Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

27 June 2019

COUNCIL MEMBERS REGISTER OF INTERESTS

Name	Responsibility (i.e. Chairperson etc)	Declaration of Interests	Nature of Potential Interest	Member's Proposed Management Plan
Hon John Carter QSO	Board Member of the Local Government Protection Programme	Board Member of the Local Government Protection Programme
Hon John Carter QSO	Carter Family Trust
Felicity Foy	Director - Northland Planning & Development	I am the director of a planning and development consultancy that is based in the Far North and have two employees.		I will abstain from any debate and voting on proposed plan change items for the Far North District Plan.
				I will declare a conflict of interest with any planning matters that relate to resource consent processing, and the management of the resource consents planning team.
				I will not enter into any contracts with Council for over $25,000 per year. I have previously contracted to Council to process resource consents as consultant planner.
	Flick Trustee Ltd	I am the director of this company that is the company trustee of Flick Family Trust that owns properties on Weber Place, Seaview Road and Allen Bell Drive.
	Elbury Holdings Limited	This company is directed by my parents Fiona and Kevin King.	This company owns several dairy and beef farms, and also dwellings on these farms. The Farms and dwellings are located in the Far North at Kaimaumau, Bird Road/Sandhills Rd, Wireless Road/ Puckey Road/Bell Road, the Awanui Straight, Allen Bell Drive.
	Foy Farms partnership	Owner and partner in Foy Farms - a farm in three titles on Church Road, Kaingaroa
	Foy Farms Rentals	Owner and rental manager of Foy Farms Rentals for 6 dwellings on Church Road, Kaingaroa and 1 dwelling at 64 Allen Bell Drive, Kaitaia, and one property at 96 North Road, Kaitaia
	King Family Trust	This trust owns several titles/properties at Cable Bay, Seaview Rd/State Highway 10 and Ahipara - Panorama Lane.	These trusts own properties in the Far North.
	Previous employment at FNDC 2007-16	I consider the staff members at FNDC to be my friends
Partner Felicity Foy	Employed by Justaplumber Taipa
Partner Felicity Foy	Friends with some FNDC employees
Dave Hookway	Resident shareholder in Kerikeri Irrigation			Declare if issues arise.
	Shareholder in Farmlands.			Declare if issues arise.
	Employee – Northland District Health Board – Public Health Unit – Health Improvement Advisor		Am employee have no personal gain.	Declare employment should issues concerning the Northland DHB arises.
	On property in Waipapa West Rd.		Possible issues relating to the street or zoning.	Declare when appropriate.
Colin Kitchen	No form received
Tania McInnes	Director – GBT Ventures Ltd	Company not currently operational		Will notify Council if company becomes operational.
	Member of Northland Conservation Board		Conservation matters not aligned with Council policy.	Will notify Council should a perceived conflict arise.
	Trustee – Northland Youth Education Trust		No perceived conflicts	Will notify Council should a perceived conflict arise.
	Founder – Bay of Islands Women’s Nexus	No perceived conflicts. An informal organisation
	Own a section on Seaview Road, Paihia 0200
	Having worked within the organisation in the early 2000’s, I know a number of staff, none of which I am close with.
Mate Radich	No form received
Ann Court	Waipapa Business Association	Member
	Warren Pattinson Limited	Shareholder	Building company. FNDC is a regulator and enforcer	No FNDC Controls
	Kerikeri Irrigation	Supplies my water		No EM intervention in disputes
	Top Energy	Supplies my power		No other interest greater than the publics
	District Licensing	N/A	N/A	N/A
	Top Energy Consumer Trust	Trustee	crossover in regulatory functions, consenting economic development and contracts such as street lighting.	Declare interest and abstain from voting.
	Ann Court Trust	Private	Private	N/A
	Waipapa Rotary	Honorary member	Potential community funding submitter	Declare interest and abstain from voting.
	Properties on Onekura Road, Waipapa	Owner Shareholder	Any proposed FNDC Capital works or policy change which may have a direct impact (positive/adverse)	Declare interest and abstain from voting.
	Property on Daroux Dr, Waipapa	Financial interest
	Flowers (I get flowers occasionally)	Ratepayer 'Thankyou'	Bias/ Pre-determination?	Declare to Governance
	Coffee and food	Ratepayers sometimes 'shout' food and beverage	Bias or pre-determination	Case by case
	Consider all staff my friends	N/A	Suggestion of not being impartial or pre-determined!	Be professional, due diligence, weigh the evidence. Be thorough, thoughtful, considered impartial and balanced. Be fair.
		My husband is a builder and may do work for Council staff
Warren Pattinson (Husband)	Warren Pattinson Limited	Director	Building Company. FNDC is a regulator	Remain at arm’s length
	Air NZ	Shareholder	None	None
	Warren Pattinson Limited	Builder	FNDC is the consent authority, regulator and enforcer.	Apply arm’s length rules
	Kurbside Rod and Custom Club (unlikely)	President NZ Hot Rod Association	Potential to be linked to a funding applicant and my wife is on the decision making committee.	unlikely to materialise but would absent myself from any process as would Ann.
	Property on Onekura Road, Waipapa	Owner	any proposed FNDC capital work in the vicinity or rural plan change. Maybe a link to policy development.	Would not submit. Rest on a case by case basis.
	Worked with or for Mike Colebrook and Kelvin Goode	Paid employment	N/A	N/A
Sally Macauley	Chairman	Northland District Health Board	Matters pertaining to health issues re Fluoride and freshwater as an example.	Declare a perceived conflict.
	Chairman	Oranga Tamaraki - Ministry of Vulnerable Children- Northland Community Response Forum	Matters pertaining to this ministry	Declare a perceived conflict.
	Judicial Justice of the Peace	Visitations to Ngawha Prison	Matters pertaining to Judicial Issues re Ngawha Prison	Declare a perceived Interest
	The Turner Centre	FNDC Representative	Observer, acknowledging FNDC financial contribution.	Note FNDC partnership
	Trustee	Kaikohe Education Trust	Providing students laptops - possible request for written support to funders	Declare a conflict
	Executive member	Kaikohe Business Association	Matters pertaining to request for written support to funders.
	Chairman	Bay of Islands Arts Festival Trust	Issues pertaining to the application of support funds	Declare a conflict of interests
	Trustee	Bay of Islands Radio Marine	Issues pertaining to the application of support funds	Declare a conflict of interets
	Secretary/Trustee	Kerkeri International Piano Competition	Issues pertaining to the application of support funds	Declare a conflict of interests
	Trustee/Director	Kaikohe Community and Youth Trust	Possible application of support funding	Declare a conflict of interests
	Commercial	Palmer Macauley Offices- Kerikeri and Kaikohe	Infrastructural matters with FNDC	Declare a conflict
	Private property of which there would not be any conflict.
	Paihia, Kerikeri, Kaikohe
Peter Macauley (Husband)	Senior Partner	Palmer Macauley
	Peter Macualey	Barristers and Solicitors- Kerikeri, Kaikohe and Mangonui	Legal matters with FNDC
	Director/Trustee
	St John NZ Priory Chapter	St John Priory Chapter	Legal matters with FNDC	Declare a conflict
	Senior Partner	Peter Macauley- Palmer Macauley Barristers and Solicitors Kaikohe, Kerikeri AND Mangonui	Legal matters with FNDC	Declare a conflict
	St John NZ	Priory Trust Board	Writing of policies and legal matters as an example	Note Interests
	Lions Club of Kaikohe	Director	Legal matters etc	Note Interests
	Kaikohe Rugby Club	Patron	Legal Matters
	Viking Rugby Club, Whangarei	Life Member	Legal Matters
	Private Property
	Kerkeri, Paihia - no contents.
John Vujcich	Board Member	Ngati Hine Health Trust	Matters pertaining to property or decisions that may impact of their health services	Declare interest and abstain
	Board Member	Pioneer Village	Matters relating to funding and assets	Declare interest and abstain
	Director	Waitukupata Forest Ltd	Potential for council activity to directly affect its assets	Declare interest and abstain
	Director	Rural Service Solutions Ltd	Matters where council regulatory function impact of company services	Declare interest and abstain
	Director	Kaikohe (Rau Marama) Community Trust	Potential funder	Declare interest and abstain
	Partner	MJ & EMJ Vujcich	Matters where council regulatory function impacts on partnership owned assets	Declare interest and abstain
	Member	Kaikohe Rotary Club	Potential funder, or impact on Rotary projects	Declare interest and abstain
	Member	New Zealand Institute of Directors	Potential provider of training to Council	Declare a Conflict of Interest
	Member	Institute of IT Professionals	Unlikely, but possible provider of services to Council	Declare a Conflict of Interest
	Member	Kaikohe Business Association	Possible funding provider	Declare a Conflict of Interest
Mike Edmonds	Chair	Kaikohe Mechanical and Historic Trust	Council Funding	Decide at the time
Mike Edmonds	Committee member	Kaikohe Rugby Football and Sports Club	Council Funding	Withdraw and abstain
Adele Gardner	N/A - FNDC Honorarium
	The Far North 20/20 , ICT Trust	Trustee
	Te Ahu Charitable Trust	Trustee
	ST Johns Kaitaia Branch	Trustee/ Committee Member
	I know many FNDC staff members as I was an FNDC staff member from 1994-2008.
Partner of Adele Gardner	N/A as Retired
Terry Greening	Greening Family Trust	Beneficiary		Highly unlikely to interface with FNDC
	Bay of Islands Walking Weekend Trust		Potential of seeking funds	Step aside from any requests or decisions regarding requests
	Russell 2000 Trust (Chairman)			Trust is about to wind up.
	Russell Centennial Trust (Chairman)	Manages Russell Museum	Seeks funds from council	Step aside from any requests or decisions regarding requests
	Residence at Kaha Place, Russell	Nil	Nil	N/A
Terry Greening (Wife)	Greening Family Trust	Beneficiary	N/A	N/A
Terry Greening (Wife)	Residence at Kaha Place, Russell
Cr Kelly Stratford	Office manager at Kinghans.
	Denture assistant at Kawakawa denture Services self-employed as book keeper Kelly@ksbookkeeoing.net	None	None
	KS Bookkeeping and Administration	Business owner, bookkeeping and development of environment management plans for clients.	None perceived	I’d step aside from decisions that arise, that may have conflicts.
	Kinghans Accounting	Office Administration	None perceived	I’d step aside from decisions that arise, that may have conflicts.
	Waikare Marae Trustees	Trustee	May be perceived conflicts	Case by case basis
	Kawakawa Business & Community Association	Committee member/newsletter editor and printer	None perceived	If there was a perceived conflict, I will step aside from decision making
	Bay of Islands College	Parent elected trustee	None perceived	If there was a perceived conflict, I will step aside from decision making
	Karetu School Bay Cosmos Soccer	Parent elected trustee. Committee member and coach	None perceived	If there was a perceived conflict, I will step aside from decision making
	Property in Waikare and Moerewa			If there was a perceived conflict, I will step aside from decision making
	Coffee and food	Ratepayers sometimes 'shout' food and beverage	Bias or pre-determination	Case by case
Kelly Stratford (Husband)	Property in Moerewa		N/A	N/A

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

27 June 2019

MINUTES OF Far North District Council MEETING
HELD AT THE COUNCIL CHAMBER, MEMORIAL AVENUE, KAIKOHE
ON WEDNESDAY 17 APRIL 2019 AT 10:00 AM

PRESENT: Mayor John Carter (HWTM), Cr Tania McInnes (Deputy Mayor), Cr Ann Court, Cr Felicity Foy, Cr Dave Hookway, Cr Colin (Toss) Kitchen, Cr Sally Macauley, Cr Mate Radich, Cr John Vujcich

IN ATTENDANCE:Mike Edmonds (Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Chairperson), Terry Greening (Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board Chairperson), Adele Gardner (Te Hiku Community Board Chairperson), Shaun Baker - Northland Transport Alliance, Shaun Reilly - Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Member

STAFF PRESENT: Shaun Clarke - Chief Executive Officer, Janice Smith - General Manager Corporate Services (Acting), Andy Finch - General Manager - Infrastructure and Asset Management, Dean Myburgh - General Manager - District Services, Darrell Sargent - General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy, Jaime Dyhrberg - Executive Officer, Glenn Rainham - Manager Alliances, Sheryl Gavin - Manager Corporate Planning and Engagement, Jill Coyle - Manager People and Capability, Tanya Proctor - Team Leader Infrastructure Programmes,Gayle Anderson - Executive Assistant to GM SPP, Aisha Huriwai - Team Leader Governance Support, Melissa Wood - Meetings Administrator, Marlema Baker - Meetings Administrator, Michelle Sharp - Manager Project Management, Roger Ackers - Manager Strategy Development, George Swanepoel - InHouse Counsel, Richard Edmondson - Manager Communications

1 Prayer

His Worship the Mayor commenced the meeting with a prayer.

2 Apologies and Declarations of Interest

Moved: Mayor John Carter
Seconded: Deputy Mayor McInnes

That the apology from Councillor Stratford be accepted and leave of absence granted

CARRIED

3 DeputationS

Bart Van der Meer representative from Volunteering Northland provided a report to Council on their activies.

4 MAYORAL ANNOUNCEMENTS

Provincial Growth Fund updates

5 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

5.1 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Recommendation

Moved: Mayor John Carter
Seconded: Cr Tania McInnes

That Council confirm the minutes of the:

a) Council meeting held 28 February 2019 as a true and correct record

b) Extraordinary Council meeting held 4 April 2019 as a true and correct record

CARRIED

6 Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board

6.1 Lease Russell Town Hall Shop

Recommendation

Moved: Mayor John Carter
Seconded: Cr Colin Kitchen

That Council

a) enters into a 3x3x3 year commercial lease of the Russell Town Hall Shop with Bay of Islands Kayak Tours Ltd.

b) approves that the General Manager Infrastructure and Asset Management is authorised to negotiate and agree to the terms and conditions of the lease on the premises on commercial terms and subject to relevant Council policies and legislation.

c) agrees that in accordance with Section 94 of the Reserves Act 1977, Council authorizes the use of the Local Purpose (Public Hall) Reserve in front of the premises by Bay of Islands Kayak Tours Ltd to park and display kayaks during business hours.

d) agrees that the General Manager Infrastructure and Asset Management is authorised to negotiate and agree to the terms and conditions of the permit to use the reserve, subject to relevant Council policies and legislation.

CARRIED

deputations (CONTINUED)

Myles Taylor representative from Fire Emergency New Zealand (FENZ) spoke regarding the local community profiling project.

7 Audit, Risk, and Finance Committee

7.1 Amendments to Rating Relief Policies

Councillor Court declared an interest and withdrew from the table

Recommendation

Moved: Cr John Vujcich
Seconded: Mayor John Carter

That Council approves the following amendments to the Rating Relief Polices prior to consultation:

a) The Transitional Farmland policy is re-instated

b) The Treaty Settlement Lands policy is amended to include settlements approved prior to 1 July 2018

c) The Common Use Properties policy is amended to include commercial enterprises and residential properties

d) The Landlocked Land policy is amended to refer Maori land issues to the Maori Land Court for decision

e) The Land Subject to Protection for Outstanding Natural Landscape, Cultural, Historic or Ecological Purposes policy is amended to include covenants approved under the Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga Act 2014 (or Historic Places Act 1993)

f) The Residential Rates for Senior Citizens policy is amended to provide clarity for conditions 1 and 4 to allow staff to apply the conditions fairly to all applicants.

CARRIED

Councillor Court returned to the table

DEPUTATIONS (CONTINUED)

Representatives from Far North Youth Mentoring Programme, accompanied by Council staff, Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board Member Rachel Smith, and Councillor Kelly Stratford introduced themselves to Mayor and Councillors.

Attendance: Councillor Hookway left the meeting at 10:55 am and returned to the meeting at 10:57 am.

8 Infrastructure and Asset Management Group

8.1 Maromaku Domain Netball Courts

Recommendation

Moved: Mayor John Carter
seconded: Cr Felicity Foy

That the Council:

a) uplift the report Maromaku Domain Netball Courts from the table

b) note the report Maromaku Domain Netball Courts

c) approve the use of the existing budget of $371,370 less expenditure previously incurred, to progress the project having the following scope:

i. Demolish the existing three netball courts.

ii. Provide two full size netball courts, two tennis courts, and a hockey training facility.

iii. Playing surfaces finished with artificial turf.

d) continue to seek a contribution from the community, comprising funding, materials or labour.

CARRIED

Councillors Foy and McInnes requested their votes against the motion be recorded

8.2 Inclusion of te rangi cross road iN the schedule of the far north DISTRICT COUNCIL MAINTAINED ROADS

This item was withdrawn at the request of the Chief Executive

8.3 PROGRESS UPDATE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF A DISTRICT WIDE PRIORITISATION MATRIX TO ENABLE FORWARD WORK PROGRAMME FOR 2019-2020 FY

This item was withdrawn at the request of the Chief Executive

9 District Services Group

9.1 Resource Management Act Delegations

Councillor Foy declared an interest and withdrew from the discussion in regard to this item

Recommendation

Moved: Mayor John Carter
Seconded: Cr Ann Court

That Council approve the delegations set out in the Resource Management Act Delegations Schedule 2019 with effect from 19 April 2019.

CARRIED

10 Strategic Planning and Policy Group

10.1 Speed Limits Bylaw Review

Recommendation

Moved: Mayor John Carter
Seconded: Cr Mate Radich

That the Council:

a) adopt the Proposed Speed Limits Bylaw 2019 for consultation (Attachment 1).

b) authorises the Chief Executive Officer to make any necessary minor edits or amendments to the attached Proposed Speed Limits Bylaw 2019 prior to consultation to correct any spelling or typographical errors.

CARRIED

11 corporate services group

11.1 Lease Council building 11 Parnell Street, Rawene

Recommendation

Moved: Cr John Vujcich
Seconded: Cr Felicity Foy

That the matter be referred back to staff and returned to the table with the appropriate community board recommendation.

CARRIED

11.2 Local Bill amending the Electricity Industry Act 2010

Councillor Court declared an interest and withdrew from the table

Recommendation

Moved: Mayor John Carter
Seconded: Cr Tania McInnes

That the Far North District Council supports and adopts an amended local bill that will:

a) Have the effect of removing the application of the Electricity Industry Act 2010 insofar as it relates to prohibitions on common management of distributors with interests in generation in the Far North District; and

b) In substitution empower the Council to set requirements relating to common management of such distributors; and

c) Approve the principles set out in the attached Schedule upon which an application which is made by a distributor under the terms of the bill will be considered.

CARRIED

Councillor Court returned to the table

11.3 Elected Member Report - Inclusive Growth Summit 19 March 2019 and Road Controlling Authorities Forum 29 March 2019

Recommendation

Moved: Cr John Vujcich
Seconded: Cr Tania McInnes

That Council note the report entitled “Elected Member Report - Inclusive Growth Summit, 19 March 2019 and Road Controlling Authorities Forum, 29 March 2019”.

CARRIED

11.4 CEO Report to Council 01 February 2019 - 31 March 2019 - SUPPLEMENTARY AGENDA

Recommendation

Moved: Cr John Vujcich
Seconded: Mayor John Carter

That the Council receive the report “CEO Report to Council 01 February 2019 - 31 March 2019”.

CARRIED

Attendance: Mayor Carter left the meeting at 11:43 am and returned at 11:45 am.

Attendance: Councillor Kitchen left the meeting at 12:23 pm and returned at 12:26 pm.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:14 pm and resumed at 1:50 pm

12 Public Excluded

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Recommendation

Moved: Mayor John Carter
Seconded: Cr Colin Kitchen

That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject matter 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 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 for the passing of this resolution

12.1 – Confirmation of Previous Minutes – Public Excluded

s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of 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 would exist under section 6 or section 7

12.2 - Te Pu o Te Wheke project

s7(2)(f)(i) - free and frank expression of opinions by or between or to members or officers or employees of any local authority

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

s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

CARRIED

13 Meeting Close

The meeting closed at 2:41 pm.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed at the meeting held on 27 June 2019

...................................................

CHAIRPERSON

6 Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board

6.1 Adoption of the Kerikeri Domain Reserve Management Plan

File Number: A2478426

Author: Rachael Pull, Specialist Planner - Urban Design

Authoriser: Darrell Sargent, General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy

Purpose of the Report

· To seek adoption of the Kerikeri Domain Reserve Management Plan.

Executive Summary

Administration, with the support of the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board (Community Board), consultants, key stakeholders, iwi and the public have created a Reserve Management Plan for the Kerikeri Domain to meet obligations under Section 41 of the Reserves Act 1977. The Kerikeri Domain Reserve Management Plan (Management Plan) has been through a public notification process and submissions were heard at a hearing on 9 April 2019.

The Community Board was presented the Kerikeri Domain Reserve Management Plan at their meeting on 20 May 2019. The Community Board made some changes to the Management Plan which have been incorporated in the attached version for Council to adopt.

The Community Board also recommended that the reserve management plan be adopted and that a governing body for the Kerikeri Domain be established.

Recommendation

That Council:

a) adopts the Draft Kerikeri Domain Reserve Management Plan 2019 pursuant to its powers under section 41 of the Reserves Act 1977

b) Requests that Council urgently establish a reserve management committee for the Kerikeri Domain, to manage the domain and its use, and that the committee seek to be an incorporated society.

1) Background

In June 2017, Council gave public notice of its intention to create a Management Plan for the Kerikeri Domain. One of Council's responsibilities under the Reserves Act 1977 is to prepare Management Plans for all of its gazetted reserves. A Management Plan sets out how Council intends to provide for the use, enjoyment, maintenance, protection, preservation and, when appropriate, development of a reserve.

The Management Plan was written by Administration, with support from the Community Board and consultants, following consultation with key stakeholders, iwi and the public.

The Management Plan was publicly notified on 17 December 2018, with submissions closing on 15 March 2019. A total of 151 submissions were received, with 32 submitters requesting to be heard. The submissions were in general support of having a Management Plan, with the majority requesting changes to the Management Plan as they wanted to have additional facilities and references to certain groups and activities provided at the Kerikeri Domain. Some of the submissions also related to matters out of scope, which can’t be controlled by the Management Plan and are better managed by Council’s Bylaws and the Long Term Plan.

At the 13 December 2018 Council meeting it was resolved that the Community Board would hear the submissions received on the Management Plan, and that they would deliberate on whether to make any changes to the Management Plan before recommending adoption by Council.

The public hearing was held by the Community Board on 9 April 2019, with deliberations held on 20 May 2019 at which time the Management Plan was amended.

2) Discussion and Options

The Community Board recommends that Council adopt the amended Kerikeri Domain Reserve Management Plan.

Options

The available options include Council either adopting the amended Management Plan or resolving to prepare a new Management Plan.

Option 1

The Community Board has reviewed the submissions made by the public and considers that there should be some minor changes made to the Management Plan to achieve a more integrated document, which also addresses concerns raised by the community. The following changes were made:

a) Amended/additional action points to improve/increase how the Kerikeri Domain is developed

Submissions were received suggesting expanding the actions in the Management Plan to provide more facilities and to more specifically address concerns about implementation. It is considered that the following action points be amended:

Action Point	Amendment
Short Term
Council develop a maintenance and management plan for the Domain	Expand action point to include the following within the maintenance plan: - community planting/weeding days. - recognition of additional maintenance requirements for sports (e.g. turf management). - the ethics of ako (teaching and learning), manaakitanga (hospitality/teamwork), whānaungatanga (relationships) and Kotahitanga (unity).
Action items to be designed, costed and approved by Council	Expand the design criteria to include the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles. Add landscaping and an interactive water play area to the list.
	New short term action point: Within six month Council design a horticultural landscape plan for the Kerikeri Domain in accordance with this document and undertake the first stage of plantings to provide shade opportunities.
	New short term action point: Council to develop a shared use arrangement with Kerikeri High School regarding shared infrastructure and the use of the Kerikeri Domain and adjoining Ministry of Education owned land.
	New short term action point: Within six months Council in partnership with the Community Board and community consider the establishment of an incorporated society representing the community to manage and oversee the Domain.
Medium Term
Water fountains and rubbish bins	Move from medium term action point to short term action point and expand to specifically reference human and dog water fountains and rubbish bins and recycling.
Lighting	Expand reference to lighting to include feature and security lighting. Remove reference to excluding sport lighting.
Upgrade footpaths	Amend to consider new footpath connections and be a minimum width of 2.2 metres.
Locations of key amenities	Hitching posts added as an example.
	New Medium term action point: Provide CCTV cameras in appropriate locations to enhance safety.
	New Medium term action point: Establish barbeque areas around the domain outside the perimeter pathway.
	New Medium term action point: Establish safe and accessible play areas for children.
	New Medium term action point: Upgrade the parking next to the library to provide space for people with accessibility concerns and parents.
	New Medium term action point: Provide access onto the Domain for heavy vehicles for permitted activities.
	Move from medium term action point to short term action point: Upgrade existing basketball court to enable opportunities for all ball sports.

A general amendment to remove reference to ‘FNDC’ by each action point (except those specific to Council) will mean that any group can fundraise or develop these facilities as long as they are in accordance with the Management Plan. This is backed up by an additional statement in the ‘Implementation and Funding’ section of the Management Plan.

It is considered that amending/adding these action points will meet the vision and objectives of the plan and provide more clarity to Council and groups using and developing the Kerikeri Domain.

b) Amend Concept Plan to be more flexible

Several submitters provided alternative concept plans. All are based on a similar theme of infrastructure and planting surrounding a green space. Where they differ is regarding the amount of green space, activities outside the scope of the Management Plan and some specific activities within the Kerikeri Domain. It is considered that adopting elements from each of these plans will create a more comprehensive plan that reflects the vision for the Kerikeri Domain and the submissions.

c) Changes to improve clarity

Submissions were received to make minor changes to the document to better reflect users, facilities onsite, cultural history, policies, action points, the concept plan and the different outcomes for the pavilion. As these changes enhance the usability of the management plan it is considered that these changes will enhance the outcomes of the document.

d) Changes to governance

22 submissions were received for a governance structure to manage the Kerikeri Domain. An action point for Council to consider having the Kerikeri Domain managed by an incorporated society has been created as a short term action point (1-3 years).

Option 2

The Council may consider that they do not agree with all or some of the recommendations made in Option 1. Therefore the Council has the option of recommending starting the Management Plan process again.

Reason for the recommendation

Option 1 is recommended to the Council. It is considered that the recommended amendments will address the majority of concerns raised in the submissions, and create a more integrated Management Plan. Council is required to have a Management Plan for Kerikeri Domain.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

Associated administrative tasks and costs. These costs will be met through the existing 2018/19 operational budget for the development of the management plan.

None of the actions included in Option 1 are guaranteed and are subject to either community funding or inclusion in a future Long Term Plan.

There are no financial implications for the Council in relation to the resolution.

Attachments

1. Kerikeri Domain Reserve Management Plan - A2494927 ⇩

Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

c) If any of the options identified under paragraph (a) involves a significant decision in relation to land or a body of water, take into account the relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land, water sites, waahi tapu, valued flora and fauna and other taonga.

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	This report will have low level of significance as it is a legislative requirement and has already been consulted on. The Management Plan will facilitate the development and enhancement of a large recreational area to the benefit of the local community and wider district residents and be consistent with existing plans and policies.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	Reserves Act 1977 – outlines process for writing and adopting reserve management plans.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	The Community Board’s views have been considered through the establishment of the Community Reference Group to determine who the stakeholders were and the workshop that the Community Board members were invited to on 17 September 2018. The Community Board’s views were further considered through the delegation given to hear and deliberate on submissions and make a recommendation to Council.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	Māori have been, and will continue to be, consulted on the issues outlined in the Management Plan.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	As part of the legislative process, the Management Plan was open to the public for three months for submissions, which were heard by the Community Board.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	There are no immediate financial implications associated with the recommended resolutions, as outlined in Section 3 of this report.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The CFO has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

27 June 2019

6.2 Cobham Road Bus Stop

File Number: A2497323

Author: Mike Fox, Project Manager - Transport and Roading

Authoriser: Andy Finch, General Manager - Infrastructure and Asset Management

Purpose of the Report

This report is to confirm the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board’s decision to adopt the current layout of the bus stop and to amend the Traffic and Parking Bylaw to ensure that the bus stop is legally enforceable, as well as request that the Commercial Operators provide a suitable bus shelter for patrons.

Executive Summary

· After a fire in May 2016, the Cobham Road bus stop was temporarily relocated to outside 13 and 15 Cobham Road

· There have been complaints about the location of the bus stop and reports of unsafe use of the bus stop by the bus companies (double parking)

· In response to the above, community feedback has been sought for a trial layout consisting of a double bus park outside the Proctor library. Mixed results have been received

· The Community Board was asked to consider this feedback and determine what layout they support

· The Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board considered this report at their meeting on 20 May 2019 and makes the following recommendation to Council.

Recommendation

That Council

a) adopt the current layout and amend the Traffic and Parking Bylaw to ensure that the bus stop is legally enforceable

b) request that staff ask the Commercial Operators to provide a suitable bus shelter for patrons

1) Background

The Cobham Road bus stop historically was located outside numbers 9 and 11 Cobham Road, Kerikeri. This layout was formally adopted under the Parking and Traffic Control bylaw, so is enforceable. This layout is shown on Attachment 1.

After a fire in May 2016, the bus stop was temporarily re-located to its current location outside numbers 13 and 15 Cobham Road. This was to avoid bus passengers being exposed to construction hazards during repair of the buildings. This layout was not formally adopted under the Parking and Traffic Control bylaw, and is therefore not enforceable. This layout is shown on Attachment 2.

Since then, complaints by businesses relating to the loss of car parking spaces outside their premises have been received and safety concerns have been raised regarding the manner in which some bus companies are using the bus-stop, particularly the practice of double parking buses. Some bus companies have also advised that at both this and the original layout, their vehicles are unable to park close enough to the kerb to use disabled access ramps because of the shop awnings.

Far North District Council has written to bus companies to reinforce that they are responsible for safe use of the bus stop. The companies were reminded that double parking of vehicles is not permitted in the Road Code, and were asked to review their procedures to ensure that their operations are safe, legal and appropriate at the Cobham Road bus stop.

Council representatives also met with some of the parties involved at the site, and mapped out a trial layout consisting of a double bus park outside the Proctor library. This layout is shown on Attachment 3. The trial layout was subject to a Road Safety Audit, and directly affected parties were asked for feedback.

Facilities for public transport in Kerikeri will be reviewed as part of the District Transport Strategy, so the bus facilities on Cobham Road may be changed or relocated when the strategy is adopted.

2) Discussion and Options

Original and Current Layouts

The components of the original and current layouts as shown in Attachments 1 and 2 are relatively straight forward. Changes that would be required to revert to the original layout would include:

a) Reinstatement of the original bus stop and loading zone outside numbers 9 and 11 Cobham Road.

b) The reinstated bus stop and loading zone would be in place of four parking spaces, though three parking spaces would be reinstated outside 13 and 15 Cobham Road. There would therefore be a one less car parking space provided than currently.

c) As the original layout is the current enforceable layout, no bylaw change would be necessary.

No road safety audit has been completed for either of these layouts, nor has feedback been sought from the community.

Trial Double Bus Park outside the Library

As shown in Attachment 3, this layout involves the following changes:

a) A new double bus park is provided outside the library. The provision of a double bus park with a P30 time limit is in response to the current issue of double parking by coaches transferring passengers on Cobham Road.

b) The new double bus park is in place of one disability parking space, two other parking spaces, and one loading zone.

c) A replacement disability parking space is located on the Kerikeri-centre side of the current loading zone, with a lowered kerb to facilitate better accessibility.

d) Three parking spaces are provided in the current location of the bus stop outside numbers 13 and 15 Cobham Road. These replace the two parking spaces taken up by the new double bus park and the parking place taken up by the relocated disability parking space. There is therefore no reduction in the number of parking spaces provided.

e) The loading zone will not be replaced.

It was proposed that this layout could be trialled for twelve months, and if successful adopted as part of the District Transport Strategy.

The double bus park layout has been subject to an independent road safety audit by Northern Civil Consulting (Attachment 4). The audit found that:

• both the location and the proposed layout are fit for purpose

• the proposed double length bus park should eliminate the existing ‘double parking’ of buses that is currently occurring in the majority, if not all circumstances

• there are no significant safety implications of the use of the one-way system by a relatively small number of buses

• the raised crossing point immediately east of the proposed bus park and the zebra crossings at the intersection of Cobham Road and Kerikeri Road make good provision for bus passengers to cross the road and change to alternative modes of transport.

The audit did not recommend any changes to the layout.

There has been a considerable amount of local interest in the Cobham Road bus stop. A range of interested parties were therefore asked for written feedback on the trial double bus park layout.

A total of sixteen feedback responses were received. Ten of these were against this proposal, four supported this proposal and two were neutral. However, a simple majority count to determine support is not appropriate. This is because feedback has been obtained from a mix of individuals and representative organisations, and the various parties have or represent differing interests which must be interpreted.

A table with all of the responses is included as Attachment 5.

Options

Taking into account the trial double bus park layout concept, the road safety audit and the feedback received, the Community Board was asked to deliberate on the three options:

Option 1 No changes are made to the current layout (do nothing, but recommend that the Parking and Traffic Control bylaw be changed); or

Option 2 The layout is changed back to the original layout (complete works, no Parking and Traffic Control bylaw change necessary); or

Option 3 The trial layout consisting of a double bus park outside the library is adopted for twelve months (complete works and recommend that the Parking and Traffic Control bylaw be changed).

The Community Board resolved to recommend Option 1- that Council adopt the current layout and amend the Traffic and Parking Bylaw, and also resolved to request that staff ask the Commercial Operators to provide a suitable bus shelter for patrons. In making the second part of this resolution, it was recognised by the Community Board that provision of a suitable bus shelter cannot be required (i.e. the resolution is to ask only).

Changing the Parking and Traffic Bylaw

Administration consider the proposed changes to the Parking and Traffic Bylaw as meeting the threshold for the criteria of level of public interest as per Councils Significance and Engagement Policy. This is because the proposed change will generate considerable interest and community views that may render the community deeply divided.

Therefore as per the requirements of 156 (1) (a) (i) of the Local Government Act, Council must use the special consultative procedure when amending or revoking a bylaw that meets a threshold within a Councils Significance and Engagement Policy.

Section 83 of the Local Government Act, sets out the requirements of the special consultative procedure. These include the adoption of a statement of proposal by Council, one month of consultation and the provision of a reasonable opportunity for persons to present their views to the Council in a spoken manner before any amendment to the bylaw can be put to Council for adoption.

If the recommendation of the Community Board is adopted, the current situation (i.e. the bus-stop not being covered by the bylaw) will therefore persist during the time this takes.

Reason for the recommendation

The Community Board was asked to recommend a layout for Council to adopt because:

a) whilst the trial double bus park layout is technically sound and safe, mixed feedback was received; and

a. the trial double bus park layout is a change in the level of service provided by Council that will advantage a particular group (provision of a double bus space with 30 minute parking, which will benefit bus companies and their passengers); and

b) the trial double bus park layout is a change in the level of service provided by Council that will dis-advantage a particular group (removal of a loading zone outside the library, which may require changes to library operations);

c) the choice between layouts involves consideration of public interests better represented by the board than by staff.

The Community Board was also asked to recommend that Council make any necessary change to the Traffic Control and Parking bylaw as this is required to make any selected layout enforceable. No bylaw change is required if the recommendation is to return to the original layout, as this is already included in the bylaw.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

The work involves placement of signs, line marking and minor civil engineering works, so the financial implications of this work are not significant. The work will be funded as minor safety works under the Low Cost Low Risk category.

No physical works will be required by Council if the Community Board resolution is adopted, as their recommendation is to adopt the currently marked and signposted layout.

Attachments

1. Original Bus Stop Layout - A2446508 ⇩

2. Current Temporary Bus Stop Layout - A2446503 ⇩

3. Trial Double Bus Park Layout - A2446505 ⇩

4. Road Safety Audit - A2446502 ⇩

5. Summary of Feedback - A2446509 ⇩

Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	This report has the potential to trigger high significance depending on the preferred option of Council. Any changes to bylaws would require consultation before they could be enforced.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	Parking and Traffic Control bylaw must be changed if necessary to make the selected layout enforceable.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	The Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board’s views have been sought and included in this report.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	There are no special implications for Māori.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	Local groups, businesses and bus companies have been asked for feedback. Bus passengers are considered to be represented by the bus companies and the wider public by the Kerikeri Residents and Ratepayers Association, Vision Kerikeri and the Community Board itself.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	If required, there is capacity in the Low Cost Low Risk funding category.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report

7 Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board

7.1 Basketball Court Project - Memorial Park, Kaikohe

File Number: A2515853

Author: Robert Willoughby, Community Development Advisor

Authoriser: Darrell Sargent, General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy

Purpose of the Report

To seek approval from Council to build the asset when sufficient funding has been secured.

Executive Summary

A proposal by residents requesting a basketball court on Memorial Park in Kaikohe was received in 2018. The Kaikohe Community Youth Charitable Trust (KCYCT) was formed to raise funds to build the Basketball Court. Quotes from two parties have been obtained. The estimated cost of the project is $100,000. To date the Trust has raised $72,000, a shortfall of $28,000.

A preferred location for the asset has been agreed and Council confirms there are no consenting requirements. The Trust has asked Council to manage the project, and the Trust would like Council to maintain the asset in perpetuity.

Legal opinion confirms that the asset will automatically vest in Council by virtue of being on the reserve.

This report recommends that Council build the asset when sufficient funding has been secured.

The Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board considered this report at their meeting on 5 June 2019 and makes the following recommendation to Council.

Recommendation

That

a) approval be given to construct a basketball court on Memorial Park reserve once the Kaikohe Community Youth Charitable Trust has secured sufficient funding.

b) Council staff manage the project using funds received from the Kaikohe Community Youth Charitable Trust.

c) sufficient operational funding be allocated in the 2020/21 Annual Plan and subsequent Long Term Plans to maintain, insure and depreciate the asset.

1) Background

A public petition of 1500 signatures to the Far North District Council requesting a basketball court on Memorial Park in Kaikohe was received in 2018. The cost of the project has been quoted at $100,000. The Kaikohe Community Youth Charitable Trust was formed to raise funds to build the asset. To date the Trust has raised $72,000 from the following donors:

Oxford Trust	30,000
Pub Charity	10,000
Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board	20,000
Northland District Health Board	5,000
Te Kotahitanga e Mahi Kaha Trust	5,000
Ngapuhi Runanga	1,500
New World Kaikohe	500
Total Raised	72,000

There is a short-fall of funding.

Council and KCYCT have agreed a preferred location for the court and Council staff confirm that there are no consenting requirements. Memorial Park does not have a reserve management plan in place. There is therefore no restriction on the placement of an asset such as this.

A concept plan has been developed by the community, led by AKAU, to articulate the design, size and structure of the court and the surrounding area.

KCYCT wants Council to manage the project and own and maintain the court once it is completed.

2) Discussion and Options

Project management, ownership and responsibility for maintenance

Council automatically becomes the owner of the asset once it has been constructed on a Council reserve. Operating costs have been estimated at $5,000 per year including maintenance, insurance and depreciation.

Assuming that the asset will be constructed in 2019/20, operating costs will not arise until 2020/21. These costs will therefore be included in the 2020/21 Annual Plan and subsequent LTP.

Should the project go ahead, Council will need to manage the construction of the asset to ensure it is fit for purpose, constructed to the required standard and safe for users.

Funding shortfall

KCYCT are $28,000 short of the quoted cost. The Trust itself has sought the quotes the funding target is based on. Since Council will project manage and own the resulting asset, it is necessary for Council’s procurement process to be followed and therefore more work done on securing quotes to lay the foundation. Two quotes have also been received for the astro-turf and court fitout element. Foundation costs seem to vary depending upon the locality of the contractor. It is possible that the cost for foundation could be reduced.

Options are:

Option 1 (preferred): Work with KCYCT to review the quoted cost using Council contractors. The Trust has received two quotes. Given the cost variances between them a third quote is being sought. Staff recommend the asset should not be built until the funding streams have been secured.

Option 2: KCYCT continues its fundraising efforts and works with Council to phase the project so that funds already raised can be put to use. Although this mitigates the risk of having to repay donor funds, Council faces the possibility that the Trust is unsuccessful in raising the rest of the money, leaving Council with the cost of completing the build.

Approval to construct the asset on Memorial Park Reserve

The Community Board does not have the delegated authority to approve construction of the asset on a reserve. Therefore, Council approval needs to be sought.

Reason for the recommendation

The project is recognised by Council as an excellent place-making initiative that will attract substantial use by the youth of Kaikohe and visitors. The community has done a good job of raising a significant amount of funding and is close to target but requires more time to get to their goal.

Since the asset will be owned and maintained by Council it is important that Council’s procurement and construction processes be adhered to. For this reason the recommendation is to proceed only when Council-approved quotes have been received and sufficient funding has been confirmed.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

Assuming that the asset will be constructed in 2019/20, operating costs will not arise until 2020/21. These costs are estimated at $5,000 annually to cover maintenance, insurance and depreciation will therefore be included in the 2020/21 Annual Plan and subsequent LTP.

The capital to build the asset will be provided to Council from KCYCT.

Attachments

1. AKAU Kaikohe Basketball Report - A2515837 ⇩

Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	The project holds a high level of significance for the youth of Kaikohe to engage in positive recreational activity. Urban basketball is a growing sport with increasing participation rates.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The projects sits well as a place making activity for Kaikohe and fits within the social development goals of the Kaikohe Community Plan to engage youth in developing programs and activities for their community.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	The Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board supports, in principle, the proposal to install a basketball court to Memorial Park, Kaikohe at no cost to Council (excepting potential funding grants), subject to i) All funds for the project being secured by 1 December 2018 (subsequently reviewed to 1st April 2019. ii) The final location and design being approved by the board and subject matter Council staff iii) Funds for maintaining the court until the next Long Term Plan budget (2021-31) is set are provided by the petitioner b) The Board notes that the petitioner will work with Council staff to meet legal and safety requirements regarding this project.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	There are no foreseen implications for Maori. The project is supported by Ngapuhi Runanga who have contributed to the project
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	The basketball court will be constructed at the recreational end of Memorial Park. No encumbrances to access are foreseen. Kaikohe Police have been engaged in the project and support its purpose and outcomes. The area is under regular surveillance.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	There are no financial implications until the 2020/2021 where budget provision will be provided for in the Annual Plan and subsequent LTP.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer (Acting) has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

27 June 2019

7.2 Lease Council building 11 Parnell Street, Rawene

File Number: A2516087

Author: Rob Koops, Property Services

Authoriser: William J Taylor MBE, General Manager - Corporate Services

Purpose of the Report

That Council reconsider and decide on the matter of the lease for 11 Parnell Street, Rawene taking into consideration the recommendations of both the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board and Council staff.

Executive Summary

· The attached report was submitted to Council on 17 April 2019 as an escalated report from the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board.

· Before the subject of the report was debated, Councillor Vujcich moved that: “the report is referred back to staff and returned to the table with the appropriate community board recommendation”.

· Discussion at the meeting highlighted concern that the report did not clearly outline the position of the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board.

· This report aims to provide clarity on both the recommendation made by the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board and the original recommendation made by staff.

· The Community Board is recognised as having an important role to represent the interests of their community. The recommendation of the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board is:

“That Council offers a new lease to RAD at nominal (peppercorn) rent, still allowing RAD to sub-let part of the premises to other groups and organisations AND that Council approves that $62,000 of available renewal funding is put towards the internal fit-out proposed by RAD”

· The position of staff remains unchanged with the original staff recommendation remaining the preferred option, subject to the final decision of Council.

Recommendation

That Council offers a new lease to RAD at nominal (peppercorn) rent, still allowing RAD to sub-let part of the premises to other groups and organisations AND recommend that Council approves that $62,000 of available renewal funding is put towards the internal fit-out proposed by RAD.

1) Background

On 13 February 2019 the Kaikohe Hokianga Community Board was asked to make a recommendation to Council on the use of part of 11 Parnell Street in Rawene currently leased to Rawene & Districts Community Development Inc (RAD) as well as the appropriateness to spend renewal money towards internal lessee fit-out.

In its report to the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board meeting on 13 February staff recommended (Option 1) that Council:

a) Invite expressions of interest from local groups and organisations with a full proposal for the use of the premises located at 11 Parnell Street, Rawene in accordance with section 61(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977; and

b) Based on the expressions of interest received the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board will make a recommendation to Council in regards to the preferred future use, contribution to fit-out and new tenant for the premises.

The Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board made an amendment to the recommendation, as follows:

“That Council offers a new lease to RAD at nominal (peppercorn) rent, still allowing RAD to sub-let part of the premises to other groups and organisations AND that Council approves that $62,000 of available renewal funding is put towards the internal fit-out proposed by RAD”.

The report was subsequently tabled for discussion at Council on 17 April 2019 and it was immediately moved that the report be referred back to staff and tabled at the next Council meeting, with the appropriate community board recommendation.

This report aims to provide clarity on both the recommendation made by the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board and the original recommendation made by staff.

2) Discussion and Options

a) Community Board Recommendation

On 13 February 2019 The Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board made the following recommendation to Council:

Reasons for the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board recommendation included that:

· Council should support community groups and that

· The lease of each Council owned building should be considered on a case by case basis.

b) Original Staff Recommendation

In its report to the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board meeting on 13 February staff recommended (Option 1) that Council:

a) Invite expression of interest from local groups and organisations with a full proposal for the use of the premises located at 11 Parnell Street, Rawene in accordance with section 61(2A) of the Reserves Act 1977; and

Reasons for the staff recommendation included that:

· By advertising for expressions of interest the decision on future use and tenancy, the expectation on rental income and the contribution by Council toward lessee fit-out (if any) would follow a transparent process ensuring every community group and organisation is given equal opportunity to present its case.

c) Additional Options previously presented

Further options presented in the original report were:

Option 2:

That Council offers a new lease to RAD on standard commercial terms and at market rent, still allowing RAD to sub-let part of the premises to other groups and organisations AND recommend that Council approves that [$__,____] of available renewal funding is put towards the internal fit-out proposed by RAD.

Option 3:

That Council offers a new lease to RAD at nominal (peppercorn) rent, still allowing RAD to sub-let part of the premises to other groups and organisations AND recommend that Council approves that [$__,____] of available renewal funding is put towards the internal fit-out proposed by RAD. This option became the substantive recommendation of the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board.

d) Additional Considerations

· As a result of the earlier LTPs, Council now charges market rent on its properties (other than sportsgrounds, halls, etc. or where existing leases predate the 2012 LTP). Changing this to a nominal rent for one tenant could set a precedent and other non-profits currently leasing from Council could request the same.

· Local Government Act 2002 section 101(1) states that a local authority must manage its revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities, investments, and general financial dealings prudently and in a manner that promotes the current and future interests of the community.

· Under the 2018 Community Grant Policy, community organisations (regardless whether they lease from Council or the private sector) have the ability to apply for grants towards rent as well as place making and infrastructure projects.

Reason for the staff recommendation

The Community Board recommendation has become the substantive recommendation for this report.

However, advertising for expressions of interest would ensure a transparent process and ensures every community group and organisation is given equal opportunity to present its case.

A nominal rent for one community group could set a precedent for existing and future leases on Council owned buildings district wide that are currently rented on commercial terms.

Tenant fit-out is generally not something a landlord would pay for unless this was incorporated in the rent or amortized over the term of the lease.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

Immediate implication as per previous report.

In addition, Council owned buildings (excluding strategic assets, campgrounds, etc.) currently generate approximately $83,000 rental income per annum from both commercial and non-commercial tenants.

Attachments

1. Copy of Report to Council 17 April 2019 Item 11.1 Lease Council Building, 11 Parnell Street, Rawene - A2521771 ⇩

Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	Low
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	Reserves Act 1977 section 61 FNDC Community Grant Policy 2018 LTP 2018-28: Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable. Local Government Act 2002 section 101(1), “A local authority must manage its revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities, investments, and general financial dealings prudently and in a manner that promotes the current and future interests of the community.”
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	This decision could affect leases on Council owned buildings district wide.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	No specific implications to Maori.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	All community groups and non-profit organisations in the district have an interest in this matter. None of them will want to pay rent or fit out a building.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	Advertising for expressions of interest $1,500+GST Market rental assessment 11 Parnell Street $6,405+GST per annum Renewal funding available $62,420 Potential rental income at stake $83,000+GST per annum.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

27 June 2019

8 Governance and Strategic Relationships Committee

8.1 District Plan Update - Appendix 7 Statutory Acknowledgements

File Number: A2512970

Author: Theresa Burkhardt, Policy Planner

Authoriser: Darrell Sargent, General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy

Purpose of the Report

Administration seeks support from the Governance and Strategic Relationships Committee for the district plan update of Appendix 7 – Statutory Acknowledgements to take into account the inclusion of Appendix 7F – Ngātikahu ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Act 2017.

Executive Summary

The Ngātikahu ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Act 2017 includes statutory acknowledgement areas which form cultural redress as part of the claim settlement. These statutory acknowledgement areas must be recorded in the district plan. To date the district plan includes 5 statutory acknowledgements and it is now proposed to include Appendix 7F – Ngātikahu Claims Settlement Act 2017.

The Governance and Strategic Relationships Committee considered this report at their meeting on 30 May 2019 and makes the following recommendation to Council.

Recommendation

That Council undertake as soon as possible, a separate exercise to update appendix 7 of the district plan and notify the relevant Iwi authority, plan holders and the general public of the additions and amendments to the plan to incorporate the statutory acknowledgements.

1) Background

The Operative District Plan 2009 presently includes in its appendices, Appendix 7 – Statutory Acknowledgements. In treaty settlements between Iwi and Crown, statutory acknowledgements are a formal recognition, by the Crown, of the particular cultural, spiritual, historic and traditional associations that an Iwi has with a statutory area. Council is legally obliged to have regard to statutory acknowledgements and record them in the district plan. The inclusion of statutory areas is for the purpose of public information only and is not subject to the provisions of Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991. The statutory areas have particular relevance in regard to the resource consenting process.

To date the district plan has included five statutory acknowledgements in Appendix 7:

· Appendix 7A - Te Roroa Claims Settlement Act 2008

· Appendix 7B - Ngāti Kurī Claims Settlement Act 2015

· Appendix 7C - Te Aupouri Claims Settlement Act 2015

· Appendix 7D - NgaīTakoto Claims Settlement Act 2015

· Appendix 7E - Te Rarawa Claims Settlement Act 2015

See attachment for proposed Appendix 7F – Ngātikahu ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Act 2017.

2) Discussion and Options

The district plan update of Appendix 7 – Statutory Acknowledgements is a requirement of the Ngātikahu ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Act 2017 legislation and the options are outlined below:

Option 1 Undertake as soon as possible, a separate exercise to update appendix 7 of the district plan and notify the relevant Iwi authority, plan holders and the general public of the additions and amendments to the plan to incorporate the statutory acknowledgements.

This would be the most time efficient option. The changes will be available online for download and if printed versions are requested Council can seek cost recovery.

Option 2 Integrate the notification of the update to appendix 7 with future plan changes.

Some cost saving may be achieved but as there is uncertainty in regard to the exact timing of future plan changes, there may be further time delays.

Option 3 Do nothing.

Council would not be carrying out its statutory obligations as outlined in the claims settlement legislation, therefore this option is not considered acceptable.

It is recommended that the Governance and Strategic Relationships Committee endorse and support the recommendations in this report as outlined in Option 1.

Reason for the recommendation

The reasons for the recommendation contained in this report, are that the Far North District Plan is required to be updated to include the addition in appendix 7 of new appendix 7F – Ngātikahu ki Whangaroa Claims Settlement Act 2017.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

The cost of the update of the district plan Appendix 7 – Statutory Acknowledgements, can be provided for within existing budgetary allocation.

Attachments

1. Appendix 7F - Ngatikahu ki Whangaroa ClaimsSettlement Act 2017 - A2512859 ⇩

Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	This district plan update is considered to have a medium degree of significance in that it is anticipated that the costs of it can be met within existing budgets.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	There are a range of Council policies and plans which impact on Māori in the community and the inclusion of statutory area information in the district plan will better inform these.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	The views of the Community Boards have not been sought as the district plan update is a legislative requirement and for information purposes only.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	It is anticipated that the inclusion in the district plan of the statutory areas identified as being of particular cultural, spiritual, historic and traditional association by Ngātikahu ki Whangaroa, will have positive implications for the relationship of Māori with their ancestral land, water, wāhi tapu, valued flora and fauna, and other taonga.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	As the inclusion of statutory acknowledgments in the district plan are for information purposes it is considered that consultation is not required to be carried out.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	There is sufficient operational budget within the Strategic Planning and Policy Group to cover the cost of the update.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has approved this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

27 June 2019

9 Strategic Planning and Policy Group

9.1 Approval of Work Programme for Revoked Bylaws

File Number: A2498471

Author: Roger Ackers, Manager - Strategy Development

Authoriser: Darrell Sargent, General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy

Purpose of the Report

To adopt statements of proposal for public consultation on the Control of Land Drainage Bylaw and the Control of Earthworks Bylaw.

To approve the work programme to make new bylaws to replace those automatically revoked.

Executive Summary

Seven Council bylaws have been automatically revoked and two more bylaws will automatically revoke by February 2020. The lists of affected bylaws are;

i. Control of Amusement Devices and Entertainment Premises

ii. Land Drainage

iii. Trade Waste

iv. Control of the Use of Public Places

v. Control of Vehicle Crossings

vi. Mobile Shops and Hawkers

vii. Reserves

viii. Keeping of Animals, Poultry and Bees

ix. Control of Earthworks

Administration has reviewed these nine bylaws and determined that the majority should be replaced.

This report provides Council with four options to address the issue of the automatic revocation of the following bylaws. Administration recommends going out for consultation on two bylaws, deferring one bylaw to be part of the Revenue Review Project and workshopping the rationalisation of five bylaws down to new bylaws that apply best practice in bylaw making.

Administration has identified one bylaw, Control of Amusement Devices and Entertainment Premises, as not needing to be replaced due to legislation changes.

Recommendation

That Council approve the following approach to address the revocation of bylaws and those due to be revoked in February 2020

a) Adopt the statement of proposal for a Land Drainage Bylaw 2019

b) Adopt the statement of proposal for a Control of Earthworks Bylaw 2019

c) Workshop local regulation and controls contained in the following revoked and soon to be revoked Bylaws to provide clear direction on the development of new bylaws:

i) Control of the Use of Public Places

ii) Control of Vehicle Crossings

iii) Mobile Shops and Hawkers

iv) Reserves

v) Keeping of Animals, Poultry and Bees

d) Defer the making of a new Trade Waste Bylaw until a clear policy direction has been considered as a result of the Revenue Review Project.

1) Background

A request for information on the current state of Council bylaws was lodged under the Local Government and Official Information and Meetings Act in December 2019. Council replied to the request in January 2019. The customer who made the official information request passed on the Council’s reply to the Ombudsman asking that the reply be investigated. The Ombudsman then made a request to the Chief Executive of the Far North District Council to undertake further investigation into the currency of all bylaws.

An investigation was initiated in March 2019. This investigation confirmed that the following 7 bylaws as being automatically revoked on the dates provided in the table below:

Number	Bylaw	Date at which the bylaw automatically revoked
1	Control of Amusement Devices and Entertainment Premises	16 October 2016
2	Land Drainage	16 October 2016
3	Trade Waste	16 October 2016
4	Control of the Use of Public Places	25 March 2017
5	Control of Vehicle Crossings	26 May 2017
6	Mobile Shops and Hawkers	29 July 2017
7	Reserves	9 December 2017

The investigation also identified that the following bylaws are due to be automatically revoked on the dates provided in the table below:

Number	Bylaw	Date at which the bylaw will be automatically revoked
8	Keeping of Animals, Poultry and Bees	13 September 2019
9	Control of Earthworks	28 February 2019

FNDC commissioned a consultant to undertake an in-depth review of the nine bylaws listed above. The attached report Review of Revoked Bylaws is the result of the investigation.

2) Discussion and Options

Option one: do nothing

Under Option one no replacement bylaws would be made to control or regulate the perceived local problems enforced by the revoked bylaws.

The options analysis contained in sections 5 to 13 of the attached report Review of Revoked Bylaws has identified the need for at least one of the following controls or regulations to be considered for inclusion in new bylaws that will replace the revoked bylaws;

• General provisions required for nuisance and/or health and safety concerns

• Specific standards to allow for the control of activities identified in the revoked Bylaws

• Permitting and licencing to control activities identified in the revoked Bylaws.

If this option is adopted then Council loses the opportunity to consider local controls and regulations that are appropriate to the Far North District. This option is not recommended.

Options two: Council goes out for consultation on all revoked bylaws at the same time:

Option two would see all of the revoked bylaws out for consultation at the same time. The nine bylaws would be put out without any modification of the content or wording other than updating the bylaws to reflect current legislation and moving the content into the current standard bylaw template.

Section 3.4 Current Best Practice (Page 8) of the attached report titled Review of Revoked Bylaws has identified a general move to minimise the extent of regulation and a trend towards making bylaws easier to navigate and understand. The report also notes that subject matter areas are being combined into one bylaw, rather than split over two or more bylaws, with a trend towards a reduction in the number of bylaws in force at Councils across New Zealand. There has also been a focus across the Country on ensuring that simplified and plain English writing is contained within bylaws. Section 3.4 also identifies Auckland Council’s Animal Management Bylaw as an example of a Council using minimum standards supported by binding controls and non-binding guidelines as way of simplifying a bylaw in content and administration while also allowing for modifications of a bylaw outside of the prescribed consultation requirements in the Local Government Act.

Feedback from Council Staff that were interviewed as part of developing the attached report indicated that the list of currently revoked bylaws contain unnecessary controls, are difficult to understand and in some cases contradict each other.

If this option is adopted then the opportunity to take a best practice approach to the making of new bylaws is lost. This option is not recommended.

Option three (recommended option):

Option three proposes an approach based on the proposed work programme contained in section 4 (page 10) of the attached report titled Review of Revoked Bylaws. Administration considers that the creation of new bylaws meets the threshold for the level of public interest criteria as per Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Therefore the plan detailed below follows the special consultative procedure as per section 156 (1) (a) of the Local Government Act.

Priority One revoked Bylaws: Immediate action

Section 4.2 – Proposed work programme in the attached report titled Review of Revoked Bylaws has identified the Land Drainage and Earthworks Bylaw as priority one due to them not requiring substantive changes from what is already in place within the body of the revoked bylaws. Furthermore the Land Drainage and Earthworks bylaws do not regulate any medium or high risk issues as identified in the attached report Review of Revoked Bylaws. The following high level dates provide a timeframe for making new bylaws to replace the revoked Land Drainage and Earthworks bylaws;

1. Adopt the attached statements of proposal and draft Bylaws for consultation based on the following plan:

2. July – August 2019: Consultation and deliberations

3. 3 October 2019: Adoption of two new Bylaws for Earthworks and Land Drainage. October 3 is the next available Council meeting date post consultation and deliberations.

Priority Two revoked Bylaws: Short term action

1. July – August 2019: A facilitated workshop based on a best practice approach to the making of bylaws that considers rationalising the local controls and regulations contained in the following revoked and soon to be revoked bylaws;

o Control of the Use of Public Places Bylaw

o Control of Vehicle Crossings Bylaw

o Mobile Shops and Hawkers Bylaw

o Reserves Bylaw

o Keeping of Animals, Poultry and Bees

2. January – February 2020: Consultation on the proposed new bylaws to replace the above listed bylaws

3. April 2020: Adopt new bylaws that replace the above listed bylaws.

Priority 3 revoked Bylaw: Longer term action

1. Review the Trade Waste Bylaw in sync with the Revenue Review Project. This will ensure that the equitable and fair charging of discharge of trade waste in the Council wastewater network will be considered at the same time as a new Trade Waste Bylaw is made.

Priority 4: No action

1. As per the analysis and options assessment in section 5 Council does not need to make a new Control of Amusement Devices and Entertainment Premises Bylaw as existing legislation is considered by Administration as sufficient to ensure effective controls and regulations are in place to address the issues that warranted the original bylaw. As the bylaw automatically revoked on 16 October 2016 there is no requirement for a resolution of Council to revoke the Bylaw again.

Option four: Address revoked Bylaws once the new Council is formed

Option four proposes starting the work programme as identified in Option three above once the new Council has been formed post the elections in October 2019. Option four would see statements of proposals for the new bylaws being considered at the first Council meeting in the new triennium. As the calendar of formal meetings has not been confirmed then it is assumed that the first Council meeting would be in mid-December 2019.

Under this option consultation on the new Earthworks and Land Drainage bylaws and a facilitated workshop to rationalise the controls and regulations of five of the revoked bylaws would occur in February and March 2020 at the earliest. Under option three these steps in proposed work programme are planned to start in July and August 2019.

The analysis completed as a result of the investigation into the currency of the bylaws has identified when all Council bylaws are due for review. This investigation has informed a work programme for the making and reviewing of all Council bylaws in the coming years. This work programme has identified the following bylaws, all of which exceed the thresholds in Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy, as being due for review before 1 July 2020:

1. Water Supply: controls and regulations of the supply of water including fittings, materials and installation, protection of supply and prevention of contamination

2. Vehicles on beaches: control of vehicle access on beaches

3. Control of On-Site Wastewater Disposal Systems

4. Parking and Traffic Control: controls and regulates the use of public parking areas and sets out parking restrictions for these areas.

If the above listed bylaws are not reviewed within the prescribed timeframes then they will also automatically revoke two years after the review dates for each of the bylaws unless new bylaws are made within the two year timeframe that allows for the making of new bylaws post the review date.

Administration and the Elected Council does not have the capacity to plan for and consider the bylaws that are due for review before 1 July 2020 as well as consider the new bylaws that address the issues and problems covered in the revoked bylaws at the same time. If this option is approved then the review dates for the bylaws above will be missed and Council runs the risk of continuing with a pattern of bylaws automatically revoking in the coming years. Therefore this option is not recommended.

Reason for the recommendation

Option three is recommended for the following reasons;

1. It addresses the issue of the automatic revocation of bylaws in a timely and considered manner

2. It allows Council time to consider and rationalise the revoked bylaws using current best practice

3. It allows for a more planned and even work programme for reviewing and making of bylaws over the next 12 to 18 months.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

The financial implications of the recommended option can be accommodated in the current budgets.

Attachments

1. Review of Revoked Bylaws Report - A2511778 ⇩

2. Statement of Proposal - Proposed Land Drainage Bylaw - A2511782 ⇩

3. Draft Land Drainage Bylaw 2019 - A2511783 ⇩

4. Statement of Proposal - Proposed Control of Earthworks Bylaw 2019 - A2511780 ⇩

5. Draft Control of Earthworks Bylaw 2019 - A2511779 ⇩

Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 Section 77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	The recommendation in itself contained in this report does not meet the thresholds as set in the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The recommendation contained in this report is aimed at complying with the requirements of Part 8 – Regulatory, enforcement, coercive powers of local authorities of the Local Government Act.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	Decision making on the reviewing and making of Bylaws is not delegated to the Community Boards. Community Board views are received via the consultative process that is followed for each bylaw.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	The recommendation contained in this report has no direct impact on Māori. However execution of the recommended option to address the revoked bylaws will require engagement with iwi, hapū on each individual bylaw.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	The recommendation in this report has no direct impact on any particular interested party or individual. However the execution of the recommended option to address the revoked Bylaws will require engagement with interested persons and parties.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	The financial implications of this proposal have been made under section 3 of this report. There is no requirement for additional capital of operational budget to be requested beyond what is already budgeted for in the 2019-20 Annual Plan.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report

9.2 Speed Limits Bylaw

File Number: A2506824

Author: Roger Ackers, Manager - Strategy Development

Authoriser: Darrell Sargent, General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy

Purpose of the Report

To seek approval to amend the Speed Limits Bylaw 2005 as follows:

· renaming it the Far North District Speed Bylaw 2019 and

· updating the content of the Bylaw so that it is consistent with the equivalent Bylaws in the Kaipara and Whangarei District Council’s and

· to reflect recent changes in legislation

Executive Summary

Council approved a consultative procedure for proposed amendments to the Speed Limit Bylaw 2008 (Introductory Sections) at its meeting on 18 April 2019. This Report and the attached Speed Limit Bylaw Consultation – Submissions and Recommendations Report capture the consultation undertaken, including a summary of the submissions received and recommendations arising from an analysis of the submissions.

The recommended amendments to the Far North District Council Speed Limit Bylaw captured in this document ensures the Bylaw is consistent with other Speed Limit Bylaws in Northland, with new legislation and best practice for speed limit Bylaws.

Recommendation

That Council:

a) Make amendments to the Speed Limits Bylaw 2008 as set out in Appendix 3 of Attachment 1 – ‘Speed Limit Bylaw Consultation – Submissions and Recommendations Report’, pursuant to Section 22AB(1)(d) of the Land Transport Act 1998, with effect from 28 July 2019 and rename the Bylaw ‘Speed Limits Bylaw 2019’

b) Authorises the Chief Executive Officer to make any minor edits or amendments to the Bylaw to correct any identified errors or typographical edits or to reflect the decisions made by Council

1) Background

Section 22AB(1)(d) of the Land Transport Act 1998 provides for a Road Controlling Authority (Council) to make a Bylaw that sets speed limits for the safety of the public, or for the better preservation of any road. Council made a Speed Limit Bylaw in 2005.

The national ‘Safer Journey’s Strategy’ sets out an approach to road safety with the objective of reducing serious harm and fatal crashes on roads. Far North District, in its capacity as a Road Controlling Authority, is undertaking a rolling review of speed limits across the District as part of the national Safer Journey’s Strategy. Amending the introductory sections of the Bylaw is the first stage of the review process.

It should be noted that the Speed Limits Bylaw is made under the Land Transport Act 1998. The five yearly review requirements of Bylaws made under the Local Government Act do not apply to the Speed Limits Bylaw

2) DISCUSSION AND OPTIONS

Consultation process

Administration considered that the proposed changes to the Speed Limit Bylaw did not meet any of the thresholds as per Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Therefore under section 156 of the Local Government Act 2002 consultation was undertaken in accordance with Sections 82 and 82A of the Local Government Act 2002 (principles of consultation).

The following was made publicly available on the Council’s website and at Council offices, service centres and libraries:

· details of the proposed changes to the Bylaw

· the reasons for the proposal, including background information and how to make a submission

· an analysis of the reasonably practicable options

In addition, a public notice was placed in relevant media and several press releases were made, resulting in two articles being published in local and regional news publications.

The public submission period opened on 29^th April 2019 and closed at 5pm on 27^th May 2019.

Consultation Outcomes

Five submissions were received by the Council. Four submissions sought relief outside of the scope of the matters being consulted on. These submissions are recorded and discussed within the Submissions and Recommendations Report. One submission sought an amendment to the proposed Bylaw. The Table below provides a summary of the submissions received.

5	Total submissions received
4	Out of Scope
1	Seeking amendments to the proposal
0	Opposing the proposed amendments

Submissions seeking changes to speed limits in specific areas have been noted and will be incorporated into the prioritisation process for the ongoing speed review project. Section 9 of the attached Submissions and Recommendations Report discusses these out of scope submissions.

Having read and considered all submissions made, it is recommended that Council adopt the proposed amendments to the Speed Limits Bylaw, as amended and set out in full in Appendix 3 of the attached Submissions and Recommendations Report.

An options assessment was undertaken as part of the Agenda item that Council adopted at its meeting on 18^th April 2019. Council now has the following options:

Option one (recommended option)

Approve the amendments to the Speed Limits Bylaw and make the Bylaw as amended and set out in appendix 3 of the attached Report. This will make the Speed Limits Bylaw consistent with new legislation and other bylaws in Northland. The recommended amendments have also been subject to a consultation process under Section 156(1) of the Local Government Act 2002.

Option two

Council may reject the amendments to the introductory sections of the Speed Limits Bylaw. This option is not recommended. If Council decided to reject the amendments, the existing Speed Limits Bylaw would remain in place and would not be updated for new legislation and regional consistency.

Option three

Council may make changes to the proposed amendments. This option is not recommended. Any changes would be out of the scope of what was notified and the changes that could be reasonably expected from the submissions received. Any changes may require re-notification.

Next steps

It is proposed that the amendments to the Bylaw become operative on 28^th July 2019. This provides sufficient time for the Bylaw to be updated and appropriate public notices to be made.

The first tranche of speed reviews in high priority areas are expected to commence in the second half of this year, with the proposed programme being subject to a separate agenda item.

Reason for the recommendation

Amendments to the introductory sections of the Bylaw are being made to provide clarification that the Bylaw is made under the Land Transport Act 1998, and to ensure that the Bylaw is consistent with the Land Transport Act 1998; the Land Transport Rule: Setting of Speed Limits 2017; and other Speed Limit Bylaws operative in Northland.

The recommendations are consistent with the outcome of a public consultation process undertaken in accordance with Section 156 of the Local Government Act 2002

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no ongoing financial and budgetary implications of this decision.

Attachments

1. Submissions and Recommendations Report - A2515294 ⇩ l

Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 Section 77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	The recommendation in this report does not meet the thresholds contained within the Council’s significance and engagement policy.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	Local Government Act 2002 Land Transport Act 1998
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	The recommendation in itself does not require a decision from each of the Community Boards.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	The recommendation contained in this report has no direct implications for Māori.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	The recommendation contained in this report has no direct impact for any individual person or group.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	There are no ongoing financial and budgetary implications that would result for the recommendation contained in this report.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

27 June 2019

9.3 Climate Change Update

File Number: A2513333

Author: Chris Sargent, Senior Strategic Planner

Authoriser: Darrell Sargent, General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy

Purpose of the Report

To provide Council with an update of current Climate Change work.

Executive Summary

· Administration is currently working on a number of initiatives to address climate change. This report provides an update on these initiatives.

· The report furthermore discusses Administration’s participation in a Northland-wide approach for consistency in climate change adaptation as well the associated approach to submitting on the recently released Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill.

Recommendation

That Council:

a) accepts for information a summary of the work currently being undertaken in respect of climate change;

b) accepts for information a summary of the contents of the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill;

c) accepts for information the approach taken to submitting on the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill;

d) formally provides approval of Administration’s participation in the Tai Tokerau Climate Change Adaption Working Group;

e) directs Administration to create a Council-wide working group to integrate and formulate strategies towards climate change in response to the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill, the Tai Tokerau Climate Change Adaption Working Group’s work program, and the further consideration of outcomes of this work in current Council-wide strategy and policy development.

1) Background

Being a signatory to the Local Government Leaders Climate Change Declaration, Administration’s work program includes a number of projects that focus on responding to the risks that climate change presents. In addition to this programed work there are a number of other initiates through which Administration is proposing to address climate change.

Since mid 2018, Administration have been attending the Tai Tokerau Climate Change Adaption Working Group (‘the Regional Group’), composed of representatives from Northland Councils. The work of this group is currently being formalised through a Terms of Reference, a draft communication plan and a work program.

In early May the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill was released for public submissions, following first reading at Select Committee. Administration has reviewed the Bill together with our partners in the Regional Group, and is now preparing submissions.

Considering the identification of Climate Change as the number one risk to the Far North District Council, the work being undertaken by various parts of the organisation and the work currently being undertaken by the Regional Group and in consideration of the provisions proposed through the Bill, greater oversight is required to ensure that Council is meeting its obligations under legislation.

This paper will outline the main components of the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill, outline the strategic work currently being undertaken by Administration in respect of Climate Change and identify focus areas for Administration in the future.

2) Discussion and Options

2.1 Current Climate Change Considerations by Far North District Council

Far North District Council is considering climate change in a number of policy and strategy documents, which are currently being developed.

Far North 2100 will consider climate change and its effects through high level spatial planning, vision and goal setting. The Integrated Transport Strategy will provide for mitigation and adaptation measures to address the effects of climate change.

The review of the District Plan is incorporating adaptation to climate change through natural hazards assessment. LiDAR mapping, currently being undertaken by the Northland Regional Council will inform the distribution of land use within the District Plan. The District Plan, combined with Far North 2100, the Transportation and Infrastructure Strategies will present an integrated planning approach for the Far North District Council.

2.2 Tai Tokerau Climate Change Adaptation Working Group

Over recent months, Administration has been collaborating with Northland Councils in the Tai Tokerau Climate Change Adaptation Working Group.

In 2017 FNDC became a signatory to the Local Government Leaders Climate Change Declaration in recognition of the need for responsive leadership and a holistic approach to climate change for the benefit of current and future generations. The declaration also called for a collaborative approach by central government and local government to address climate change.

Following the 2018 SOLGM Climate Change Summit, the Tai Tokerau Climate Change Adaptation Working Group (‘TTCAWG’; ‘the Regional Group’) was formed, comprising of staff of the Northland Regional Council, Kaipara District Council, Whangarei District Council, and Far North District Council. This Regional Group has been created under the Northland Forward Chief Executives Forum

The purpose of the Regional Group is to develop a regional collaborative and consistent approach to climate change adaptation planning for local government in Northland. The work of the group will include the development of a draft climate change strategy for the Northland Region and an associated work programme that identifies and addresses priority issues at both a regional and district level. Implementation of such a strategy would remain the responsibility of the individual Councils. FNDC is represented at the group by both Strategic Planning and Policy and Infrastructure and Asset Management staff.

2.3 Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill

The Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill (‘the Bill’) was released for public submissions, with the submission period closing on July 16, 2019. At this point in time it is anticipated that the Bill will pass into law in late 2019, and a Climate Change Commission would be established around the same time.

The purpose of the Bill is to provide a framework for New Zealand to develop and implement clear and stable climate change policies that contribute to the global effort under the Paris Agreement. The goal is to limit the global average temperature increase to 1.5° Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

The Bill proposes four main parts:

1. Setting of targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions;

2. Setting of budgets to achieve emission cuts;

3. Creation of a framework for adaptation to climate change effects;

4. Establishment of the Climate Change Commission.

The Bill follows the guiding principles of the all-of-government approach to climate change policy i.e. other government departments will be made responsible for implementation and accountable for meeting emission budgets. Regular monitoring and reporting will allow for adjustments of budgets under certain conditions to enable a just and inclusive economic transition in New Zealand which supports affected regions, sectors and communities. Consultation with iwi is a requirement to give effect to the Treaty of Waitangi.

2.3.1 Setting of targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions

The Bill will set a long-term emissions reduction target for 2050. The target will require the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to a level consistent with holding global warming to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels as per the Paris Agreement. Reviews of these targets will occur regularly, and an amendment may occur under certain conditions, including:

· global action;

· scientific understanding of climate change;

· New Zealand’s economic or fiscal circumstances;

· New Zealand’s obligations under relevant international agreements;

· technological developments o distributional impacts;

· equity implications (including generational equity).

2.3.2 Setting of budgets to achieve emission cuts

Emissions budgets and implementation plans will be set through the Climate Change Commission and the responsible Minister. This will include the quantity of emissions permitted in a budget period, and realistic means of meeting them. It is unclear how far the public will be consulted with respect to the setting of these targets. Cabinet approval of budgets is required before they are gazetted.

The Bill recognises that:

· emissions budgets have “to be ambitious and also feasible”;

· public consultation will be required;

· emission budget distribution between regions, communities and generations must be considered (equity);

· there may be costs and benefits of early adoption;

· the global response to the Paris Agreement by other country has to be considered.

As part of the emissions budget provision, the Bill also provides for emissions banking and borrowing. In addition, the Bill discusses the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme (‘ETS’) and its use as a tool to reduce emissions. The ETS will be reviewed later in 2019 to ensure that it is appropriate to assist in reducing emission towards the 2050 target.

2.3.3 Creation of a framework for adaptation to climate change effects

The Bill recognises that New Zealand will have to adapt to some effects of climate change through a National Climate Change Risk Assessment. This National Risk Assessment (‘NRA’) will improve the understanding of the climate risks New Zealand is facing. A National Adaptation Plan (‘NAP’) will outline the Government’s approach to improving New Zealand’s resilience to the effects of climate change, specifically risks identified as significant. Monitoring and reporting will form part of this response to ensure accountability. To get accurate local accounts for this purpose, the responsible Minister may require central and local government organisations and ‘lifeline utility providers’ to report on adaptation. It is unclear at this point if the NRA and NAP require that local government approaches to climate change are consistent with that of central government.

2.3.4 Establishment of the Climate Change Commission

The proposed Climate Change Commission (‘the Commission’) will have advisory and monitoring functions, and will keep the Government accountable for its climate policy goals.

The Commission will be governed by a board of seven members with relevant expertise in a range of fields, selected or appointed. The Government can also ask the Commission for advice about other climate-related matters.

Commission will not have decision-making power, decisions on climate change responses will remain with the government.

2. 4 Submissions

Far North District Council initially provided input into the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill in mid 2018 when it was first put out for consultation. Council’s main submission point at the time sought that the Bill takes into account any effects on rate payers across New Zealand.

2.4.1 The Regional Submission

In the current consultation and submission period on the Bill, the Tai Tokerau Climate Change Adaptation Group, of which Far North District Council is a member, is proposing a combined submission on the Adaptation section of the Bill, in accordance with Regional’s Groups overall interests. At this point, each Council has provided comments on the Adaption section to a representative of the group to allow the drafting of a considered submission. When received, Administration will submit on behalf of Council in support of the development of a National Climate Change Risk Assessment, and the development of a National Climate Adaption Plan.

2.4.2 The Far North District Council Submission

Administration is proposing to draft an independent submission, as there are areas of the Bill that are considered to be important to the Far North District Council, that will not be part of the Regional Submission.

Far North District Councils submission will emphasize support for the following points:

1. Far North District Council’s strong interest in corporate and environmental sustainability and our support for the addressing of the effects of climate change on our natural and built environment and our communities.

2. The support of the setting of three-yearly emission budgets and their review as a mechanism to enable fair and equitable transition for the District and our communities.

3. Requirements for consultation with any group or interested party regarding appointments to the Climate Change Commission, including iwi and Maori representative organisations, to ensure that our specific concerns will be adequately and equitably represented in central planning and reporting.

4. An emissions reduction plan to include a strategy to mitigate the impacts that reducing emissions will have on workers, regions, iwi and Maori, and the wider communities. It is important to consider the impact of climate change initiatives on rate payers in the regions and districts. Changing emission limits may have significant economic effects on local communities and forward planning at an early point in time will allow for consultation and feedback of input from the grass roots level. Early public consultation will be crucial.

5. A multi-sector strategy to meet emissions budgets and improve the ability of those sectors to adapt to the effects of climate change.

6. The preparation of a National Adaptation Plan, which takes into account the economic, social, health, environmental, ecological, and cultural effects of climate change including effects on iwi and Maori. As previously, local adaptation measures will have to be identified and actions be captured in strategies and policies which will require public buy-in. Public consultation on the National Adaption Plan will be crucial.

Reason for the recommendation

It is recommended that:

· Council accepts for information, a summary of the work currently being undertaken in respect of climate change. Climate change has been identified as one of the most significant risks that Council will have to address in the coming years. Understanding Administration current work in providing for climate change is important in development of Council direction and decision making.

· Council formally provides approval of Administration’s participation in the Tai Tokerau Climate Change Adaption Working Group. The group’s purpose is to develop a consistent approach to climate change adaptation throughout Northland jurisdictions. Far North District Council’s absence would signal disinterest in a regional approach to climate change with our neighbours and partners, while valuable information collected and produced through this forum would not be available to the Far North District and our communities.

· Council accepts for information, a summary of the contents of the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill. When the Bill passes into law, there may be additional requirements of Council in preparing strategies and policies for climate change mitigation and to address climate change adaptation, on which Council may have to report potentially at regular intervals.

· Council accepts for information, the approach taken to submitting on the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill. A submission will be made by Administration and the content of the submission will be based on the information in this report.

· Council directs Administration to create a Council-wide working group to integrate and formulate strategies towards climate change in response to the Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill, the Tai Tokerau Climate Change Adaption Working Group’s work program, and the further consideration of outcomes of this work in current Council-wide strategy and policy development. Having such oversight will enable an integrated approach to responding to the requirements of central and regional climate change initiatives.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

Costs are covered through the annual staff salary budgets.

With the release of a National Climate Change Risk Assessment and National Climate Adaptation Plan and the potential requirements through reporting, workloads to address climate change tasks may intensify, and in some instances additional consulting advice may be required. Such workloads will be projected and covered through annual plan budgetary considerations.

Attachments

Nil

Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	At first, this report will have a low degree of significance as it simply puts in place a structure for the management of climate change concerns by Administration. As work progresses and if there are central government directions for mitigation and adaptation to climate change, it is considered that climate change matters will generate considerable community interests and views. Climate change may also have an impact on ratepayers through the development of Council strategies and policies. Public engagement and consultation will occur through the programmed engagement activities to occur with these projects.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	Under the Local Government Act 2002, Council is responsible to “meet the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses”. In addition, Council has the responsibility under the Resource Management to recognise and provide for matters of national importance and other matters, including the management of significant risks from natural hazards; and shall have particular regard to, e.g. the effects of climate change. The Climate Change Response (Zero Carbon) Amendment Bill will most likely result in further requirements of Council in mitigating and adapting to the effects of climate change. Administration is already addressing concerns arising from climate through strategies and policies currently being development. Creating a climate change working group will allow Administration to better integrate current initiatives in response to and collaboration with regional and central government initiatives.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	Climate Change consideration will be of district-wide relevance. The views of community boards have not been sought at this point.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	Climate change will have implications on Maori within the district. At this point, no feedback has been sought. However, any implications on Maori will be considered through district-wide strategy and policy development, while the collaboration with Maori advisors will be sought for the climate change working group.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	Climate change will affect all communities within our district.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	At this point, climate change initiatives fall within the general staff remuneration budgets.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

27 June 2019

9.4 Infrastructure Grant Fund 2018/19

File Number: A2458215

Author: Bill Lee, Community Policy and Development Manager

Authoriser: Darrell Sargent, General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy

Purpose of the Report

This report advances the Infrastructure Grant Fund (IGF) Panel’s request to carry over unallocated grant funds of $14,230 from 2018/19 to the Infrastructure Grant Fund 2019/20.

Executive Summary

The IGF Panel for the 2018/19 funding round consisted of 3 Community Board Chairs plus 1 other Member from Bay of Islands – Whangaroa Community Board. Council received 3 funding requests and awarded $85,770 to the two eligible projects. The IGF was $100,000 for the 2018/19 year which left $14,230 unallocated. The IGF Panel as part of their resolutions requested Council to resolve the $14,230 be carried forward to the 2019/20 IGF funding round. This report seeks approval from Council for the IGF Panel’s request.

Recommendation

That Council agrees the Infrastructure Grant Fund Panel’s request to carry forward the unallocated funds of $14,230 from the 2018/19 Infrastructure Grant Fund to be used for the next funding round in 2019/20.

1) Background

The Infrastructure Grant Fund (IGF) of $100,000 was established to help communities build new, community managed infrastructure to support the development of cultural, sporting and recreational initiatives in the district and support the district’s sustainable development. Grant funding from any Council source cannot exceed 50% of the total project cost, which may include a calculation based on volunteer time.

In 2018, Council resolved that a panel including Community Board Chairs and one additional representative from each Board will consider applications and make decisions on awarding the fund on behalf of Council.

The Panel for the 2018/19 funding allocation consisted of the 3 Community Board Chairs and a Community Board Member from the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board.

2) Discussion and Options

Three applications were received for the 2018/19 funding round, all based in the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Ward, with 1 application containing 2 distinct projects. Only 2 applications met the criteria for the fund and consequently the IGF Panel allocated a total of $85,770 to 2 infrastructure projects. This left an unallocated amount of $14,230.

The IGF Panel made a resolution that requested Council to carry forward the unallocated amount of $14,230 to the next funding round to be allocated in 2019/20. This, if Council agrees, would make the total grant pool $114,230 in the 2019/20 year. Grant funds are operational funds and require a resolution of Council to carry forward into the next financial year.

The criteria for an operational carry forward is for the funding to have been allocated to specific projects that will be completed in the next financial year. The panel considers that the IGF funding is towards undetermined community infrastructure projects and the next round remains the same – as yet undetermined community infrastructure, but it is for the same purpose.

Options

An options assessment has identified the following options:

Option 1 (recommended)

That Council to agree a carry forward of the $14,230 unallocated Infrastructure Grant Fund in 2018/19 to the 2019/20 Infrastructure Grant Fund resulting in a funding pool of $114,230.

Option 2

That Council does not agree a carry forward of the $14,230 unallocated Infrastructure Grant Fund in 2018/19 to the 2019/20 Infrastructure Grant Fund resulting in the funding pool remaining at $100,000.

Reason for the recommendation

The Infrastructure Grant Fund Panel made a recommendation to Council for the unallocated funds of $14,230 to be carried forward for the next IGF round in 2019/20.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial implications as the $100,000 Infrastructure Grant Fund is rated for in the year of allocation. Therefore the unallocated $14,230 has already been rated for.

Attachments

Nil

Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	Low
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	Infrastructure Grant Fund allocated by Community Grants Policy 2018 and allocation of funds through LTP 2018-28.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	Council delegated the funding decision to Community Boards but Infrastructure Grant funding remains District Wide.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	None – Maori have the same opportunity to gain Infrastructure Grant Funds.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	Considered on a case by case basis as part of evaluating applications.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	No future financial implications as Infrastructure Grant Funds have been rated for.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

27 June 2019

9.5 Adoption of Fees and Charges for 2019/20

File Number: A2497684

Author: Sheryl Gavin, Manager - Corporate Planning and Engagement

Authoriser: Darrell Sargent, General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy

Purpose of the Report

To adopt a schedule of fees and charges for the 2019/20 financial year.

Executive Summary

Under the Local Government Act 2002 (the LGA), Council is required to review fees and charges annually. The adoption of fees and charges must occur prior to the start of the financial year to which they apply. In most cases, increases are limited to the Local Government Cost Index (LGCI) inflation factor which is forecast at 2.3% for 2019/20. Exceptions are discussed in this report.

Recommendation

That Council adopt the Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2019/20.

1) Background

Council reviews and adjusts its fees and charges on an annual basis. Although many fees and charges may be set by Council resolution under sections 12 and 150 of the LGA, some must follow a formal process that includes public consultation in accordance with section 83 (the Special Consultative Procedure or SCP) of the LGA. No adjustments requiring consultation or an SCP are proposed in the attached Schedule of Fees and Charges.

Fees/charges that have been adjusted are shaded blue in the Schedule for ease of reference.

All adjustments are consistent with Council’s decision as part of the Long Term Plan 2018-2028 to adjust fees annually in line with changing circumstances and specifically in line with inflation.

2) Discussion and Options

In general, fees have been adjusted by inflation (LGCI) which is forecast at 2.3% for the 2019/20 year).

Exceptions are:

· To encourage responsible dog ownership, staff propose no change to dog registration fees (page 1). Impound costs (including those for stock) have been adjusted for inflation.

· Resource Consent (except hourly processing charges) and Building Consent fees (pages 3 and 21 respectively) are set for cost recovery in accordance with the Revenue and Financing Policy. Staff recommend no change for both until actual costs can be analysed as part of the 2019 Revenue Review.

· Some fees and infringements are set by statute (e.g. Food Regulations 2015, Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012) and are therefore not adjustable.

Inflationary adjustments are proposed for the following (refer to the Schedule of Fees and Charges attachment):

· Dog / stock impounding (page 2)

· Vehicle crossing application and inspection fees (page 6)

· Fees for fire prevention, gaming and TAB, animals, poultry and bees, advertising signs, taxi stands, brothel signs and entertainment premises (page 7)

· Alfresco dining licences (page 9)

· Environmental health licences (page 10)

· Mobile shop, street stall and hawkers licences (page 11)

· Noise control – return of confiscated equipment only (page 12)

· Reserves (leases and licenses, change of status) (pages 14 & 15)

· Council legal services (page 16)

· Libraries (book repairs, replacement borrower cards and fax fees only) (page 17)

· Official information (scanning, District Plan copies only) (pages 19 & 20)

· Property information (staff time only) (page 20)

· Land Information Memoranda (LIMs) (page 20)

· Resource consent hourly processing charges (page 24)

· Applications and inspections relating to works on Council infrastructure (stormwater, wastewater and water) (pages 27 to 32)

No changes are proposed for the following:

· Dog registrations (page 1)

· Building consents (pages 3 to 6)

· Cemeteries (page 8)

· Hokianga Ferry charges (page 18)

· LGOIMA requests (page 19)

· Property information (except LIMs and staff time for digital supply) (page 20)

· Resource consents (except hourly processing charges) (pages 21 to 24)

· Rubbish disposal at transfer stations (pages 25 & 26)

· Transportation including road closures and overweight permits (page 28)

· Venues for hire (page 29)

No change for legislated fees:

· Amusement devices (page 7)

· Alcohol licencing (page 9)

· Food control – plans, compliance and monitoring (pages 10 & 11)

· Infringements for litter, noise, parking and skateboards/cycles (pages 12 & 13)

Council could decide not to adjust fees and charges as proposed. However, by doing so Council risks not recovering the actual and reasonable costs associated with these activities, placing the burden on the general ratepayer and creating the potential for steeper increases in future years.

Reason for the recommendation

The reason for the recommendation is to ensure an adopted schedule of fees and charges is in place prior to the start of the 2019/20 financial year.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

Forecast revenue from the Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2019/20 is recognised in the budget adopted as part of the Annual Plan for 2019/20.

Attachments

1. Proposed Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2019-20 - A2501769 ⇩

Compliance schedule:

Full consideration has been given to the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 S77 in relation to decision making, in particular:

1. A Local authority must, in the course of the decision-making process,

a) Seek to identify all reasonably practicable options for the achievement of the objective of a decision; and

b) Assess the options in terms of their advantages and disadvantages; and

2. This section is subject to Section 79 - Compliance with procedures in relation to decisions.

Compliance requirement	Staff assessment
State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy	Significance of the proposed changes to the schedule of fees and charges is assessed as low. Further, the current Financial Strategy (adopted alongside the LTP) clearly states Council’s intention to adjust fees and charges on an annual basis and that adjustments would not exceed the forecast LGCI rate for the corresponding year. The review of fees and charges for 2019/20 complies with this limit. Substantial consultation was carried out on the strategy and LTP prior to adoption in June 2018. In accordance with the policy on Significance and Engagement, further consultation is not necessary.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The proposed schedule of Fees and Charges links to the Annual Plan for the 2019/20 financial year.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	Fees and charges hold district-wide relevance. Community Boards provided input to the LTP in which the Financial Strategy (and the limit on annual fee / charge adjustments) were adopted.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.	Because the proposed changes to fees and charges are considered insignificant, engagement with Maori was not carried out.
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.	Fees and charges were consulted on in 2018 prior to adoption of the LTP. Proposed changes for the 2019/20 are within the limit set in the Financial Strategy. Historically, consultation on fees and charges generates little interest from the public.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	Forecast revenue from the Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2019/20 is included in Annual Plan budgets to be adopted at this meeting.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report

Animals

Dog registration

Registration fee for desexed dogs	1 July 2019 – 31 August 2019		1 September 2019 – 30 June 2020 Full fee and late registration penalty
	*Current*	*Proposed*	*Current*	*Proposed*
Pet dog	$52.00	$52.00	$77.00	$77.00
Menacing / dangerous dog	$82.00	$82.00	$121.00	$121.00
Working / pig dog	$40.00	$40.00	$60.00	$60.00
Disability assist dog (approved organisation certified)	No charge	No charge	No charge	No charge
Multiple dog discount (Register five dogs, get the sixth dog free)	$0.00	$0.00	n/a	n/a
Discount for Gold Card or Community Card holders	10%	10%	n/a	n/a

Full fee, penalty and debt recovery costs are incurred between 1 September 2019 and 30 June 2020

Registration fee for non-desexed dogs	1 July 2019 – 31 August 2019		1 September 2019 – 30 June 2020 Full fee and penalty
	*Current*	*Proposed*	*Current*	*Proposed*
Pet dog	$62.00	$62.00	$87.00	$87.00
Menacing / dangerous dog	$92.00	$92.00	$131.00	$131.00
Working / pig dog	$50.00	$50.00	$70.00	$70.00
Disability assist dog (approved organisation certified)	No charge	No charge	No charge	No charge
Multiple dog discount (Register five dogs, get the sixth dog free)	$0.00	$0.00	n/a	n/a
Discount for Gold Card or Community Card holders	10%	10%	n/a	n/a

Full fee, penalty and debt recovery costs are incurred between 1 September 2019 and 30 June 2020

Other fees	Current	Proposed
Re-homing dog registration fee (applies to dogs re-homed by the SPCA or via Council pounds)	$36.00	$36.00
Dog adoption. Fee includes: microchipping, dog registration until the end of the current year, vet check, vaccinations and desexing (if required)	Actual costs	Actual costs
Microchipping	$30.00	$30.00
Small dog collar	$11.50	$11.50
Large dog collar	$16.50	$16.50
Replacement registration tag (per tag)	$4.30	$4.30
De-sexed dog registration Registration of desexed dogs is free for the first year of the dog’s life (desexing certificate to be supplied) for the current registration year only. All other years shall be at normal fee.

Dog impounding	Current	Proposed
Impounding	$67.00	$68.50
Second impounding	$102.00	$104.00
Third impounding	$140.00	$143.00
After-hours impounding (impound fee $68.50 + after hours fee $51.00)	$117.00	$119.50
Daily handling (up to three days)	$21.50	$22.00
Daily handling (up to seven days)	$41.50	$42.50
Daily handling (eight or more days)	$62.00	$63.00
Veterinary care	Actual costs	Actual costs

Other animals

Stock impounding	Current	Proposed
Bovine (bull, cow, ox) where one to five head of stock are impounded	$93.50	$95.50
Bovine (bull, cow, ox) where six to 10 head of stock are impounded	$185.00	$189.00
Bovine (bull, cow, ox) where 11 plus head of stock are impounded	$278.00	$284.00
Equine (horse) where one to five are impounded	$104.00	$106.00
Equine (horse) where six to 10 are impounded	$196.50	$201.00
Equine (horse) where 11 plus are impounded	$289.00	$295.50
Ovine (sheep)	$30.50	$31.00
Calves, foals, lambs, piglets (feeding off the mother) – no impounding or sustenance charge	No charge	No charge
Sustenance fees for impounded stock	$9.20	$9.50
NAIT (National Animal Identification and Tracing) tagging	Actual costs	Actual costs
Advertising costs (Advertising of impounded stock as required prior to auction / disposal)	Actual costs + $15.30 admin cost	Actual costs + $15.65 admin cost
Transport of stock to pound	Actual costs + $15.30 admin cost	Actual costs + $15.65 admin cost
Officers time (per hour)	$88.50	$90.50

Building consents

Building notes

It is important to note that each building project and site may be different, so please use this information as a guideline only. Total consent costs may not be known until the consent has been processed to approval.

For an indication of fees payable with your building consent application, please use our building fee calculator or contact our Building staff on free phone 0800 920 029 (Northland land lines only) or 09 401 5200.

When are building fees payable?

ž If your building project falls under the criteria for fixed fee applications then you will be paying a fee as stated in the consolidated fees schedule. This fee will be required when lodging your application

ž If your building project falls outside the criteria for fixed fee applications then you will be in the banded fee bracket. These fees will be calculated based on processing time, and will be invoiced at time of issue of your consent

ž When issuing a Code Compliance Certificate a check is done to see if there are any outstanding inspection or processing fees and these will be invoiced at this time

ž In all cases, Council payment terms apply to all issued invoices.

How do I work out the estimated value?

ž This is the total value of the building work including GST. Usually the designer or architect supplies the contract square metre rate and Council checks this against national statistics, the MBIE website, Building Economist and Codeword’s publications.

Why do I get charged for inspections in advance?

ž Council policy is to release building consents as soon as possible. Estimated inspection fees are paid in advance to assist this process to avoid delays for all parties.

What are ‘actual costs’ and what will they include?

ž This includes processing, inspections and administration services

ž It may also include external services engaged to carry out reviews for Council e.g. New Zealand Fire Service and Heritage NZ etc.

ž Disbursements like scanning, copying, facsimile, telephone, travel and postage.

What are external services and why are they applicable to my application?

ž External services are usually for New Zealand Fire Service design review, engineering technical or weather-tightness review for complex design or when unproven methods are proposed or input from Heritage NZ for any archaeological reviews.

When does my consent become commercial and trigger the higher fees?

ž Generally when the building use is associated with public use and the engagement of employees

ž Some descriptions of these building types include:

- Communal residential (hostel / prison)

- Communal non-residential (church / school)

- Commercial (bank / service station)

- Industrial (agricultural building / sewage plant)

These classified uses attract the higher fee due to the additional design complexity and use of specified systems.

What happens if I don’t go ahead with my building consent, do I get a total refund?

ž This function is carried out on a case-by-case basis and no full refund is provided due to administration and cost overheads. In normal cases there will be a refund for unused inspections, and BRANZ / MBIE levies

ž If processing has already begun, partially complete or fully completed fees will be deducted accordingly.

Other fee information

ž Some levies are set by other agencies and are not affected by this proposal

ž All fees are GST inclusive unless otherwise stated

ž Building application fees are based on the project value of the building works , simple structures or minor type applications.

Fixed fee applications

ž This fee applies to building work with a project value of less than $20,000

ž This fee applies to residential projects only

ž This fee applies to specific works as listed in the chart below – the fee includes:

- Building processing

- District plan processing (where applicable)

- Inspections as nominated (additional inspections will be charged at the current fee rate)

- Code compliance certificate application fee.

ž This fee is non-refundable due to the reduced fee offered for these services.

Fixed fee applications	Current	Proposed
Solid fuel heating appliance – freestanding (includes inspection)	$230.00	$230.00
Solid fuel heating appliance – inbuilt (includes inspections)	$357.00	$357.00
Residential connection to Council reticulated sewer (includes inspections)	$357.00	$357.00
Residential ancillary buildings – e.g. carports, gazebo, garden sheds (includes inspections)	$518.00	$518.00
Residential outbuildings – e.g. garages unlined up to 120 m², pool changing rooms etc. (includes inspections)	$518.00	$518.00
Farm buildings any type up to 120 m² (includes inspections)	$518.00	$518.00
Residential swimming / spa pools and associated fencing (includes inspections)	$518.00	$518.00
Garage / sleep-out with plumbing and drainage (includes inspections)	$1,036.00	$1,036.00
Conservatories (includes inspections)	$714.00	$714.00
Other minor building work less than $20,000 – e.g. TP58 effluent systems, minor internal alterations (includes inspections)	$575.00	$575.00

General building fees	Current	Proposed
Amended plans application	Actual costs	Actual costs
BRANZ Levy (applies to project values above $20,000)	$1.00 per $1,000.00	$1.00 per $1,000.00
MBIE Levy (applies to project values above $20,000)	$2.01 per $1,000.00	$2.01 per $1,000.00
Building warrant of fitness annual renewal	$92.00	$92.00
Building warrant of fitness audit report and inspection fee	$346.00	$346.00
Building warrant of fitness (audit only)	$172.00	$172.00
Certificate of acceptance application instalment (actual processing costs are calculated and applied)	$546.00 + actual costs	$546.00 + actual costs
Certificate of public use application	$380.00	$380.00
Certificate of title request	$39.00	$39.00
Change of use application instalment (actual processing costs are calculated and applied)	$104.00 + actual costs	$104.00 + actual costs
Code compliance certificate application	$172.00	$172.00
Older code compliance certificate application (includes review of building consents if over four years old)	Actual costs	Actual costs
Compliance schedule and statement	$310.00	$310.00
Compliance and accreditation levy (maximum levy fee $276.00)	$1.40 per $1,000.00	$1.40 per $1,000.00
Condition assessment report application	$104.00	$104.00
Enforcement action under the Building Act (Notice to fix notice, dangerous or insanitary notice and breach investigation)	Actual costs	Actual costs
Exemption from requiring building consent application	$172.00	$172.00
Extension of time application	$104.00	$104.00
Field advice notice	$172.00	$172.00
Inspections – residential	$172.00	$172.00
Inspections – commercial	$252.00	$252.00
Request for information (charged on any application type)	Actual costs	Actual costs
Scanning charge per application	$11.20	$11.20
Section 72 hazard notification	$346.00	$346.00
Section 75 building on two or more allotments notification	$346.00	$346.00
Specific expertise – inspection and processing required	Actual costs	Actual costs
Swimming pool inspections	$172.00	$172.00
Waiver / modification waiver application to existing building consent	Actual costs	Actual costs
Weekly building consent report (charge per annum)	$407.00	$407.00

Hourly processing fees	Current	Proposed
Building Manager / Compliance Manager	$161.00	$161.00
Team Leader / Senior Building Officer / Senior Building Specialist	$156.00	$156.00
Building Officer / Building Compliance Officer / Building Specialist	$149.00	$149.00
PIM Officer (District Plan check)	$132.00	$132.00
Building Administration / Compliance Administration	$90.00	$90.00

Banded fees
The table below provides an estimate of fees that could be charged for processing a consent depending on project value and complexity. This estimate does not show all applicable fees that may be charged, for this use our Building Fees Calculator, which will again give an estimate of fees and show what other fees will be applicable like BRANZ and MBIE levies etc. Note: these fees will only be charged on completion of processing when actual fees and charges are known. You must pay the invoice before you can uplift your consent and inspections can start on your project.
Building work to be undertaken	Building Officer		District Plan check		Administration
Building work to be undertaken	Current	Proposed	Current	Proposed	Current	Proposed
$0 – $19,999	$294.00 (2 hrs officer time)	$294.00 (2 hrs officer time)	$98.00 (0.75 hr officer time)	$98.00 (0.75 hr officer time)	$145.00 (1.5 hrs officer time)	$145.00 (1.5 hrs officer time)
$20,000 – $150,000	$441.00 (3 hrs officer time)	$441.00 (3 hrs officer time)	$163.00 (1.25 hrs officer time)	$163.00 (1.25 hrs officer time)	$191.00 (2 hrs officer time)	$191.00 (2 hrs officer time)
$150,001 – $350,000	$588.00 (4 hrs officer time)	$588.00 (4 hrs officer time)	$261.00 (2 hrs officer time)	$261.00 (2 hrs officer time)	$236.00 (2.5 hrs officer time)	$236.00 (2.5 hrs officer time)
$350,001 – $700,000	$735.00 (5 hrs officer time)	$735.00 (5 hrs officer time)	$261.00 (2 hrs officer time)	$261.00 (2 hrs officer time)	$281.00 (3 hrs officer time)	$281.00 (3 hrs officer time)
$700,001+	$881.00 (6 hrs officer time)	$881.00 (6 hrs officer time)	$261.00 (2 hrs officer time)	$261.00 (2 hrs officer time)	$281.00 (3 hrs officer time)	$281.00 (3 hrs officer time)

Vehicle crossings	Current	Proposed
Vehicle crossing application and vehicle crossing inspection fee	$217.00	$222.00
A bond deposit (minimum $1,000.00) may be set to ensure construction of vehicle crossing
Vehicle crossing inspection fee	$160.00	$163.50
Re-application fee for expired approvals	$67.00	$68.50
Application for RAPID number	$26.00	$26.50
Replacement RAPID signs	$10.20	$10.50

Bylaw enforcement

Amusement devices and entertainment premises	Set by legislation
These fees are set under Section 11 of the Amusement Devices Regulations 1978 and are applicable to devices such as merry-go-rounds, ferris wheels and roller coasters, bumper cars and boats, indoor go-karts, mini-bikes, parasailes, jet skis, bungy jumping. Bouncy castles, inflatable slides and non-powered playground equipment are not amusement devices and do not require a permit.
Amusement devices only; one device, for the first seven days of operation or part thereof	$10.00
Amusement devices only; for each additional device operated by the same owner, for the first seven days or part thereof	$2.00
Amusement devices only; for each device, for each further period of seven days or part thereof	$1.00

Fire prevention	Current	Proposed
Section clearance (includes administration charge, site inspection if required and contractors actual costs)	$102.00 + actual costs	$104.00 + actual costs

Gambling Act 2003	Current	Proposed
Gambling and TAB venue licence fees (Gambling Act 2003)	$407.00	$416.00

General bylaw licence application	Current	Proposed
General bylaw licence incorporates fees for:- Application for keeping animals, poultry and bees Application for advertising signs Application for taxi stands Application for brothel signs Application for entertainment premises (e.g. billiard room)	$104.00 per application	$106.00 per application
New or replacement sign (requires Community Board consideration)	$155.00	$159.00
Reclaiming of seized advertising signs	$76.00 per sign	$78.00 per sign

Cemeteries

Burial plots	Current	Proposed
Burial plot	$738.00	$738.00
Interment single depth	$774.00	$774.00
Interment double depth	$877.00	$877.00
Interment child (under 10)	$207.00	$207.00
Ground maintenance	$145.00	$145.00
Disinterment fee	$2,065.00	$2,065.00
Interment - oversize single depth	$852.00	$852.00
Interment – oversize double depth	$929.00	$929.00
Statutory holiday surcharge	$444.00	$444.00

Ash burial	Current	Proposed
Ash berm (Russell)	$336.00	$336.00
Ash berm (All others)	$103.00	$103.00
Grave digging for ash burial	$186.00	$186.00
Search fee	$25.50 per hour	$25.50 per hour

Flowering baskets	Current	Proposed
Standard rate per unit	$31.50	$31.50

Certificates and licences

Alcohol licensing				Set by legislation
The following fees are set under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012
Application fee - Managers Certificates				$316.25
Renewal fee - Managers Certificates				$316.25
Temporary Authority				$296.70
Certificate of Compliance Liquor application - please see Page 24 - Resource consents for this fee
Premises - On, off and club licences
Fee category and cost / risk rating score			Application fee	Annual fee
			Set by legislation	Set by legislation
Very low		0-2	$368.00	$161.00
Low		3-5	$609.50	$391.00
Medium		6-15	$816.50	$632.50
High		16-25	$1,023.50	$1,035.00
Very high		26 plus	$1,207.50	$1,437.50
Special licences - risk based fees (see definition below)*				Set by legislation
Class 1				$575.00
Class 2				$207.00
Class 3				$63.25
*Special licence definition
Class 1	a large event (400+) people, or more than three medium events (100 - 400 people), or more than 12 small events (fewer than 100 people)
Class 2	One to three medium events (100 - 400 people), or Three to 12 small events (fewer than 100 people)
Class 3	One or two small events (fewer than 100 people)

Alfresco dining licence	Current	Proposed
All licences renewable on 1 July each year
Application and renewal fee	$103.00	$105.50
Site inspection	$72.00	$73.50
One table	$52.00	$53.00
Two tables	$103.00	$105.00
Three tables	$155.00	$158.50
Four tables	$206.00	$210.50
Five tables	$258.00	$264.00
New application received during licensing year	Pro rata, according to number of tables (however the application fee and site inspection will be charged at full fee)	Pro rata, according to number of tables (however the application fee and site inspection will be charged at full fee)
Re-inspection fee	$52.00	$53.00
New application – not compliant and needing Community Board approval	$155.00	$158.50
Change of new ownership – new licencee	$57.00	$58.00
Example: All new compliant applications will incorporate an application fee ($105.50), a site inspection fee ($73.50) and a charge per table ($53). Therefore a new application for one table will be a total fee of $232.00

Collection and transportation of waste and diverted materials	Current	Proposed
Waste collector’s licence	$509.00 per annum	$509.00 per annum

Environmental health licences	Current	Proposed
(Per annum) Health (Registration of Premises) Regulations 1966 annual renewal 1 July. Pro rata fees for new application throughout the registration year
Class 1 (pre-packed food) and club licence	$320.00	$327.00
Class 2 (preparation and sale of food on premises)	$531.00	$543.00
Class 3 (manufacturers)	$738.00	$755.00
Health (hairdressers, mortuaries, camping grounds and septic tank cleaners)	$320.00	$327.00
Club 1 (club licence for pre-packed food)	$320.00	$327.00
Camping ground (with food preparation and / or shop)	$531.00	$543.00
Charitable organisations (churches etc)	$206.00	$210.50
Re-inspection	$185.00	$189.00
Change of ownership (new certificate)	$57.00	$58.00
Replacement of lost certificate	$26.00	$26.50

Food Act	Set by legislation
The following fees are set under the Food (Fees and Charges) Regulations 2015
Food Control Plan
Initial registration based on an acceptable model or template
Initial registration (includes one hour processing time)	$180.00
Additional processing time – per hour	$180.00
Registration renewal
Registration renewal (includes one hour processing time)	$180.00
Additional processing time – per hour	$180.00
Registration amendment
Registration amendment (includes one hour processing time)	$180.00
Additional processing time – per hour	$180.00
Verification
Fixed fee (includes up to 3.5 hours of verification activity)	$515.00
Additional processing time – per hour	$180.00
Compliance and monitoring
Complaint driven investigation resulting in the issue of an improvement notice by a Food Safety Officer – per hour	$180.00
Application for review of issue of improvement notice – per hour	$180.00
Monitoring of food safety and suitability	Charge per hour

Mobile shop, street stall and hawkers licences
*Definitions:* Mobile shop means a vehicle (including a trailer) from which goods are offered for sale in any public place but does not include any vehicle used exclusively for the delivery of pre-ordered goods, nor any stall. Hawker means any person who carries any goods for sale from property to property but does not include any person delivering pre-ordered goods, or any person exposing goods for sale in any public place, nor any mobile shopkeeper.
Regular annual licences		Current	Proposed
Mobile shop	*Non-food*
	Annual	$520.00	$532.00
	Seasonal – one month	$46.00 per month	$47.00 per month
	*Food related*
	Annual This fee is for the licence to trade in a permitted public place. A food licence will also be required	$774.00	$792.00
	Seasonal – one month	$66.00 per month	$67.50 per month
Coffee vendor only	Annual	$258.00	$264.00
Coffee vendor only	Seasonal – one month	$26.00 per month	$27.00 per month
Hawkers	Annual	$335.00	$342.50
Hawkers	Seasonal – one month	Pro rata $31.00 per month	Pro rata $32.00 per month
Site permit	*Non-food*
	Annual	$1,047.00	$1,070.00
	Seasonal – one month	$87.00 per month	$89.00 per month
	*Food related*
	Annual This fee is for the licence to trade in a permitted public place. A food licence will also be required	$1,342.00	$1,371.50
	Seasonal – one month	$112.00 per month	$114.50 per month
Market food premises and mobile shop		$206.00	$210.50
Street stalls (Fundraising events, charitable trusts, or street appeal collectors) Maximum 20 per year		No charge	No charge
Tour operators licence		$206.00	$210.50

Infringements

The following infringements are set by Government legislation or under Council Bylaws. For more information please visit: www.legislation.govt.nz. Some Council Bylaws also set infringements. These can only be changed when the Bylaw is reviewed. To find out more on Bylaw infringements visit our website: www.fndc.govt.nz key word: Council Bylaws

Activity	Legislation
Alcohol – sale and supply	Sale and Supply of Alcohol 2012, Section 260
Dogs	Dog Control Act 1996, Schedule 1
Building	Building Act 2004, Section 101
Food	Food Act 2014, Section 391
Littering	Litter Act 1997, Section 15 (1) a-b, Section 16 and FNDC Litter Infringement Policy
Noise	RMA 1991 and Resource Management Infringement Offences Regulations 1999
Seizing of any equipment (noise, skateboards etc)	Local Government Act 2002, Section 259
Parking	Land Transport (Offences and Penalties) Regulations 1999, Schedule 1B
Resource consents	Resource Management Act 1991, Section 338 and Resource Management Infringement Offences Regulations 1999

Litter infringements* (effective from 16 February 2017)	First offence	First offence	Subsequent offence	Subsequent offence
	Current	Proposed	Current	Proposed
Litter, of less than one litre, left in a public space or on private land without the occupier's consent.	$100.00	$100.00	$400.00	$400.00
Litter, of one litre to 20 litres, left in a public space or on private land without the occupier's consent.	$150.00	$150.00	$400.00	$400.00
Litter, of 20 litres to 120 litres, left in a public space or on private land without the occupier's consent.	$250.00	$250.00	$400.00	$400.00
Litter, of more than 120 litres, left in a public space or on private land without the occupier's consent.	$400.00	$400.00	$400.00	$400.00
Hazardous or offensive litter* left in a public space or on private land without the occupier's consent.	$400.00	$400.00	$400.00	$400.00

* Infringements do not attract GST

** Hazardous litter includes broken glass, barbed wire, jagged metal, medicines

*** Offensive waste includes rotting food, animal remains, faeces (including discarded nappies)

Noise control	Current	Proposed
Infringement notice to be issued under Resource Management Act (RMA 1991)*	$750.00	$750.00
Return of confiscated equipment (seizure of any property)	$145.00	$148.00

* Infringements do not attract GST

Parking infringements		Set by legislation
P101	Parked within an intersection	$60.00
P102	Parked within six meters of an intersection	$60.00
P103	Parking near corner, bend or rise	$40.00
P104