of an Annual Plan is to consider and approve any variations to the Long Term Plan (“LTP”) for that financial year. 

3        The project plan attached provides a clear timetable of key tasks and milestones to ensure that the Annual Plan is ready for approval by 30 June 2019.

4        Staff seek Council approve and proceed with the proposed project plan, as detailed in the attachment. 

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)            Receives the report titled “Annual Plan 2019/2020 - Project Plan” dated 11 December 2018.

 

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

 

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

 

d)           Approves the attached project plan for the Annual Plan 2019/2020.

 


 

Background

5        Every three years, Southland District Council develops and adopts a Long Term Plan. In the second and third year of the LTP, Annual Plans are developed to address any variations that occur.

6        The purpose of an Annual Plan is to:

·        contain the proposed annual budget and Funding Impact Statement.

·        identify any variation from the financial statements and Funding Impact Statement included in the 10 Year Plan in respect of the year.

·        provide integrated decision making and co-ordination of the resources of the local authority.

·        contribute to the accountability of the local authority to the community.

7        Each Annual Plan adopted must contain appropriate references to the Long Term Plan and set out the (financial) information required by Part 2 of Schedule 10 of the Local Government Act (“LGA”) which includes:

·        forecast financial statements.

·        financial statements for the previous financial year.

·        funding Impact Statement (rating).

·        rating base information.

·        reserve funds.

 

Issues

8        The LGA requires the community to be formally consulted if there are significant or material difference from the content of the Long Term Plan. It has still not been determined whether this threshold will be met by the proposed variations and therefore time for formal consultation has been included in the attached project plan.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

9        Pursuant to section 95 of the LGA, Council is required to prepare and adopt an Annual Plan for each financial year.  Each Annual Plan must be adopted before the commencement of the financial year to which it relates.

Community Views

10      Council is required in the course of its decision-making process to give consideration to the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by this matter.  Council should therefore consider the views of their community boards and community development areas around the proposed budgeting processes.

Costs and Funding

11      All costs associated with the Annual Plan 2019/2020 are factored into existing budgets.  It is not anticipated that any unbudgeted expenditure will be required.

Policy Implications

12      The Annual Plan 2019/2020 project plan is consistent with Council’s current Financial Strategy, Infrastructure Strategy and policies.  At this stage it is not anticipated that any policies will be amended as part of the Annual Plan planning process.

Analysis

Options Considered

13      There are two options to be considered in this report:

Option 1:    Council approve the Annual Plan as per the timetable (indicative).

Option 2:    Council approve the Annual Plan timetable with amendments.

Analysis of Options

Option 1: Council approve the Annual Plan as per the timetable (indicative)

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        staff can proceed with the work required for the document as planned.

·        provides a streamlined annual plan process.

·        complies with statutory requirements for Council to complete an Annual Plan

·        there are no disadvantages identified

 

Option 2: Council approve the Annual Plan timetable with amendments

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        there are no disadvantages identified

·        greater administrative complexity and potential delay with the approval of the Annual Plan

 

Assessment of Significance

14      The matter before the Committee is considered to have low significance.

Recommended Option

15      The Community and Policy Committee supported Option 1, and recommended to Council the approval of the Annual Plan as per the timetable (indicative).

Next Steps

16      If the project plan is approved, staff will continue with the delivery of the Annual Plan 2019/2020 as per the project plan.

 

Attachments

a             Annual Plan 16 11 2018 project plan    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Forecasted Financial Position for the year ending 30 June 2019

Record No:             R/18/11/26809

Author:                      Joanie Nel, Management Accountant

Approved by:         Anne Robson, Chief Financial Officer

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        To inform and get approval from Council of the forecasted changes to the 2018/2019 Annual Plan budget.

Executive Summary

2        Forecasting the financial position for the year ended 30 June 2019 is intended to provide information about what has changed since the budget was approved, why it has occurred and what the result is expected to be at the end of the year.  In considering the final position staff consider what they planned to do in the Annual Plan, the projects carried forward from 2017/18 that were approved by Council on 25 September 2018, unbudgeted expenditure requests approved by Council during the year and the expected year end position as a result of operational decisions and information.

3       Forecasting enables the organisation to understand the anticipated year end position at all levels.  It will also assist with decisions and priorities for spending across Council.

4       The budgeted expenditure included in the Annual Plan for the 2018/2019 year was adopted in June 2018.  Forecasting allows a formal process to communicate to the Executive Leadership Team (ELT), Finance and Audit Committee and Council any known or expected changes.  The net amount by business units is shown in Appendix A.

5       The effect of the forecast changes on the Statement of Comprehensive Revenue and Expenditure and Statement of Financial Position is shown in Appendix B and C.

6       As part of this report approval is also sought for unbudgeted expenditure that has not been advised to Council previously.  Additionally there are a number of projects that have been identified as needing to be deferred to future years.  A detailed list of these projects can be found in Appendix D.

7       This report has also been presented to the Finance and Audit Committee on the 14th December 2018.  Council staff will update the Council on the comments made by the Finance and Audit Committee at the Council Meeting on the 18th of December 2018.

 

 

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)            Receives the report titled “Forecasted Financial Position for the year ending 30 June 2019” dated 11 December 2018.

 

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)           Note the forecasted changes to Council’s year-end financial performance and position as detailed in appendix B and C.

 

e)            Approves the changes as detailed in appendix A.

 

f)             Notes the projects or partial costs of projects indicated to be deferred to next year as part of the year end carry forward process, as detailed in appendix D.

 

g)           Approve the following projects to be deleted from the 2018/19 financial year:

 

Business Unit

Project

Amount

Details

Stewart Island

Streetworks Stewart Island

 $80,000

Being completed by the Department of Conservation

Stewart Island

Peterson Hill footpath upgrade

 $94,649

Funding source no longer available

Stewart Island

Oban sign

$4,000

Upgrade done by community

Lumsden Balfour

Water supply upgrade

$86,600

Project already deferred to 19/20

Riversdale

Street lighting project 815

$5,000

CDA requested project be deleted

 

h)           Approves the following unbudgeted expenditure for the 2018/19 financial year:

 

Business Unit

Expense

Amount

Funding Source

Dipton Forest

Forestry charges

 $10,534

Forestry Reserve

Finance

Insurance costs

$10,902

District Operations Reserve

Ohai Forest

Forestry charges

$15,259

Forestry Reserve

Manapouri

Playground project change to a flying fox and unbudgeted expenditure for additional costs

$17,500

Manapouri General Reserve

Chief Executive

Riskpool insurance claims

$31,321

District Operations Reserve

Gowan Hills Forest

Forestry charges

$43,552

Forestry Reserve

District Sewerage

Expected increase in monitoring costs for the year due to additional costs from ES and monitoring required from consents

 $57,181

District Sewerage Reserve

SIESA Operations

Increase in operating costs

$249,905

SIESA Operations Reserve

Waikaia Forest

Forestry charges

$695,443

Forestry Reserve

 

 

Background

8        Forecasting enables transparency and Council to be informed of the anticipated year-end financial result. Forecasting is not intended to involve the time and effort undertaken in the annual budgeting process. 

9        This is the first round of forecasting for the financial year with the second due to be completed in March 2019.

10      Budget managers were requested to undertake forecasts for their business units where the expected overall outcome would vary from the budget in the Annual Plan by specified tolerance levels.  These net levels are set at:

-           $1,000 for Council-owned halls;

-           $1,000 to $10,000 for townships depending on their operational expenditure in the current year;

-           $10,000 for all District business units.  The maximum limit of $10,000 was set in line with the delegation held by the Chief Executive in relation to him approving unbudgeted expenditure.

11      No changes have been made to wages costs, depreciation or the revaluation of fixed assets.

12      Changes due to forecasting have been included in the attachments as follows. 

·   Attachment A, provides details of changes to revenue and operating expenditure and capital

expenditure for each business unit with commentary from the budget manager.

 

·   Attachment B, shows the net effect of the changes to the Statement of Comprehensive

Revenue and Expenditure for the year ended 30 June 2019.

 

·   Attachment C, shows the effect of changes to the Statement of Financial Position for the year

ending 30 June 2019.

 

·   Attachment D, provides details of the specific projects being deferred to future years. The

recommendation to Council is that these planned deferrals be included in the carry forward process.

 

13      A breakdown of the movement of capital projects as a result of carry forwards and forecasting for the 2018/2019 year is as follows:

Financial Activity

Amount

Capital projects as per the 2018/2019 Annual Plan

$19,916,188

Carried forward from 2017/2018

$7,078,304

October Forecasting movement

$602,265

Expected project costs for 2018/19

$27,596,757

 

14      Major changes due to forecasting are shown below. Details can be found in Appendix A.

Revenue - Changes in revenue from the budget has increased by $1.1M (Appendix B).  This is principally due to the increased tonnage and sale price of forest harvesting at Waikaia.

 

Operating Costs - Operating expenditure has increased from the budget by $1.2M. 

Major changes are:

·    Approved unbudgeted expenditure for consultant’s fees of $250,000 re business case and assessment of SDC Invercargill Office.

·    Harvesting costs for Dipton, Gowan Hills, Ohai & Waikaia $775,690 increase.

·    An increases in the operating costs for the SIESA operations, $249,905

 

Capital

·    The forecast capital expenditure has decreased by $602K.

 

15      The total forecast net deficit for the year is $4.5M which is $140K less than the original Annual Plan budget.

Issues

16      The roading team indicated no forecast changes to be included in the October round of forecasting as some of the projects are still in development stage or early construction and it is too early to tell what the effect on the budget will be.

17      Forecasting is part of the ongoing process to encourage better financial behaviours across the organisation.  This includes earlier identification of projects that will not be completed by the end of the current financial year.  The intention is that where projects will not be completed this year, these will be included in the Carry forward process.  The Carried Forward report is provided to Council after the end of a financial year to request that the work not completed during a year is carried into the next financial year’s budget.  The current Works programme will be reviewed again in the next forecasting round (March 2019), to ensure that the 18/19 Projects will be delivered on time.

18      Forecasting also provides an opportunity to approve anticipated unbudgeted expenditure during the year.  This should reduce the number of individual requests needed to be handled by Council.  Council will still need to approve some expenditure items separately where the expenditure is large enough to require individual approval or where unbudgeted expenditure has been identified between the two rounds of forecasting. 

19      It is expected that forecasting will improve as the process is refined and it becomes part of the yearly process.  In 2017/18, $19M of projects were moved to 2018/19 as part of the Annual Plan consultation process.  An additional $7M was carried forward into 2018/19 at year end as a carry forward.  This year $3.4M is proposed to be deferred to the 2019-2020 Annual Plan (Appendix D). 

20      Budget managers were asked if projects being deferred would impact on delivery of the currently planned 2018-19 projects.  Of special note is;

·    Council’s decision regarding the Te Anau Wastewater Business Case on the 23rd of October which has created additional work to be done by Council in the form of two new consents to be applied for.  This additional work created has resulted in the deferral of the Winton sewerage scheme. 

·    The new Land and Water Regulation from Environment Southland has not been finalised yet but it will have an impact on Council financially.  The regulations state that any discharge to fresh water doesn’t comply with the new regulations.  Tokanui, as part of a test case, has been advised by Environment Southland to attend a Commissioner Hearing in order to apply for consent, which we will be appealing. During the next Forecasting round we will have a better indication of the cost implications in order to get consent approval for Tokanui and what the implications are for other CB’s/CDA’s affected by the new regulation.

21      The SIESA Management fees has increased by $249,905 as part of the contract renewal process.  Work is underway to assess the long-term sustainability of this contract in its current form and work to identify cost-saving mechanisms in the delivery of this service. This includes a contract and levels of service review including opportunities for further automation and resilience.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

22      There are no legal or statutory requirements in regards to forecasting Council’s end of year position.

Community Views

23      Consultation was held with the community for the expenditure included in the 2018/2019 budget as part of the Annual Plan process and estimates meetings.

24      Changes proposed to capital and operational expenditure for townships will be have been or will be reported to the relevant Community Board or Community Development Area Subcommittee.  There are no new significant projects planned for 2018/19.

Costs and Funding

25      Forecasting completed shows that overall net operating income and expenditure is expected to decrease by $140K.  This is shown by business unit in Attachment A.

26      Overall net Capital Expenditure is expected to decrease by $602,265 with the main item being the purchase of the new telephone system.  Council is requested to approve the expenditure, not included in resolutions, shown in Attachment A.

The impact on the budgeted Statement of Comprehensive Revenue and Expenditure for the 2018/2019 is a net operating deficit of $140K from the original Annual Plan as shown in Attachment B.

Policy Implications

27      Council staff must ensure that all expenditure is carried out within approved delegations. 
The current financial delegations only allow the Chief Executive to approve unbudgeted expenditure up to $10,000. 

Analysis of Options

The options are to approve or not to approve, in full or part, the forecasted adjustments to the expenditure in the Annual Plan.

Option 1 - Approve the changes in income and expenditure in Attachment A

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Council is informed of anticipated changes from the Annual Plan for 2018/2019.

·        Council has had the opportunity to prioritise expenditure to be incurred in the current financial year.

·        Council staff are able to purchase services as required to provide services to the community in the most appropriate manner.

·        Deferral of projects which are going to be completed later or costing more than previously indicated.

Option 2 - Approve the forecast changes recommended   

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Council is informed of anticipated changes from the Annual Plan for 2018/2019.

·        Council has had the opportunity to prioritise expenditure to be incurred in the current financial year

·        Council considers that the additional expenditure is not a current priority and does not need to be incurred.

·        Processes may be delayed where further approval needs to be sought from Council before committing to additional expenditure.

Option 3 - Do not approve, in part or in full, the forecast changes recommended 

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Council is informed of anticipated changes from the Annual Plan for 2018/2019.

·        Council has had the opportunity to prioritise expenditure to be incurred in the current financial year

·        Processes may be delayed where further approval needs to be sought from Council before committing to additional expenditure.

 

Assessment of Significance

28      The content of this report is not deemed significant under the Significance and Engagement Policy. 

Recommended Option

29      Option 1 to receive the forecasted adjustments to the financial statements and approve the expenditure in Attachment A not included in the Annual Plan for 2018/2019.

Next Steps

30      To advise managers of the approval of unbudgeted expenditure for the 2018/2019 financial year.

31      Ensure that deferred projects are included in the proposed 2019-2020 Annual Plan.

 

 

Attachments

a             Forecasting Financial Report - October 2018 - Attachment A (V6)

b             Forecasting Financial Report - October 2018 - Attachment B (V4)

c             Forecasting Financial Report - October 2018 - Attachment C (V2)

d            Forecasting Financial Report - October 2018 - Attachment D (V2)    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

 

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Proposed Road Stopping at 1830 Manapouri Te Anau Highway

Record No:             R/18/11/26902

Author:                      Theresa Cavanagh, Property Advisor

Approved by:         Matt Russell, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        To consider a request from John and Karalyn Twidle to stop a portion of unformed legal road (2,317m2) which intersects their property at 1830 Manapouri Te Anau Highway.  If completed the stopped road will be purchased and amalgamated with the adjoining property.

Executive Summary

2        The Twidles currently occupy the portion of road and it runs through their property at 1830 Manapouri Te Anau Highway as shown on the attached diagram.  The land owned by the Twidles are Lots 2 & 3 DP 476991.

3        The land intersects this property and the Twidles consider that the road as it exists is an impediment to operating the land as one.  To deal with these issues the Twidles have requested that the road be stopped and transferred to them.

4        Council’s approval to the road stopping is required to allow the next step of the process to proceed.

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)            Receives the report titled “Proposed Road Stopping at 1830 Manapouri Te Anau Highway” dated 11 December 2018.

 

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)           Agrees to commence the process as set out in the Local Government Act 1974 to stop an approximately 2,317m2 portion of unformed legal road intersecting Lots 2 & 3 DP 476991 to allow the land to be disposed of to the adjoining landowners.

 

e)            Resolves to delegate to the Chief Executive the authority to enter into an Agreement for Sale and Purchase with John & Karalyn Twidle on conditions acceptable to the Chief Executive.

 

 

Background

5        The Twidles currently occupy the portion of road and it runs through their property at 1830 Manapouri Te Anau Highway as shown on the attached diagram. 

6        The land intersects this property and the Twidles consider that the road as it exists is an impediment to operating the land as one.  To deal with these issues the Twidles have requested that the road be stopped and transferred to them

7        The Twidles currently occupy the road as part of their property and graze goats and keep beehives.  They have developed the unformed portion of road as if it is part of their property.

8        The Twidles requested this road stopping to enable the purchase and amalgamation of the portion of road with their property.  Attached to the request was written approval from the following agencies: Te Ao Marama, Department of Conservation, NZ Walking Access Commission and Te Runanga o Ngai Tahu (TRONT).

9        Council required consultation with TRONT given the vicinity of the Nohoanga site located 125m to the west of the portion of road.

10      Consultation was not required with the Roading Department as this is not a formed legal road.

11      The public cannot currently access the unformed road and there continues to be public access via the adjacent road reserve which adjoin Lake Manapouri.  This has recently become more accessible with the newly constructed cycle way which is part of the Te Anau to Manapouri Cycle Trail.

12      The landowner has been advised of the process to be followed and has agreed to pay survey costs and the land value. Therefore the next step is to seek Council approval to commence the process.

Issues

13      There are no issues identified at this point given existing alternative access to Lake Manapouri.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

14      The process will follow the statutory steps as set out in the Local Government Act 1974 including public notification and disposal at valuation.

15      The legislation to deal with this land is the Local Government Act 1974, in particular Sections 342, 345 and the Tenth Schedule.  These Sections require the approval of the Minister of Lands as the land is in a rural area.

16      This process includes a subsequent resolution to be made by Council once the public objection process has been completed.

Community Views

17      Public notification must be undertaken in accordance with the Local Government Act 1974.

Costs and Funding

18      The Twidles have agreed to pay the valuation of $6,500 including GST.  The valuation amount has been set by a registered valuer as is required by the legislation.

19      On top of this they have agreed to pay the survey costs to define the road to be stopped as per Council policy.

Policy Implications

20      None identified at this stage.

Analysis

Options Considered

21      The options are to either commence the process or not.

Analysis of Options

Option 1 – Commence the road stopping process

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Allows the adjoining landowner to incorporate the portion of road which runs through their property in order to own and develop a contiguous area of land.

·        Council is able to dispose of land not required for roading purposes

·        None identified.

 

Option 2 – Not to commence the road stopping process

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        None identified at this point given  the applicant accepts the process and valuation

·        None to Council however there is a disadvantage to the landowner as they will continue to have their property separated by an unformed legal road which restricts future development.

 

Assessment of Significance

22      Not considered significant.

Recommended Option

23      Option 1 – Commence road stopping process.

Next Steps

24              A survey will be undertaken followed by public notification.  If no objections are received, a report will be presented to Council for a final resolution. 


Attachments

a             Map of Portion of Road Proposed to be Stopped - 1830 Manapouri Te Anau Highway - Twidle    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


Council

18 December 2018

 

Unbudgeted Expenditure for Upgrading the Drinking-water Quality Supplying the Curio Bay Recreation Reserve

Record No:             R/18/11/27247

Author:                      Kevin McNaught, Strategic Manager Property

Approved by:         Matt Russell, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        To consider a request for unbudgeted expenditure to undertake immediate works to appropriately treat the water that is supplying the Curio Bay Recreation Reserve.

Executive Summary

2        Running in parallel with the recent developments that were undertaken at the Curio Bay Recreation Reserve, was ongoing monitoring of the water supply that is used by the reserve, camping ground and heritage centre.

3        The monitoring has resulted in a recommendation that the water supply needs to be treated, and with the number of users of the reserve, that Option 1 be undertaken prior to the busy Christmas period.

4        To achieve this, Council is requested to approve unbudgeted capital expenditure of up to $35,000 plus $7000 operational expenditure in 18/19 and $12,500 in 19/20 to be funded from the District Operations Reserve.

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)            Receives the report titled “Unbudgeted Expenditure for Upgrading the Drinking-water Quality Supplying the Curio Bay Recreation Reserve” dated 11 December 2018.

 

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

 

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

 

d)           Approves unbudgeted capital expenditure of up to $35,000 plus GST to complete a Fixed Dose Treatment process of the water supply for the Curio Bay Recreation Reserve to be funded from the District Operations Reserve.

 

e)            Approves $7000 plus GST unbudgeted operational expenditure for the 18/19 and $12,500 19/20 financial years to be funded from the District Operations Reserve.

 

Background

5        In parallel with the recent developments undertaken at the Curio Bay Recreation Reserve was ongoing monitoring of the water that is supplied to the reserve. This water is used by campers, the heritage centre and day visitors. This supply is non-treated and non-compliant.

6        As a result of that ongoing monitoring, attached is a recommendation from Council’s Water staff that upgrading of this supply is required to ensure that the water quality meets the required standards.

7        Given the number of visitors to the site and a desire to have this treatment in place prior to the busy Christmas period, unbudgeted expenditure is requested from Council to complete Option 1 immediately.

8        It should be noted that while Options 2 and 3 are required at some stage, these are not critical at this point in time, so it is intended that these be considered for funding as part of the next TIF application.

Issues

9        The issues are primarily around the water quality being supplied to the Curio Bay Recreation Reserve.

10      Council’s staff have been monitoring the quality for some time and have now recommended that treatment is required. Given this, some action is required to manage the risks, and at this stage it is immediate Fixed Dose Treatment.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

11      This is considered to simply be Council’s requirement to provide a quality public water supply to meet the necessary standards.

12      Staff have recommended that Fixed Dose Treatment is required now, therefore it is appropriate that to meet Council’s legal obligations that this work be undertaken.

Community Views

13      None sought as the proposal is to meet Council’s legal obligations.

Costs and Funding

14      The attached recommendations are for three options, with all three capital expenditure options totalling around $85,000 including a small contingency.

15      It is anticipated that the additional operational expenditure for the 18/19 year will be $7000 plus GST and for the whole 19/20 year $12,500 plus GST. These costs are due to the manual nature of the fixed dose process, however when the automated dose system is installed it is anticipated that these costs will reduce significantly.

16      Option 1 (Fixed Dose Treatment) is required now, however Options 2 and 3 can be completed later, with the intention at this stage that these be included for funding in a subsequent TIF application.

17      The Curio Bay Recreation Reserve is a District funded reserve, therefore any costs should be funded from Council’s District Operations Reserve. It is confirmed that the $35,000 plus GST capital expenditure and the two amounts of operational expenditure requested in this report can be funded from the reserve.

Policy Implications

18      The recently adopted AMP for Parks and Reserves 2018-28 did anticipate that as a result of open spaces planning, some projects may have some urgency and made allowance for these commencing in the 19/20 financial year, but subject to funding approvals.

19      As a result of the ongoing monitoring, the recommendation from Councils water services staff is that this project needs to be commenced now, which is far quicker than the AMP anticipated for urgent projects.

Analysis

Options Considered

20      The options are to either undertake the Fixed Dose Treatment now or not.


 

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Undertake Fixed Dose Treatment

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Allows for the water quality to meet the required standards.

·        Reduces the risk if any health issues being created from those using the water supply

·        None identified.

Option 2 – Not undertake the Fixed Dose Treatment

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        No advantages seen in not undertaking the required treatment

·        Opens Council up to some potential liability given staff have identified a water quality issue and have recommended treatment.

·        Potential for negative publicity around Council not considering human health as a priority.

Assessment of Significance

21      Not considered significant if treatment undertaken. However this may change if work is not undertaken and subsequent issues arise.

Recommended Option

22      Undertake the Fixed Dose Treatment now and therefore authorise the unbudgeted expenditure request.

Next Steps

23      Get treatment work completed and operating prior to Christmas.

 

Attachments

a             Curio Bay Potable Water Treatment Options    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


Council

18 December 2018

 

Management Report

Record No:             R/18/11/27077

Author:                      Steve Ruru, Chief Executive

Approved by:         Steve Ruru, Chief Executive

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Chief Executive

Local Government Funding and Financing Inquiry

1.       During the month the Productivity Commission released an issues paper for the local government funding and financing inquiry that they are leading. A copy of the issues paper is available on the commission’s website (www.productivity.govt.nz).

2.       The issues paper briefly describes local government in New Zealand and how funding and financing currently works. It asks questions about current pressure points and ways that councils can manage cost pressures. It then seeks views on options for future funding and financing tools. 

3.       Submissions are open until 15 February 2019. Subsequent phases of the inquiry process include the release of a draft report in June 2019 and then a final report to government in November 2019.

Tourism Strategy and Visitor Levy

4.       The government have released their proposed new tourism strategy for public consultation. A copy of the full strategy is available on the MBIE website (www.mbie.govt.nz/info-services/sectors-industries/tourism/tourism-strategy-consultation).

5.       The draft strategy identifies five key outcomes, including that tourism protects and enhances New Zealand’s natural, cultural and historic heritage, that regions and communities benefit from tourism, and that New Zealander’s lives are improved by tourism. It also outlines the challenges that the growth in tourism in recent years has created and the proposed actions to manage these challenges.

6.       At the end of September the government approved the introduction of the $35 border levy, which is expected to raise some $80 million per year that is to be used to fund tourism infrastructure and conservation related projects. It is expected that the funds raised will be split evenly between conservation and tourism related infrastructure. At this stage work is still to be progressed to determine how the funds are to be split and how they will be distributed.

7.       The levy will be collected through visa fees and via the new Electronic Travel Authority, with legislation due to be passed around the middle of 2019.

 

 

 

3 Waters Review

8.       The government is continuing to progress their 3 waters review.

9.       In late October the government released a report by GHD and Boffa Miskell into the costs of upgrading wastewater treatment plants. The report estimates that the cost of upgrading wastewater schemes to a standard suitable to meet the current National Policy Statement on Freshwater would cost approximately $2 billion. It also questions the ability of a number of rural and provincial councils to meet these costs.

10.     In late November government released the cabinet paper and minutes detailing the decisions that they made at their meeting on 29 October in regard to the review process. A copy of the papers is available at (www.dia.govt.nz/three-waters-review). 

11.     In these papers the government have outlined the broad shape of the options being considered in their review and the overall timetable within which they now expect to be able to make decisions.

12.     It is expected that the first round of decisions will be made by cabinet in June 2019. These are expected to include decisions in relation to:

·      the formation of new regulatory processes for drinking water

·      changes to the environmental regulation system that is currently managed by regional councils

·      processes for improving performance reporting in relation to the delivery of wastewater and stormwater systems.

13.     By the end of 2019 it is expected that decisions will be made about:

·      proposed service delivery arrangements for 3 waters

·      the need for economic regulation.

14.     The question as to whether there will be a need for some form of economic regulation will partially depend upon the decisions that government make in relation to the potential aggregation of service delivery arrangements.

15.     The broad models of reform include:

·      proceeding with changes to the regulatory system only

·      whether government creates an incentives regime to encourage the development of more efficient service delivery models

·      a form of compulsory aggregation of service delivery agencies. These would still be publicly owned and most likely still involve some form of local government ownership through, for example, a council controlled organisation model.

16.     In a number of recent speeches the minister of local government, Hon Nanaia Mahuta has continued to signal a preference for change to the 3 waters delivery structures including the potential for cross-subsidisation between regions.

17.     Local Government New Zealand are making it clear, from a sector advocacy perspective, that any form of aggregation of service delivery should be left to local authorities to decide, particularly given that the assets are owned by local communities. In this regard they have adopted a position statement which has four key principles as follows:

·      Fix drinking water first: Havelock North has shown that urgent action is needed in the drinking water space, and any reform process should make this a priority. The government needs to set hard drinking water standards, and establish a strong regulator to enforce these standards.

·      Let existing regulations run their course: Wastewater and stormwater assets are long-lived, and it takes many years of planning and investment to change performance outcomes. New freshwater quality standards were introduced in 2017, and we should allow efforts to meet these standards to run their course before introducing new requirements.

·      Take mandatory aggregation off the table: Local government strongly opposes mandatory aggregation of water assets as one-size-fits-all policy making. The economic literature shows aggregation can be an effective tool to produce service delivery efficiencies in some cases, and so needs to be applied on a case-by-case basis, not as a blanket policy for New Zealand.

·      Incentives matter: Central government should focus on getting the incentives right to drive behaviour. Setting hard quality standards across all 3 waters, backed by rigorous compliance enforcement, will force service providers to lift their performance. At the same time it will open the door to innovation, as service providers experiment with different technologies and ownership models to meet these standards.

18.     Across the local government sector a number of other concerns have also been expressed about the current review process. These include:

·      the lack of a clear problem definition that the review aims to fix, particularly when consideration is being given to some form of aggregation of supply

·      a lack of follow through on the ‘co-design’ principle, under which the 3 waters review process was originally established

·      a tendency to see the 3 waters as one system, as opposed to three distinct but interlinked systems, each with their own challenges

·      the question as to whether this is simply a ‘back door’ way of amalgamating local authorities.

19.     The issues arising from the current 3 waters review process are clearly significant at both the national level and for all local authorities. It is clear that there is a need for change and a significant lift in the performance of the sector as a whole. There is also a need for a lift in the quality of private water systems across New Zealand.

20.     At the very least there will be significant change to the regulatory environment, which includes drinking water standards, environmental regulation and potentially economic regulation, within which the sector currently operates. This will bring new standards which will need to be met within a short timeframe and will also be subject to an intensive enforcement regime.  Local authorities will not be able to use cost as a reason for not meeting the required standards.

21.     Staff will continue to monitor developments in this area. At a local level we need to continue on with looking to improve the way in which we manage the water, wastewater and stormwater activities including looking at increasing the pace with which we implement infrastructure improvement projects. We also need to improve our asset management information and processes so that we are able to support informed decision-making processes.

22.     We are also now getting closer to the point at which there will be merit in Council looking to do some work with its neighbouring authorities on future models that could be implemented across Southland.

Local Governance and Community Well-beings

23.     Alongside of their announcements on the 3 waters review the government also released a cabinet paper outlining work that they are doing to look at strengthening the role of local authorities in the community governance and broader community well-beings area.

24.     As noted previously the government have introduced an amendment to the Local Government Act 2002 to require local authorities to have a focus on improving the social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being of their communities. While some might see this as a reinstatement of the sustainable development focus that was previously included in the Act, but removed by the previous government, others see it as having quite a different focus to the previous regime.

25.     A strengthening of the community leadership and development role that local government can play will have much more significance if the way in which a number of the traditional infrastructural services, such as 3 waters and roading, are changed. The approach being pursued is also consistent with work at a central government level to bring a four well-beings approach to the development of their next Budget. This work, which is called the Living Standards Framework, is also consistent with the Sustainable Development Goals set by the United Nations.

26.     Eventually, this work could lead to a greater devolution of responsibilities from central to local government. While government have ruled this out at this stage it is inevitable that there will be ongoing discussions in this area particularly given that the role of local government in New Zealand is relatively narrow by OECD standards and hence it is seen that there is considerable ability to strengthen the role of local authorities as leaders in social, housing, emergency management and long term community planning areas, which are also priorities for government. Over time this could also lead to the decentralisation of what are currently central government service responsibilities to local government.

27.     The minister of local government is expected to report back to cabinet in April 2019 on the progress being made in this area.

 

 

 

 

Marine Pollution

28.     The Ministry of Transport is currently seeking input into a decision on whether New Zealand should sign an international treaty restricting air emissions from ships. The level of air pollution coming from cruise ships within Fiordland and Milford Sound in particular has been an issue of concern.

29.     This International Maritime Organization treaty, Annex VI of the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), regulates emissions that are harmful to public health, deplete the ozone layer and contribute to climate change.

30.     Annex VI would reduce air emissions by controlling the sulphur content of fuel.  Domestic and international ships entering New Zealand waters meet the current Annex VI standards of 3.5 percent sulphur content.  Marine fuel produced here is also under 3.5 percent. From 2020 however, the standard required by MARPOL is likely to drop to 0.5 percent.

Resource Management Act Reform

31.     Government have announced that they intend undertaking a two-stage approach to the introduction of amendments to the Resource Management Act 1991.

32.     The first stage, which will be introduced in the near future, will be a narrowly-focused set of amendments that will address a number of targeted issues which government see as being able to be amended relatively easily. Further details on the specific changes proposed are available on the Ministry for the Environment website (www.mfe.govt.nz/rma/improving-our-resource-management-system).

33.     Stage 2, which will begin in 2019, will be a more comprehensive review of the resource management system and will build on current work across urban development, climate change, and freshwater. It will also consider a number of issues raised by stakeholder groups including the Productivity Commission and Local Government New Zealand.

Stewart Island/Rakiura Service Sustainability Review

34.     In September 2018, Council asked staff to develop, in consultation with the Stewart Island/Rakiura Community Board, terms of reference for completion of a service sustainability review. The review is intended to identify the challenges and additional costs associated with delivering services to the Stewart Island/Rakiura community and follows on from a number of recent issues that have highlighted the challenges associated with delivering services to this community.

35.     The review is focussed on the sustainability of Council delivered activities and does not include services that might be provided by the community and/or other service providers. Staff have developed draft terms of reference for the review, which will be considered by the community board at their 10 December 2018 meeting. They will then be submitted to Council for its consideration in February 2019.

 

 

Southland Regional Development Agency

36.     Work with the formation of the Southland Regional Development Agency (SRDA) is reaching an important milestone with the legal formation of the new company on track to be completed in early December. The Joint Shareholders Agreement and Constitution will be formally signed in early December.

37.     The Joint Shareholders Committee, who also have responsibility for managing the board and setting the performance expectations for the new entity has also been formed and will have its second meeting on 4 December. At that meeting the committee will also be briefed on progress with the director recruitment process. Some 70 applications were received from a wide range of good quality candidates.

Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management

38.     Council will remember that the previous Government indicated its intention to review the 60/40 funding of emergency events.  This is where in the declaration of an emergency, central government contributes 60% and local contribution is 40% of essential infrastructure costs subject to the relevant criteria being met.

39.     The review was initiated because of the impact that the Christchurch and Kaikoura earthquakes had on the central government funds.  Recently, Local Government New Zealand met with the Ministry of Civil Defence and Emergency Management and received assurances that no change to the 60:40 arrangement has been made or is under consideration at this time.

Community and Futures

Strategy and Policy

Corporate Performance Framework

40.     The Corporate Performance Framework aligns Council’s high level direction to its activities and outcomes, and its purpose is to streamline Council planning and reporting functions.  As part of the Corporate Performance Framework, Council will deliver on its legislative requirements – including the Long Term Plan, Annual Plan, Annual Report and Activity Management Plans. 

41.     Council will also produce an Interim Performance Report, undertaken three times a year – for the four month periods of July-October, November-February and March-June, with the third being produced to inform the Annual Report.

42.     This framework requires Council activity managers to provide meaningful explanation of the level of performance compared to what was planned.  The Interim Performance Report will utilise Council’s new CAMMS reporting tool with the first report presented to the Finance and Audit Committee in December 2018.  This will be a work in progress as we shift reporting tools for the organisation and seek a more efficient and effective way of working.

43.     Council staff have also now developed Team Business Plans and Individual Performance Plans. These are an operational level tool to provide staff and elected members with the linkages between Councils overall vision, and alignment to Councils programmes of work, projects, and operational requirements to effectively deliver what is promised in the Long Term Plan and Annual Plans. 

Annual Plan 2019/2020

44.     The Local Government Act 2002 requires Council to prepare and adopt an Annual Plan in the second and third years between the development of the Long Term Plan.  The purpose of the Annual Plan is to consider and approve any variations to the Long Term Plan for that financial year.  Once finalised, the direction given for 2019-2020 will be used to set rates for the year beginning 1 July 2019 and deliver any additional projects identified.

45.     Work for the Annual Plan 2019/2020 is currently underway, and a timeline and project plan is being submitted to Council in December 2018.  Direction setting reports have been presented to local community boards and community development area subcommittees throughout the months of November and December identifying any variances to the long Term Plan 2018-2028.  It is recognised that extraordinary projects or changes to the level of service may be needed outside of the Long Term Plan process, to ensure the on-going needs of the community are being met. 

46.     Council has streamlined its 2019/2020 Annual Plan process, and community boards and community development area subcommittees were asked to send to Council all proposed projects for the local area prior to 21 September 2018, so that they could be received and scoped appropriately by staff, in consultation with the respective boards and development area subcommittees.  Scoped and agreed new projects, that need to be resourced outside the projects identified in the Long Term Plan 2018-2028, have been included in the 2019/2020 Annual Plan.

Risk Management Framework

47.     Council continues to identify the need to invest in and develop its risk management processes and approach.

48.     In developing the Risk Management Framework the objective is to create a framework to effectively understand, plan for, and mitigate risk across all levels and activities within the organisation. Understanding and mitigating risks is central to safeguarding Southland District’s community assets and services and other activities it is responsible for.  In facilitating better decision making that support risk informed choices, prioritise actions and determine options, assurance can be provided to Council, the Southland District community and stakeholders that critical risks are identified and managed effectively. The framework is anticipated to be finalised by mid-2019.

BERL Stage 3 – Working towards positive Southland community futures

49.     Business and Economic Research Limited (BERL) was commissioned by Southland District Council to undertake research to assist with the development of the District’s 2031 Long Term Plan.

50.     The research is based on the idea that the District can passively accept the future that fate will provide for its communities, or work strategically to shape the future it wants to achieve.

51.     The research is in three stages, each of which is designed to answer a specific question:

•     Stage 1 asked “where we are now?”  This involved collecting and analysing data to show the state of wellbeing in the District as a whole and in seven defined communities.  This stage has been completed.

•     Stage 2 asked “where we are heading?”  This involved some forecasting to examine how the population and the level of employment in the District and each of the communities would change, if past trends were left to continue.  This stage has also been completed.

•     The current stage, Stage 3, is about asking the question “where we actually want to be?”  Its aim is to define a set of actions that will help to shape positive futures for each of the main communities in the District.

52.     BERLs engagement with individuals, organisations, and businesses in the District to inform the Council about what it can do itself to increase wellbeing, as they strive for overall community wellbeing has been completed.  The final draft is to be received by Council staff by December 2018.  It is intended this will be presented to Council in February 2019.  

Community Futures Research and Analysis Work Programme

53.     Council continues to support the progression of research and analysis work to support its decision-making in preparation for the Long Term Plan 2031. 

54.     This work will assist in leading the development of Council’s overall approach to the management of change and preparation for what the future might hold for the District and its communities, and identify priorities for investing in community future planning. The Executive Leadership Project Team comprising of the chief executive, chief financial officer, group manager services & assets, group manager environmental services and group manager community and futures has been established to determine prioritisation, and is facilitated by the strategy & policy manager. High level project plans have been developed that will help determine what is required to deliver priority projects within the District and reports presented to the Community & Policy Committee in September and November to update on the progress of the overall programme of work.

55.     The on-going work streams include:

•     Socio-demographic projects (where are we now, where are we heading, and where do we want to be)

•     Climate change and implications for Southland District (risks and impacts on the District)

•     Service Delivery Framework – District vs Local service provision and levels of service (an assessment and evaluation of Council services and determine the most appropriate level of service to meet community needs in the future)

•     Rating affordability planning and implications (to understand income levels in our communities and affordable measures for delivery of activates and services – and implications of decisions on rating affordability for the District)

•     Land and Water Plan implications (to understand the implications of compliance standards on the future provision of services to local communities)

•     Community Facility Provision Framework (how, what and when are facilities used and needed)

•     Community Partnerships Assistance and Funding Alignment Approach (multi-agency community partnership opportunities, and council’s funding and grant schemes to support community organisations)

•     Technological change impacts on communities and implications for Council.

Policy and Bylaw Updates

56.     There are a number of Council bylaws and policies currently being reviewed and updated, and a large number of bylaws due for review in the next 12-24 months.  Currently, there is the Stewart Island Visitor Levy Bylaw and Policy that will be deliberated on by Council at the end of December, a proposed amendment to the wording of the Use of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles Policy (which includes drones) that will be discussed at the Services and Assets Committee in late November prior to a decision being made at the 18 December Council meeting.  Council’s Sensitive Expenditure Policy and Conflict of Interest Policies have all been completed.

Community Partnership Leaders

Ohai Hall Consultation

57.     The Ohai Community Development Area subcommittee is currently consulting with their community regarding options for the current Ohai hall and a potential new community centre for the town.  By way of background, the Ohai Community Development Area subcommittee (CDA) has been working with Council for some time on a project to make several major upgrades to the Ohai hall. These upgrades include replacing windows, upgrading the hot water system in the kitchen, upgrading the main hall lighting and completing painting of the interior.

58.     In June 2017, prior to the commencement of the above upgrade, Council received an offer from the Ohai Bowling Club to gift the former clubrooms to Council. Both the Ohai CDA and the Southland District Council agreed to accept this gift.

59.     As part of considering the offer, it was agreed that an opportunity existed to consider the whole of the recreation area which includes the swimming pool, tennis courts and sports field and to investigate the possibility of creating a community hub with the bowling clubrooms becoming a smaller community centre as well. It was also agreed that as this proposal was different from the current operations of the Ohai hall that the community within the hall rating area be consulted on what they considered to be their preference for the future, i.e. the community hub, or the current hall.

60.     In the interim, the boiler unit at the current Ohai hall has been resurrected, and LED lighting has been installed in the main hall auditorium.

61.     The community has been advised of the estimated costs to upgrade both facilities and the purpose of the survey is to find out which option the community prefers. The survey is available online at https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/KHFF8FT and closes in early December.


 

Governance

Representation Review and Community Governance Project

62.     The Local Government Commission heard appeals and objections on the Council’s final proposal on Wednesday 5 December at which time Council staff and elected representatives made a presentation on our final proposal.

63.     Work is progressing on arrangements to support the community governance project.

Environmental Services

Group Managers Update

National Policy Statement (NPS) and National Environmental Standard (NES) for Fresh Water Management 2019

64.     Some key elements of this work for the Councillors to be aware of are as follows:

·      A bill to undertake minor amendments to the RMA related to the NPS and NES is likely to be passed late this year/early next year

·      A more comprehensive review of the resource management system is proposed to be developed and introduced in the 2nd quarter of next year

·      A NPS could take the form of what is proposed in the NPS for Indigenous Biodiversity (outlined below), potentially including more definitive targets and stronger central direction

·      A NES could set national environmental bottom lines, require the review of consents, and determine how activities within risk catchments should be managed

·      This could have implications for the work currently being undertaken for Council on the Water and Land Plan appeal/mediation process.

Recommended National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity – NPSIB

65.     A national Biodiversity Collaborative Group has developed a draft National Policy Statement for Indigenous Biodiversity, and recommendations to the government on complementary and supporting measures to maintain indigenous biodiversity. 

66.     This was presented to the associate minister for the environment, Hon Nanaia Mahuta, in October this year.  Essentially, the recommendations are for a NPS with regulatory and non-regulatory components. 

67.     The associate minister’s announcement on this, released on 25 October, included the following wording:

Media release from associate minister for the environment, Hon Nanaia Mahuta:

·      A new report recommending improvements to biodiversity management will build on communities’ good work to protect our biodiversity, says associate minister for the environment, Hon Nanaia Mahuta.

·      The report of the Biodiversity Collaborative Group outlines a draft National Policy Statement (NPS) for Indigenous Biodiversity and provides complementary recommendations, to help halt the decline in biodiversity.

·      “Our biodiversity is a taonga, important to New Zealand’s environment, culture, society and economy. However, it is in rapid decline from pressures like land-use change, invasive species, and climate change, and we need to do more to ensure that it is protected,” said Hon Nanaia Mahuta.

68.     The complementary and supporting measures document provides further guidance on how to implement aspects of the NPS, including advice on how to strengthen leadership, community partnerships, create support funds, align different national frameworks and initiatives, and direction around improving compliance, monitoring and enforcement. There are a number of recommendations from the group within each area of that document.

69.     The draft NPS itself sets clear direction and covers the following:

·      National criteria for assessing all indigenous biodiversity

·      Creation of Significant Natural Areas (SNAs) that will be required to be identified, attributes scheduled, mapped and then incorporated into District Plans and Regional Plans.

·      Direction on how activities within those SNAs will be managed and how to engage with landowners through that process, with the ultimate goal of setting environmental bottom lines within a SNA

·      Direction on how activities within all other indigenous biodiversity should be undertaken to “maintain” indigenous biodiversity

·      Provision for existing activities (on a limited basis) within SNAs

·      Requires a regional biodiversity strategy which sets targets for restoration and enhancement to be developed by the Regional Council.

70.     The creation of the NPS will require continued support from Council of the regional biodiversity study programme already underway and the biodiversity strategy.  However, the draft NPS proposes a 5 year timeframe to have completed what will be a fairly extensive research and ground truthing programme and may require a higher level of resourcing in order to meet that timeframe.  The draft NPS will also require councils to actively enter into engagement with landowners once areas have been identified from the study.  This will be likely to require additional resource.

71.     The draft NPS further proposes that within six years a plan change be notified to the relevant Regional and District planning documents to incorporate the SNAs.

72.     The strategy will require that an increase in indigenous biodiversity be achieved to boost the percentage of indigenous cover for the region.  It is likely that this will require TAs to consider what they can contribute towards meeting that target. 

73.     A cost benefit analysis will be prepared and both that, and the collaborative group’s reports, will be forwarded to the relevant ministers and officials for consideration.  A full consultation process on a proposed NPS and its complementary and supporting measures will then occur.  Depending on what the ministers determine, it is possible that this will be progressed next year (2019).

Environment Southland - People Water and Land Work Programme

74.     The group manager environmental services, team leader of resource management, senior policy planner and strategic manager water and waste attended a briefing on this at Environment Southland on 30 October. This explained the general direction of travel for this work and linkages to the limit setting process.

75.     While there were limited specifics upon which to seek to assess the long – term implications for the Council, it is important that staff keep abreast of developments in this area and ensure that elected representatives are also kept suitably informed.

Matters before the Court

76.     As elected representatives will be aware, Council is currently prosecuting the owners of two dogs involved in an attack on a member of the public in Winton.  This matter is before the Court at present, and the indications are that it is unlikely to be heard before early 2019.

IANZ Reaccreditation

77.     This is an important focus for the Environmental Services Group in the lead-up to the scheduled IANZ audit in March 2019. 

78.     Considerable advance effort is being undertaken to seek to position the Council’s Building Solutions team positively for this audit, and also to review issues raised in other recent IANZ audits of other councils.

Staffing

79.     Courtney Ellison has resigned from the senior policy planner role for family reasons, and Theresa Cavanagh has moved from the resource management team into the property officer role within Council. Scott Dickson has been appointed to replace Theresa, Scott has already been working in the resource management team in a fixed term role.

Heritage

80.     Johanna Massey, roving museums officer has been busy assisting with preparations for the opening of the Waikaia Museum on 7 December

81.     Johanna has also been working closely with the Rakiura Museum redevelopment project. Building and resource consents have now been obtained for this project, and construction has recently commenced on Stewart Island/ Rakiura. Johanna has been advising on the initial stages of inventory and display work, and has also connected Rakiura committee members to the similar group at Waikaia, so learnings can be shared.

82.     The Ministry of Culture and Heritage has recently being surveying stakeholders on their thoughts on New Zealand’s heritage protection system. Feedback has been provided by the relevant staff. It is understood that this feedback will be collated into a recommending report to the Ministry on future direction for heritage protection. 

Resource Management

83.     Council has resolved to initiate a plan change to establish stronger lighting controls on Stewart Island/Rakiura to support the Dark Skies Sanctuary application that is currently being processed by the Dark Skies Association. One of the key requirements of achieving “sanctuary status” is having a level of lighting controls within the sanctuary area. Work on the Council initiated plan change has commenced and view of notifying a plan change in early to mid-2019.

84.     Council received a limited notified a resource consent application for Greenbriar Limited to extend the open cast coal mine in Ohai in an easterly direction. Two submissions on this application were received. A hearing on this application is expected in the New Year which is likely to be a joint hearing with Environment Southland.

85.     The number of resource consents being lodged with Council remains steady. There are currently 63 consents in the system (on hold and processing).

Water and Land Plan Appeal

86.     Council along with Invercargill City Council and Gore District Council have jointly appealed the decision on Environment Southland’s Water and Land Plan. The appeal relates to discrete provisions of the plan that impact upon reticulated services (water, stormwater and wastewater).

87.     The Environment Court has decided to split the appeal into two topics “A” and “B” which will be heard separately. Topic “A” covers the front end of the plan. Particularly, the issues pertaining to Southland’s water and land, the state of the environment, physiographic zones, objectives and discrete policies relating to Ngai Tahu, physiographic zones, freshwater management units. A hearing for topic “A” is set down for May 2019 with evidence scheduled from December 2018 until early May 2019. Evidence for the councils’ appeal is due in late February. Topic “B” containing the remaining policies and rules of the plan will be scheduled once an interim decision and appeals on topic “A” have been resolved. It is likely that topic “B” will be heard in early 2020.

Building Solutions

88.     The department has received 88 building consent applications for the month this is down about 10% on the previous 3 year average. The majority of these reductions are accounted for in the reduction of consents for C1 commercial consent applications down to 20 from a three year average of 34 applications. The value of C1 consent applications was bolstered with an application to construct a $1m heritage centre on Stewart Island/Rakiura. 

89.     The department issued 53 consents for the month, this is down from 84 consents for the same period as last year. The most noted reductions came in C1 commercial consents, down from 32 to 24 and R1 residential are down from 58 to 32 when compared to November 2017. The number of consents issued are down on November last year and this is also reflected in the value of consented work down from $10.3 million to $4.6 million. 

90.     For the year to date the total number of consents issued are down from 559 to 365 on the same period in 2017-2018 and would be more in line with the number consents issued for the year 2016-17.

91.     The average length of time to issue a building consent was 15 days.  This is up from just under 11 working days for November 2017.  The department issued 55 CCCs and 26 refused CCCs this has contributed to a reduction of the number of active consents which currently sits at 4,352.

People and Capability

92.     Health, safety and wellness continues to be a focus within Council.  Health and safety audits and safety observations on our contractors have begun, the pre-approval process for our contractors has been reviewed and updated, E-learning and team activities are continuing.

93.     Council is hosting community events on wellness, anxiety and depression in Winton, Riverton and Te Anau for staff, friends and communities in mid-December.  The events will be run by Dr Tom Mulholland, who is currently sailing around New Zealand working with communities and businesses on health based initiatives.

94.     There have been some changes to the Services and Assets group.  The new structure includes the creation of a Project Delivery Team and establishment of a Commercial Infrastructure function to support, amongst other things, our procurement and contract management activities. The new structure will also see the disestablishment of the Community Engineer team with staff moving into positions the Project team and the various Activity Teams.  The purpose of the proposed amendments is to improve programme-delivery and increase both commercial and asset management capacity across the group.

Services and Assets Group

Group Manager’s Update

95.     The Programme/Project Management Platform remains on track for ‘go live’ in early December. As we get closer to this milestone the focus is around reporting outputs and the quality of the data within the system. Internal training is also ongoing.

96.     With the decision to proceed with subsurface drip irrigation (SDI) discharge methodology, the Te Anau Wastewater Discharge Project team is working hard to ensure the SDI consenting process is progressed as soon as possible. Council staff are working closely with Stantec, external specialists and Environment Southland to ensure that all parties are up to speed with requirements and anticipated timelines.  

97.     Southland disAbility Enterprises have now been formally notified that an extension to their recycling contract will not be occurring. Wastenet staff are working together to issue a tender to the market pre-Christmas.

98.     Work is ongoing to provide further clarity and prioritisation of expenditure in association with infrastructure deficits, activities, sub-activities and services.  This work is necessary, to adequately inform levels of service discussions and consultation in the lead up to the 2021 Long Term Plan.

99.     An electricity industry-specialist has been engaged to provide an assessment of the long-term sustainability options for the operations and maintenance of Stewart Island Electrical Supply Authority (SIESA). This specialist is working with Council staff and SIESA contract representatives over the coming months, to identify risks and opportunities for this business unit.

100.   An assessment of the Te Anau airport land-side development opportunities has also been underway over recent months. This work is focussing on the layout of infrastructure and leasable land available for development over the short, medium and long-term with a view to catalyse and re-invigorate investment in this strategic asset for the local Te Anau and Manapouri communities.

Stewart Island Electrical Supply Authority (SIESA) (PowerNet)

101.   There have been three applications for new connections in this period.

102.   Red tagged pole replacement pricing has been supplied to Southland District Council, for the replacement of the first seven poles. PowerNet are looking to progress this work promptly. Confirmation of Southland District Council holding an archaeological authority and providing PowerNet staff with a contractor briefing will also be necessary before this planned work can proceed.

Te Anau Airport Manapouri

103.   Half way through the summer season with positive growth trends in aircraft movements.  The airports operational function is performing well with no airport related delays or services which is assisting our clients, with the on time performance standards. Positive comments from our clients are encouraging and confirming our support is to a high standard.

Operations

104.   Our aircraft movement figures mid-season are looking encouraging, with a 20% increase in total landings and surpassing last year’s total, two months early.  It is projected to be the busiest year since statistics have been recorded dating back to 2009.  2011 was our busiest year with 1,211 landings and this year it is predicted to reach about 1,320 landings.

105.   Confirmation of helipad location and design has been completed with construction work commencing shortly.  This will reduce congestion on the apron, with itinerant helicopters having dedicated parking areas; a safer loading site for cargo and baggage, directly from the car parking area.

106.   Still awaiting confirmation of who will operate the Tauck Tours aircraft after January 2019.  This is causing some level of frustration, as staff training will need to be carried out with the new operator.  Ongoing discussions with Tauck are continuing to get a firm plan for next year. They have confirmed that they are still operating into the Te Anau Airport Manapouri, with further additional flights planned for the next few years.

Safety, Security and Training

107.   There have been not been any Bird Strike or Near Miss reports this period.

Forestry (IFS)

108.   With the annual harvest program now completed, all income has been received. A total of 30,000 tonnes was harvested from the Waikaia Forest. The remainder of the year concentrates on tending, establishment and maintenance operations.  Financial results are well above budget.


 

Strategic Water and Waste

Te Anau Wastewater Discharge Project

109.   Following Council resolutions from the 23 October 2018 meeting, when it was resolved to proceed with a sub-surface drip irrigation as disposal route, staff have been progressing work on a number of fronts including development of resource consents for the sub-surface drip irrigation field, as well as advancing towards a detailed design.  Staff have also met with Environment Southland consenting staff, to develop a strategy to allow early lodgement of the application.  In addition a Registration of Interest process has been run for the pipeline element of the project, with tenders to be evaluated week commencing 26 November.  It is anticipated that four contractors will be invited to submit a tender to undertake the work.

Havelock North Drinking Water Inquiry

110.   The recommendations coming out of Stage 2 of the Inquiry were released in December, including a list of immediate and longer term recommendations.  The overall inquiry is highly likely to change the way water is managed and regulated in New Zealand, though a lot of the detail is yet to be announced. 

111.   Further funding has been included in the 2018 Long Term Plan, to help develop systems around data recording and to install further disinfection at the Riverton Water Treatment Plant, following the abolition of the ‘Secure Status’ of all raw water sources.

Review of Solid Waste Contract Arrangements

112.   The WasteNet Southland Waste Management Group has rolled over the Bond Contract for waste collection on the same rates and terms and conditions.  Further, WasteNet has resolved to put out a tender for the provision of the recycling acceptance contract.  It is anticipated this tender will be ready to go to the market before Christmas 2018. 

Operations and Community Services

The Southern Scenic Route

113.   Council has been allocated funding from the Tourism Infrastructure Fund to improve a number of toilets on the Southern Scenic route. The contract is being signed and once confirmed we will award contracts to the sub-contractors and finalise design, consents and set the priority of construction, based on the procurement lead time of the toilet facilities and materials. 

Lumsden Tourism Infrastructure Fund Project

114.   The Lumsden Railway Tourism Infrastructure Fund project is 95% complete, there are a few signs to install and the finance round up to complete. We will then send the project completion documents and invoices to Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment for final approval and release of funds.

Work Schemes

115.   The main projects completed over the last month have been:

·      Gorge Road fence between school and reserve

·      tidy up of Woodlands and Wallacetown cemeteries and garden plots

·      mowing throughout district

·      track maintenance and noxious weed control in reserves.

Strategic Roading

Alternative Coastal Route Seal Extension Project

116.   The culmination of 18 months of construction has seen the last section of sealing completed.  There is still some signage and tidy up works to be done but the construction aspect of the project is now substantially completed.

117.   Legal survey to finalise the land purchases and legalisation is currently underway and will be completed over the coming months.

LED Street Light Conversion

118.   With all the standard 70W High Pressure Sodium lights replaced in the townships, work is underway on converting the remaining higher wattage lights and special / decorative lights.

119.   Discussions with NZ Transport Agency are underway around the level of funding particular for the decorative lights.  Current indications are these will be funded at enhanced Funding Assistance Rate (85%) but, only to the same dollar amount as standard lights.

District Wide Renewals Programme

Reseals - the annual district wide road resurfacing program has commenced with good progress being made, considering the weather interruptions that have occurred.  This programme is still on track to be completed by 30 March 2019.

120.   Rehabilitation – there are three package of works planned for the 2018/19 season.  The two larger packages have had the designs completed and tender documents finalised. The tendering and awarding of these are expected to be completed pre-Christmas. The third package is still in the design phase and is likely to be tendered at the start of the New Year.

Community Facilities

121.   Work has commenced on the 2018 - 2019 projects, to be completed this financial year.  There are a number of projects that have been started, with the remaining projects having been quoted for. Once the quotes have been confirmed and approved, the work will be programmed to commence for those that are under budget.  Some projects will need a scope change or additional expenditure approval.

122.   Work has also commenced to plan to commence and complete those improvement processes, as identified in each of the seven activity plans used, as the basis of the recently approved Long Term Plan.  For community centres this includes the collection of data regarding each facilities utilisation. This work will lead into the development of minimum levels of service for Council’s assets across the Community Facilities portfolio.

123.   Recently, Real Journeys has decided to relocate its bus stop away from the Lions Park toilets in Te Anau to another site in town. This is having an effect on the numbers using these toilets however, the figures are being collated on a monthly basis for comparison and a report will be presented to Council, in due course. This was highlighted in a recent article in the ‘Southland Express’.

Water Structures

124.   Progress is continuing in relation to the Riverton Wharves licencing and repairs.  Most licence holders are progressing with essential repairs.   Resolution with only one berth owner in regard to execution of the licence documentation is outstanding.  Once this has been resolved the licencing side of the structures will be passed over to the Manager Property Services.

Tourism Infrastructure Funding

125.   Staff involved in the Tourism Infrastructure Funding process, attended a presentation from representatives of Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment and Local Government New Zealand.  They provided feedback on the applications that had been received in the previous rounds of funding.  Following the first two rounds, they have reviewed the application process based on feedback from local authorities and took the opportunity to update councils on the changes that they have implemented. The two key points from the presentation were:

·      they have reduced the $100,000 threshold to $25,000

·      applications dates have been fixed to the 1 March and the 1 August

126.   Following on from this meeting a team will be meeting to identify and prioritise projects in preparation for the 1 March application date.


 

Customer Delivery

Customer Support

127.   A busy two months in Customer Support with following up outstanding dog registrations and rate payments due in November. 

128.   The team has continued to deliver a superior call abandonment rate which means our customers are having their calls answered during business hours. 

 

October 2018

November 2018

Total number of calls to 0800 732 732

4516

4770

Abandonment rate

0.13%

0.08%

Request for Service received

662

1037

Top three requests types

Building inspections, noise control, water toby leak

Building inspections, change of address and roading

Payments processed by Council

8891

18584

Cash

Cheques

Direct Credit

Direct Debit

Eftpos

2.2%

8.2%

54.8%

27.3%

 7.5%

1.8%

9.7%

53.2%

25.9%

 9.4%

Number of visitors to our Libraries and Council Service Centres

*Excludes Invercargill, Stewart Island, Wyndham and Book Bus

8899

12265

 


 

Libraries

129.   We currently have 5344 active library users in the District as at 3 December 2018 (this is defined as having used their library card in library or online in the last 12 months).

130.   The table below shows the number of individuals checking out items from a branch library each month.   

Library Name

October

November

Book Bus

321

397

Lumsden

94

82

Otautau

103

84

Riverton

196

182

Stewart Island

54

39

Te Anau

417

368

Winton

624

595

Wyndham

60

63

131.   Use of the PressReader application is below. 

MONTH

ISSUES DOWNLOADED

ARTICLES READ

October

5291

24396

November

4200

11028

132.   Our Library service has new books each month, these can be viewed online through our catalogue on https://www.southlanddc.govt.nz/my-southland/libraries/.

Knowledge Management

133.   Over the past two months the team have continued to work with teams throughout Council supporting the change to the digitisation of our property files.  Changes have created efficiencies for teams in that they can now access information from their desks as opposed to the having to come in, find the file, take it away to review and then return for filing.  It also allows for multiple people to access the files at one time.

134.   For the public to view property files, we maintain a request service via the Customer Support team and files are emailed to the requestor at no cost.  Many other councils throughout New Zealand do charge for this service so we could renew this in the next fees and charges review.  From the 1st October until 30th November 2018 we received 227 property file requests from the public.

Business Solutions

135.   The team have been busy supporting the organisation with a variety of work.  One significant piece of work is supporting the Building Solutions team with changing their workflows in preparation for reaccreditation next year.  Another is providing support for access to data for the interim Corporate Performance Review.  This is a significant change for many activity managers so it is necessary to imbed the disciplines for calculating key performance indicators.

136.   A new portal for users to log requests from the team, this is a new channel for staff to use.  The portal provides structured questions to define the user meaning users will receive a response from the most appropriate staff member.  The portal also provides some self-help tools for frequently asked questions. 

137.   Recruitment is progressing for the business solutions manager to lead the team. 

Digital Solutions

138.   Supporting the implementation of CAMMS Strategy and Project over the past two months has been the priority for the team.  With implementation and handover nearly complete, a review with stakeholders will be completed to ensure we build on success and learn from any issues.

139.   Currently, People and Capability and Finance teams are working through a process to find applications to support processes within human resources management, health and safety and payroll.  This will be presented to the Finance and Audit Committee in March 2019.

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)            Receives the report titled “Management Report” dated 6 December 2018.

 

 

Attachments

a             Building Solutions - Consent Data - November 2018    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Unbudgeted Expenditure Approval to Undertake Refurbishment of the Kitchen and Toilets at the Lumsden Hall

Record No:             R/18/12/27800

Author:                      Mark Day, Community Facilities Manager

Approved by:         Matt Russell, Group Manager Services and Assets

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        To consider a request for unbudgeted expenditure to replace the vinyl and paint the kitchen and toilets (including the accessible toilet) at the Lumsden Hall.

Executive Summary

2        The Lumsden Hall is used on a regular basis and is showing signs of wear and tear due to the level of use.

3        The Subcommittee has requested that some works be undertaken to bring these areas of the building up to an appropriate standard. The scope and indicative costing’s are attached for consideration and approval for unbudgeted expenditure to undertake the work.

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)            Receives the report titled “Unbudgeted Expenditure Approval to Undertake Refurbishment of the Kitchen and Toilets at the Lumsden Hall” dated 11 December 2018.

 

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)           Agrees that the project be funded from the Lumsden Community Centre reserve with any shortfall being funded from the Lumsden General reserve.

 

e)            Recommends to Council to approve the unbudgeted expenditure of $11,960 plus GST to replace the vinyl and paint and wallpaper the kitchen and toilets (including the accessible toilet) in the Lumsden Hall.

 

Background

4        The Lumsden Hall is used on a regular basis and is showing signs of wear and tear due to the level of use.

5        The Subcommittee has requested that some works be undertaken to bring these areas of the building up to an appropriate standard. The scope and indicative costing’s are attached for consideration and approval for unbudgeted expenditure to undertake the work. 

6        The proposed works include a complete internal repaint of the toilets, repainting of all existing paintwork and replacement of the wallpaper in the kitchen. The vinyl in the kitchen and toilets is to be removed, the surface prepared and new vinyl laid.

7        While this is not a significant upgrade it will enhance the appearance of the inside of the building and increase its longevity.

Issues

8        With regular use the areas have deteriorated over time and if not maintained will cost considerably more in the future.

Factors to Consider

Legal and Statutory Requirements

9        The works will be undertaken in line with all legislative and statutory requirements.

Community Views

10      The issues with the building have been raised by users and the proposal is to address these issues. The Subcommittee’s position has been taken to represent the community.

Costs and Funding

11      The cost estimates are:  Replace the vinyl $6,620, painting and wallpaper $3,940. This all totals to $10,560 plus GST. Adding a contingency of $1,400 this then totals $11,960 plus GST.

12      The works are proposed to be funded using the Lumsden Community Centres reserve of $11,960 with any shortfall being funded from the Lumsden General reserve.

Policy Implications

13      None identified at this point.

Analysis

Options Considered

14      The options are to undertake this upgrade work and allow the building to continue to be used, or not do the work and do it at a later date at additional cost.


 

Analysis of Options

Option 1 - Undertake work and allow the building to continue to be used

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        Updated décor to a more desirable standard.

·        While the expenditure is to make the building more visually attractive, future long term upgrading of the building will need to be discussed and planned for.

Option 2 – Do not undertake work and close building for use.

Advantages

Disadvantages

·        None identified in doing this.

·        The decor will continue to deteriorate thus becoming an eyesore and a bigger liability to be dealt with at a later date.

Assessment of Significance

15      The decision is not considered to be significant.

Recommended Option

16      Option 1 – undertake the work proposed.

Next Steps

17      Have the work completed.

 

Attachments

a             Regal Floors Quote - Lumsden Hall

b             Flooring Xtra Quote - Lumsden Hall

c             T M Lynch Quote - Lumsden Hall    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


Council

18 December 2018

 

PDF Creator


Council

18 December 2018

 

PDF Creator

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Draft Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee Heads of Agreement 2018 - 2025

Record No:             R/18/12/27848

Author:                      Bronwyn Affleck, Administration Manager

Approved by:         Bruce Halligan, Group Manager Environmental Services

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Purpose

1        The Draft Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee Heads of Agreement, due for renewal, has been revised following a further review by the Southland District Council in March 2018.

Executive Summary

2        Following the report that went to Southland District Council on 27 March 2018, Council’s Chief Executive Mr Ruru recommended some further changes to remove the ambiguity of some clauses, and to update relevant references.

3        The Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee Advisory Group hence further reviewed and incorporated these recommended changes into the Draft Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee Heads of Agreement 2018 – 2025.

4        The updated Draft Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee Heads of Agreement 2018 – 2025 was approved by the Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee at the Meeting held 16 November 2018 for referral to the Councils for approval and execution.

5        The Draft Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee Heads of Agreement 2018 – 2025 with tracked changes is appended.

6        Two key changes of note are:

·        HOA - Reference 3.1.15 - This clause was originally included to support an appended funding schedule and Museum category classification.  Due to the changes within the Museum and wider heritage sector this criteria could be unduly restrictive and prescriptive for future needs, and hence the Regional Heritage Committee considered it was more appropriate to remove it.

·        HOA - Reference 6.6 - It was agreed participating TLAs would ensure staff were available to support the Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee to carry out its functions and responsibilities. It was agreed that this clause need not be too prescriptive, because with the move to the Southland Regional Development Agency the role of current providers may change.

 

 

Recommendation

That the Council:

a)            Receives the report titled “Draft Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee Heads of Agreement 2018 - 2025” dated 11 December 2018.

 

b)           Agrees that the revised “Southland Regional Heritage Joint Committee Heads of Agreement 2018 – 2025” be approved and executed by the Mayor and Chief Executive on behalf of the Council.

 

 

Attachments

a             Draft Southland Regional Heritage Committee Heads of Agreement 2018 - 2025 - November 2018    

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

 

Southland Regional Heritage Committee

Heads of Agreement
–2018 - 2025

                                                                                                                   

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                                                         

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

 

Table of Contents

Heading one. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Heading two. 3

Heading three. 3

 

 

Document Revision

Date

Amendment

Amended by

Approved by

Approval date

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

 

 

THIS AGREEMENT is made the      1st     day of                             December 2018

BETWEEN              Invercargill City Council (ICC)

AND                           Southland District Council (SDC)

AND                           Gore District Council (GDC)

 

BACKGROUND

I.    ICC, SDC and GDC are all incorporated territorial authorities, Local Government Act 2002 (Local Authorities) (“the Parties”).

II.  THE Local Authorities have agreed to establish an Organisation to be known as the Southland Regional Heritage Committee (“the Committee”) for the purpose of maintaining agreements and standards regarding the preservation of collections and overview the distribution of Regional Heritage Funding to Museums and the Regional Heritage Development Fund.

III. THIS Agreement is to confirm commitment from Local Authorities to advance the establishment of the Committee’s Funding with the intent that:

a)       The Committee will be carried out by a Joint Committee of Councils (Section 5(1) in Schedule 7, clause 30, Local Government Act 2002) with representatives from the Parties.

b)      The Parties delegate to the Joint Committee, the authority for governance and coordination of funding for Regional Heritage and Museums in Southland on the terms set out in this Agreement.

c)       The Joint Committee shall be responsible for the integration and application of the combined resources, including funding and the establishment of priorities, having regard to local programmes and commitments within the Southland Region.

IV. IT is intended to record the objects, purposes and responsibilities of the Parties.

1.      Interpretations

1.1     Definitions

“Commencement Date”: means the 1st day of December 2018

The “Committee” and “Southland Regional Heritage Committee” means the Joint Committee formed by this Agreement.

“The parties” means Invercargill City Council (“ICC”), Southland District Council (“SDC”), Gore District Council (“GDC”)

“Territorial Authorities” means ICC, SDC, GDC

“ICC” means the Invercargill City Council

“SDC” means the Southland District Council

“GDC” means the Gore District Council

“LGA” means Local Government Act 2002

“Working day” has the same meaning as Section 2 LGA 2002.

1.2     Headings

Clause and other headings are for ease of reference only and do not form any part of the context nor affect the interpretation of this Agreement.

1.3     Parties

Reference to parties is the parties to this Agreement.

1.4     Defined Expressions

Expressions defined in the main body of this Agreement bear the defined meaning in the whole of this Agreement, including the recitals.

1.5     Plural and Singular

Words importing the singular number shall include the plural and vice versa.

1.6     Negative Obligations

Any obligation not to do anything shall be deemed to include an obligation not to suffer, permit or cause that thing to be done.

1.7     Statutes

A reference to a statute includes reference to the statute, regulations, orders or notices and amendments made pursuant or in substitution to that statute or regulation.

1.8     Clauses

Refers to clauses in this Agreement.

2.      Formation

2.1       The parties shall cause to be formed immediately after the signing of this Agreement by the parties to have effect from the commencement date a Joint Committee (Section 5(1), Schedule 7, Clause 30 LGA 2002) to be known as “ Southland Regional Heritage Committee” on the terms following and with the following objects, purposes and responsibilities as outlined in Clauses 3 – 13 below of this document.

2.2       In reaching this agreement, the parties acknowledge that the closure to the public in 2018 of the Southland Museum and Art Gallery for safety reasons may necessitate the review of this Heads of Agreement document prior to 2025.

3.      The Committee’s Objects and Purposes

3.1      

3.1       To be responsible for the establishment and implementation of a strategy for preserving the Regional Heritage in Southland, including but not limited to the following:

3.1.1    Preserving key heritage collections of regional significance by providing regional heritage funding to ensure the preservation and cataloguing of key heritage elements;

3.1.2    To develop collections to portray and promote Southland’s Heritage in the context of the “Story of Southland” including the portrayal of elements of Southland Heritage near where the activities occurred adding relevance and context.

3.12.3  To provide the scope for local accountability and priorities and ensuring the opportunity for local Communities to develop their administration and exhibitions in a manner that reflects the importance placed on heritage by the local Communities in Southland and the promotion of visitor interest.

3.1 2.4 To ensure recognition of heritage as it relates to the whole of the Region including but not limited to:

·       a regional approach crossing territorial boundaries;

·       a recognition of the contribution individual territorial authorities make to Regional Heritage Collection;

·       stimulating co-operation between all governing bodies;

·       increasing the potential for regional expertise and funding to be available to local Museums;

·       providing an integrated regional approach with local accountability;

·       developing the potential for the Regional Heritage Grants to encourage preservation and heritage collections;

·       establishment of grants for the development of heritage as it relates to the “Story of Southland”

3.1.2.5 To establish strategic plans and identify priorities for (but not exclusively) Museum and heritage development.

3.1.2.6 To achieve a co-ordinated and complementary approach and the implementation of existing programmes and projects of Southland Museums.

3.1.7    To establish a fund to facilitate, investigate, assess, evaluate and prepare feasibility studies for new initiatives relating to Regional Heritage and Museums.

3.1.2.8 To take a proactive approach towards accessing and distributing funds for Regional Heritage and Museums.  Funding will not be allocated retrospectively and will not be eligible to offset capital development project over runs or operational deficits.

3.1 .9   To develop and implement further partnerships with key agencies to implement projects and initiatives of benefit for the purposes of advancing regional heritage and museums, in Southland.

3.1..10 To promote community heritage projects and initiatives of benefit to Southlanders and visitors to Southland.

3.1..11 To encourage the preservation and maintenance of buildings and facilities and the preservation, management and development of collections and exhibits and obtaining of funds to support the objects and purposes of the Committee.

3.1..12 To facilitate seminars, public forums and education to develop skills and    public awareness of issues and opportunities of Southland’s Regional Heritage and Museums.

3.1..13 To utilise and manage funds, make necessary investments, enter into joint ventures, service contracts, lease and other agreements upon such securities or in such a manner and upon such terms and conditions as the Joint Committee may deem   necessary and to apply funds received for the purposes for which they were granted or advanced or allocated.

3.1..14 To maintain close liaison with community groups and local communities throughout Southland to ensure all Local and Regional Museum strategies and initiatives of benefit to Southland are identified, encouraged and addressed.

 

3.1..15 To undertake as necessary any other activities which are incidental or conducive to the attainment of the above objects and purposes.

4.      Term

4.1       The term of the Agreement shall be for a term of seven (7) years from the date of commencement and thereafter for renewable periods of twelve (12) months each or such longer periods of time as any two or more of ICC, SDC and GDC agree and as otherwise provided in Clause 4.2.

4.2       Any of the parties may terminate their further participation in the Committee (subject to Clause 4.1) by giving eighteen (18) calendar months prior written notice to the expiry of any term or renewed term (Clause 4.1) to the other parties that their further participation is cancelled and that their member or members and the rights of appointment of a member or members are discharged (“the date of cessation”) without prejudice to any liabilities and responsibilities to the date of cancellation.

4.3       The Committee shall (unless sooner discharged), not be deemed to be discharged on the coming into office of the members of the local authority elected or appointed, as the case may be, at or following the general election next after the appointment of the Committee and the provisions of Schedule 7 Clause 31(5) of the Local Government Act 2002 shall apply

5.      Representation

5.1       ICC, SDC and GDC shall each appoint two voting members both of whom must be elected members of the local authority. 

5.1.1         Any other interested Councillors who are not members of the Committee may also attend meetings, but do not have voting rights.

5.2     The Committee may jointly appoint an Iwi representative to the Committee.

5.3       The Committee may jointly appoint other Committee Members being persons who have the skills, attributes or knowledge that may assist the work of the Committee.

5.4       Each local authority shall be at any time and from time to time entitled to appoint or discharge its member or members including alternate members.

5.5       Each local authority shall be entitled to appoint an alternate/s to attend a Committee meeting in the event that the appointed member/s is/are not available to attend.

5.6     The parties may jointly discharge a member appointed (clauses 5.2 and 5.3)

6.      Governance

6.1       The Committee shall re-appoint its own Chair and deputy Chair (if any) after each triennial election and the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 and Local Government Official Information Meetings Act 1987 shall apply and Standing Orders Section 5(1), Schedule 7, Clause 27(1),  LGA 2002 shall be adopted by the Committee to order its proceedings.

6.2     The Committee shall meet at such times and places as it shall determine.

6.3       A quorum shall be half of the members (including vacancies) if the number is even, and a majority (including vacancies) if odd and must at any time have an elected member of each local authority frto form a quorum.

6.4       The Committee shall have such powers, functions and duties as are necessary to carry out the objects and goals set out in this Agreement.

6.5     The powers shall include, but not be limited to the following (subject to Clauses 6.6 – 6.7):

6.5.1         To carry and fund surpluses.

6.5.2         To delegate to subcommittees.

6.5.3    The powers shall not include those powers expressly excluded by Section 5(1), Schedule 7, Clause 32  of the Local Government Act 2002 and not include the power to employ staff.

6.6       Each of the parties agree to make best endeavours to provide such staff as the Committee reasonably require including a Staff Advisory Group to assist the Committee in the exercising of its functions.

7.      Financial Commitment

7.1       The parties have each resolved to set and collect a Regional Heritage Uniform Annual Charge (UAC) and make this available to the Committee by way of rates, annual grants and allocations.  As of the date of signing of this agreement, the current UAC is $41.28 per SUIP in 2017/2018.  It is recognised that this amount will vary during the term of this agreement, as referred to in clause 7.5 below.

7.2     The amount in clause 7.1 shall be the minimum level of contribution. 

7.3       Where new initiatives or opportunities arise the parties may agree to provide additional funding as necessary based on the merit of the project.

7.4       The parties shall ensure for the term of this Agreement (Clause 4) that funding is provided by each of the Local Authorities’ planning processes for the purposes of Local Government Act 2002 to meet each party’ies’ financial commitment as contemplated by this Agreement.

7.5       Annual contributions made by the parties to this Agreement  via clause 7.1 above shall be automatically Local Government Cost Index adjusted annually.

7.6       It is agreed that any income or credit balance in the annual accounts of the Committee will be carried forward and will be applied as determined by the Joint Committee subject to the terms of allocation.

7.7       Any local authority not paying its agreed share when due as agreed under this Agreement, shall not be entitled to continue membership of the Committee. 

7.8       “Due” (clause 7.7) unless otherwise agreed by the parties shall mean the end of the financial year for which the rates have been set (refer clause 7.1).

7.9       Each local authority shall be deemed to have passed a resolution for its members to be discharged until such time as such funding when due shall have been paid, without prejudice to any other rights the other parties may have for non payment (clause 7.7).

8.      Financial Policy

8.1     Fiscal Responsibility

The Committee shall ensure  that it operates in a fiscally responsible manner and having due regard to the relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act 2007.

8.1.1          Application of the Committee’s Funds

The Committee’s Funds shall be applied solely towards the advancement and promotion of its objects (refer clause 3 above)

8.1.2    No proportion of the Committee’s Funds shall be paid or transferred directly or indirectly to any Joint Committee member save that nothing shall prevent payment, at a fair and reasonable rate, to any Committee member of any out of pocket expenses.

8.1.3         Remuneration

The Committee members may be paid remuneration pursuant to the provisions of LGA 2002 by each party in accordance with the policies of that party BUT they shall not be an expense of Southland Regional Heritage Committee Funds.

8.1.4         Audit

The books of account of the Committee shall be audited annually by Audit New Zealand and be reported as part of the Local Authorities annual reporting process.

 

 

 

8.1.5         Annual Balance

The annual joint accounts of the Committee will be presented to the parties to this Agreement as early as possible, withinthree months, after the balance date of the Committee, the annual balance date being 30 June, and otherwise in accordance with the LGA 2002.

8.2     General

The Committee shall ensure that:

8.2.1         The financial management complies with the requirements of this Heads of Agreement.

8.2.2    Officers with delegated authority shall report to the Committee on their respective areas of activity and shall be accountable for achieving outcomes relevant to those activities.

8.2.3    That each party shall put in place a comprehensive risk management plan with adequate insurances established for all areas of activity, asset protection and litigation indemnity for each of its members.   Any additional members (clauses 5.2 and 5.3 above) shall be the joint responsibility of the partners unless otherwise agreed.

8.2.4    Standard reporting from the Committee will be provided to each of the parties on a biannual basis unless they have ceased to be a member for the purposes of Clause 7.9.

8.3     Budgets

The Committee shall ensure that:

8.3.1         Annual budgets be prepared for all activities.

8.3.2    Budgets shall identify operational costs, projects, activity funding budgets, specific capital expenditure, major maintenance items and costs associated with meeting the Committee objectives.

8.4     Donations/Contributions

The Committee shall ensure that:

8.4.1    Donations received are clearly identified in the Committee‘s accounts and tagged to identify the purpose for which they were received.

8.4.2    Accountability documentation and reporting shall be completed and returned to the “donor organisation” to confirm that a grant has been applied to the purpose for which it was received.

8.4.3    A register of donations/grants is maintained under the following categories and reported as part of the annual reporting process:

·       Cash donations

·       Donations of materials

·       Transport

·       Voluntary labour

·       Professional services

8.5     Asset Management

The Committee shall ensure that:

8.5.1    All assets including replacements/acquisitions be clearly identified as to which party they belong.

8.5.2    An Asset Register is maintained on a regular basis and that items not required by the Committee be offered back for value originally donated or (unless otherwise agreed) to the party from which they were donated.

8.5.3    Purchases of $250.00 or more be considered as capital items and if relevant, be recorded in the Asset Register including donated assets.

8.6     Investment

The Committee shall ensure that investment of the Committee funds be the responsibility of the financial administrator, ICC, as per this agreement.  Such investment shall include adoption of appropriate strategies to ensure that:

8.6.1         Assets are adequately safeguarded and investment risks minimised.

8.6.2    Interest income is maximised (taking into account the need to ensure the security of investments).

8.6.3         Funds are available to meet the Committee’s cash flow needs.

8.6.4    Fixed term investments shall be secure investments with major registered trading banks or institutions having a Standard and Poors rating of AA or better.

8.6.5    Investments be either one lump sum or parcels invested with “staggered” maturation dates.  The parties agree spreading investments over secure instruments with a variety of banks and/or financial institutions is the most desirable option.

8.6.6   

8.7     Taxation

The Committee shall ensure that taxation payments (including GST if any) are the responsibility of the financial administrator as determined by the Committee.

8.8     Annual Reporting

The Committee’s annual reporting process shall include such information reasonably required by the parties in terms of the LGA 2002.

9.      Further Assurances

9.1       The parties delegate to the Committee the authority to consider and recommend alternatives to the parties as follows:

9.1.1         Implementation timetable.

9.1.2         Delegation of authority

9.1.3         Provision of assets.

9.1.4         Resources.

9.2       The parties agree to make best endeavours to sign and execute all deeds, acts, documents and things as may reasonably be required to effectively carry out and give effect to the provisions and intentions of this Agreement, including the passing of necessary resolutions.

10.   Disputes

10.1     If a dispute arises between the parties out of or in connection with this Agreement, including any dispute as to its existence or validity, which is not resolved within 14 days after the dispute arises, any party may, by written notice served on the other parties, require the Chief Executive Officers/Chief Executive or other agreed persons of the parties to attempt to resolve the issue.  If the parties are unable to resolve the dispute, then any party may require, by written notice served on any other party, for the dispute to be determined by arbitration of a single arbitrator.

10.2     If the parties cannot agree on a single arbitrator, then an arbitrator shall be appointed by the President of Local Government New Zealand for the time being. 

10.3     The arbitration shall be conducted as soon as possible in accordance with and subject to the provisions of the Arbitration Statutes for the time being in force in New Zealand.

11.   Dissolution

11.1     In the event that the Committee and its members are discharged, then any property and/or funds, real or personal (except those assets identified as belonging to a specific party in terms of Clause 8.5.1), shall be held for such of the local authorities who have appointed members remaining on the Joint Committee at the time of discharge. 

11.2     The property shall be held in such proportion to the share of contributions each local authority has made to the funding of the Committee during the term of this Agreement (except those assets identified as belonging to a specific party in terms of Clause 8.5.1).

12.   Miscellaneous

12.1     No delay, grant of time, release, compromise, forbearance (whether partial or otherwise) or other indulgence by one party in respect of any breach of any other party’s obligations under this Agreement is to:

          12.1.1         Operate as a waiver or prevent the subsequent enforcement of that obligation; or

12.1.2  Be deemed a delay, grant of time, release, compromise, forbearance (whether partial or otherwise) or other indulgence in respect of, or a waiver of, any subsequent or other breach.

12.2     If any provision of this Agreement or its application to any party, person or circumstance is invalid or unenforceable, then the remainder of this Agreement or the application of such provision to such other parties, persons or circumstances shall not be affected.

13.   NOTICES

13.1     Each notice or other communication under this Agreement is to be in writing, is to be made by facsimile, personal delivery , by e-mail or by post to the addressee at its facsimile number , e-mail address or address and is to be marked for the attention of the person or office holder (if any) from time to time designated for the purpose by the addressee to the other party.  The initial facsimile number, e-mail address and address and relevant person or office holder of each party is set out under its name at the end of this Agreement.

 

13.2     No communication is to be effective until received.  A communication will, however, be deemed to be received by the addressee:

13.2.1  In the case of a facsimile, on receipt of confirmation of receipt by the correct facsimile number.

          13.2.2         In the case of personal delivery, when delivered.

          13.2.3         In the case of a letter, on the sixth working day after posting and

          13.2.4         In the case of an email, on receipt of ‘received confirmation’ by email notification.

 

                   Invercargill City Council

                   Chief Executive Officer

                   101 Esk Street

                   Private Bag 90104

                   Invercargill 9840

                   Telephone: 03 211 1777         Facsimile:   03 211 1433

Email: service@icc.govt.nz

 

                   Southland District Council

                   Chief Executive Officer

                   15 Forth Street

                   P O Box 803

                   Invercargill 9810

                   Telephone: 0800 732 732

E-mail: sdc@southlanddc.govt.nz

 

                   Gore District Council

                   Chief Executive Officer

                   29 Civic Avenue

                   P O Box 8            Gore 9740

                   Telephone: 03 209 0330 Facsimile: 03 209 0357

E-mail: info@goredc.govt.nz

 

 

 

IN WITNESS  this Agreement was signed on the date first stated.

 

 

THE COMMON SEAL of the)

INVERCARGILL CITY COUNCIL)

was affixed in the presence of:         )

 

 

..............................................Mayor

 

 

..............................................Chief Executive Officer

 

 

………………………………….Date

 

 

THE COMMON SEAL of the)

SOUTHLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL)

was affixed in the presence of:            )

 

 

..............................................Mayor

 

 

.............................................. Chief Executive Officer

 

 

………………………………….Date

 


 

 

THE COMMON SEAL OF THE)            

GORE DISTRICT COUNCIL)

was affixed in the presence of:         )

 

 

............................................Mayor

 

 

.............................................. Chief Executive Officer

 

 

………………………………….Date

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Minutes of the Community and Policy Committee Meeting dated 5 September 2018

Record No:             R/18/11/27437

Author:                      Alyson Hamilton, Committee Advisor

Approved by:         Alyson Hamilton, Committee Advisor

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council receives the minutes of the Community and Policy Committee meeting held 5 September 2018 as information.

 

 

Attachments

a             Minutes of Community and Policy Committee Meeting dated 5 September 2018 (separately enclosed)

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Minutes of the Regulatory and Consents Committee Meeting dated 6 September 2018

Record No:             R/18/11/27248

Author:                      Alyson Hamilton, Committee Advisor

Approved by:         Alyson Hamilton, Committee Advisor

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council receives the minutes of the Regulatory and Consents Committee meeting held 6 September 2018 as information.

 

 

Attachments

a             Minutes of Regulatory and Consents Committee Meeting dated 6 September 2018 (separately enclosed)

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Minutes of the Riverton Harbour Subcommittee Meeting dated 3 September 2018

Record No:             R/18/12/27821

Author:                      Alyson Hamilton, Committee Advisor

Approved by:         Alyson Hamilton, Committee Advisor

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council receives the minutes of the Riverton Harbour Subcommittee meeting held 3 September 2018 as information.

 

 

Attachments

a             Minutes of Riverton Harbour Subcommittee Meeting dated 3 September 2018 (separately enclosed)

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Minutes of the Riverton/Aparima Community Board Meeting dated 8 October 2018

Record No:             R/18/12/27840

Author:                      Alyson Hamilton, Committee Advisor

Approved by:         Alyson Hamilton, Committee Advisor

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council receives the minutes of the Riverton/Aparima Community Board meeting held 8 October 2018 as information.

 

 

Attachments

a             Minutes of Riverton/Aparima Community Board Meeting dated 8 October 2018 (separately enclosed)

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Minutes of the Tuatapere Community Board Meeting dated 9 October 2018

Record No:             R/18/12/27962

Author:                      Alyson Hamilton, Committee Advisor

Approved by:         Alyson Hamilton, Committee Advisor

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council receives the minutes of the Tuatapere Community Board meeting held 9 October 2018 as information.

 

 

Attachments

a             Minutes of Tuatapere Community Board Meeting dated 9 October 2018 (separately enclosed)

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Minutes of the Athol Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 30 April 2018

Record No:             R/18/12/27638

Author:                      Rose Knowles, Committee Advisor/Customer Support Partner

Approved by:         Rose Knowles, Committee Advisor/Customer Support Partner

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council receives the minutes of the Athol Community Development Area Subcommittee meeting held 30 April 2018 as information.

 

 

Attachments

a             Minutes of Athol Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 30 April 2018 (separately enclosed)

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Minutes of the Garston Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 30 April 2018

Record No:             R/18/12/27626

Author:                      Rose Knowles, Committee Advisor/Customer Support Partner

Approved by:         Rose Knowles, Committee Advisor/Customer Support Partner

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council receives the minutes of the Garston Community Development Area Subcommittee meeting held 30 April 2018 as information.

 

 

Attachments

a             Minutes of Garston Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 30 April 2018 (separately enclosed)

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

Minutes of the Waikaia Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 23 April 2018

Record No:             R/18/11/27107

Author:                      Rose Knowles, Committee Advisor/Customer Support Partner

Approved by:         Rose Knowles, Committee Advisor/Customer Support Partner

 

  Decision                                        Recommendation                                  Information

 

 

 

Recommendation

That Council receives the minutes of the Waikaia Community Development Area Subcommittee meeting held 23 April 2018 as information.

 

 

Attachments

a             Minutes of Waikaia Community Development Area Subcommittee Meeting dated 23 April 2018 (separately enclosed)

   

 


Council

18 December 2018

 

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

Recommendation

 

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

C10.1 Venture Southland Triennial Agreement

C10.2 Around the Mountains Cycle Trail Management options

C10.3 Public Excluded Minutes of the Community and Policy Committee Meeting dated 5 September 2018

The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

Venture Southland Triennial Agreement

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

That the public conduct of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists.

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

Around the Mountains Cycle Trail Management options

s7(2)(b)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information.

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

That the public conduct of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists.

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this resolution

Public Excluded Minutes of the Community and Policy Committee Meeting dated 5 September 2018

s7(2)(a) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person.

s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).

That the public conduct of the whole or the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding exists.