Agenda of Infrastructure Committee Meeting - Wednesday, 10 February 2021

	Authorising Body	Mayor/Council
	Status	Standing Committee
COUNCIL COMMITTEE	Title	Infrastructure Committee Terms of Reference
	Approval Date	7 May 2020
	Responsible Officer	Chief Executive

Purpose

The purpose of the Infrastructure Committee (the Committee) is to ensure cost effective, quality and sustainable infrastructure decisions are made to meet the current and future needs of Far North communities and that Councils infrastructure assets are effectively maintained and operated.

The Committee will review the effectiveness of the following aspects:

· Affordable core infrastructure to support healthy and sustainable living;

· Operational performance including monitoring and reporting on significant infrastructure projects

· Delivery of quality infrastructure and district facilities

· Financial spend and reprogramming of capital works

· Property and other assets

To perform his or her role effectively, each Committee member must develop and maintain

his or her skills and knowledge, including an understanding of the Committee’s responsibilities, Councils’ infrastructure assets such as roading, three waters and district facilities.

Membership

The Council will determine the membership of the Infrastructure Committee.

The Infrastructure Committee will comprise of at least six elected members (one of which will be the chairperson).

Mayor Carter

Felicity Foy – Chairperson

Ann Court – Deputy Chairperson

Dave Collard

Kelly Stratford

John Vujcich

Mate Radich

Mike Edmonds

Adele Gardner

Non-appointed councillors may attend meetings with speaking rights, but not voting rights.

Quorum

The quorum at a meeting of the Infrastructure Committee is 5 members.

Frequency of Meetings

The Infrastructure Committee shall meet every 6 weeks, but may be cancelled if there is no business.

Power to Delegate

The Infrastructure Committee may not delegate any of its responsibilities, duties or powers.

Committees Responsibilities

The Committees responsibilities are described below:

Quality infrastructure and Facilities

· Assess and provide advice to Council on strategic issues relating to the provision of Council’s infrastructural activities and district facilities

· Review, and recommend to Council, policy and strategies for the delivery of infrastructural asset services

· Monitor achievement of outcomes included in the Infrastructure Strategy and other infrastructure strategies eg District Transport Strategy

· Ensure that Council protects its investment in its infrastructural assets in accordance with accepted professional standards

· Monitor the risks, financial and operational performance of the Council's infrastructural activities and facilities

· Monitor major contract performance measures/key result areas (KRAs)

Significant Projects – spend, monitoring and reporting

· Monitor significant projects

· Approve budget overspend (above tolerance levels in the CE delegations) and any reprogramming of capex for a project or programme provided that:

o The overall budget is met from savings

o The overall budget for capex is not exceeded. Where this is not the case, the Committee must either:

§ Recommend to Council that additional funding is approved (outside the Annual Plan or Long Term Plan process), or

§ Recommend as part of the next round of Long Term Plan or Annual Plan process that the funding is considered for inclusion.

· Approve tenders and contracts provided they are:

o Up to $3 million,

o in accordance with the current year’s plan, whether that be Annual Plan or Long Term Plan, and

o deemed low by the Significance and Engagement Policy

Compliance

· Ensure that operational functions comply with legislative requirements and Council policy

· Ensure that consents associated with Council's infrastructure are being met and renewals are planned for

Service levels (non regulatory)

· Recommend service level changes and new initiatives to the Long Term and Annual Plan processes.

Relationships

· Monitoring Council’s relationship with the Northland Transportation Alliance

o Receive quarterly performance reports

· Monitoring Council’s relationship with the Far North Waters Alliance Partner

Property

· Recommend to Council the acquisition or disposal of assets.

· Approve new leases and lease renewals (of non-reserve land), in accordance with the current years’ plan, whether that be Annual Plan or Long Term Plan.

Receive updates on changes to national and regional policies that impact on Council provision of infrastructure and where appropriate make recommendation to Council.

Rules and Procedures

Council’s Standing Orders and Code of Conduct apply to all the committee’s meetings.

Annual reporting

The Chair of the Committee will submit a written report to the Chief Executive on an annual basis. The review will summarise the activities of the Committee and how it has contributed to the Council’s governance and strategic objectives. The Chief Executive will place the report on the next available agenda of the governing body.

INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE - 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 Program
Hon John Carter QSO	Carter Family Trust
Felicity Foy (Chair)	Shareholder - Northland Planning & Development 2020	A planning and development consultancy that is based in the Far North and have two employees. Property owner of Commerce Street, Kaitaia		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 Seaview Road – Cable Bay, and Allen Bell Drive - Kaitaia.
	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 and Allen Bell Drive.
	Foy Farms Partnership	Owner and partner in Foy Farms - a farm on Church Road, Kaingaroa
	Foy Farms Rentals	Owner and rental manager of Foy Farms Rentals for 7 dwellings on Church Road, Kaingaroa and 2 dwellings on Allen Bell Drive, Kaitaia, and 1 property on North Road, Kaitaia, one title contains a cell phone tower.
	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
	Shareholder of Coastline Plumbing NZ Limited
Felicity Foy - Partner	Director of Coastline Plumbing NZ Limited
Felicity Foy - Partner	Friends with some FNDC employees
Deputy Mayor Ann Court (Deputy)	Waipapa Business Association	Member		Case by case
	Warren Pattinson Limited	Shareholder	Building company. FNDC is a regulator and enforcer	Case by case
	Kerikeri Irrigation	Supplies my water		No
	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	Any proposed FNDC Capital works or policy change which may have a direct impact (positive/adverse)	Declare interest and abstain from voting.
	Flowers and gifts	Ratepayer 'Thankyou'	Bias/ Pre-determination?	Declare to Governance
	Coffee and food	Ratepayers sometimes 'shout' food and beverage	Bias or pre-determination	Case by case
	Staff	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.
	Warren Pattinson	My husband is a builder and may do work for Council staff		Case by case
Ann Court - Partner	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
	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.
David Collard	Snapper Bonanza 2011 Limited	45% Shareholder and Director
David Collard	Trustee of Te Ahu Charitable Trust	Council delegate to this board
Mate Radich	No form received
Kelly Stratford	KS Bookkeeping and Administration	Business Owner, provides book keeping, administration and development of environmental management plans	None perceived	Step aside from decisions that arise, that may have conflicts
	Waikare Marae Trustees	Trustee	Maybe perceived conflicts	Case by case basis
	Bay of Islands College	Parent Elected Trustee	None perceived	If there was a conflict, I will step aside from decision making
	Karetu School	Parent Elected Trustee	None perceived	If there was a conflict, I will step aside from decision making
	Māori title land – Moerewa and Waikare	Beneficiary and husband is a shareholder	None perceived	If there was a conflict, I will step aside from decision making
	Sister is employed by Far North District Council			Will not discuss work/governance mattes that are confidential
	Gifts - food and beverages	Residents and ratepayers may ‘shout’ food and beverage	Perceived bias or predetermination	Case by case basis
	Taumarere Counselling Services	Advisory Board Member	May be perceived conflicts	Should conflict arise, step aside from voting
	Sport Northland	Board Member	May be perceived conflicts	Should conflict arise, step aside from voting
Kelly Stratford - Partner	Chef and Barista	Opua Store	None perceived
Kelly Stratford - Partner	Māori title land – Moerewa	Shareholder	None perceived	If there was a conflict of interest, I would step aside from decision making
John Vujcich	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
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

Infrastructure Committee Meeting Agenda

10 February 2021

4 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

4.1 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

File Number: A3052532

Author: Kim Hammond, Meetings Administrator

Authoriser: Aisha Huriwai, Team Leader Democracy Services

Purpose of the Report

The minutes of the previous Infrastructure Committee meeting are attached to allow the Committee to confirm that the minutes are a true and correct record.

Recommendation

That the Infrastructure Committee confirm that the minutes of the meeting held 2 December 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

1) Background

Local Government Act 2002 Schedule 7 Section 28 states that a local authority must keep minutes of its proceedings. The minutes of these proceedings duly entered and authenticated as prescribed by a local authority are prima facie evidence of those meetings.

2) Discussion and Options

The minutes of the meeting are attached. Far North District Council Standing Orders Section 27.3 states that no discussion shall arise on the substance of the minutes in any succeeding meeting, except as to their correctness.

Reason for the recommendation

The reason for the recommendation is to confirm the minutes are a true and correct record of the previous meeting.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial implications or the need for budgetary provision as a result of this report.

Attachments

1. 2020-12-02 Infrastructure Committee Unconfirmed Minutes - A3023023 ⇩

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 is a matter of low significance.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	This report complies with the Local Government Act 2002 Schedule 7 Section 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.	It is the responsibility of each meeting to confirm their minutes therefore the views of another meeting are not relevant.
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 implications on Māori in confirming minutes from a previous meeting. Any implications on Māori arising from matters included in meeting minutes should be considered as part of the relevant report.
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 (for example – youth, the aged and those with disabilities.	This report is asking for the minutes to be confirmed as true and correct record, any interests that affect other people should be considered as part of the individual reports.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	There are no financial implications or the need for budgetary provision arising from this report.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has not reviewed this report.

Infrastructure Committee Meeting Agenda

10 February 2021

MINUTES OF Far North District Council
Infrastructure Committee Meeting
HELD AT THE Council Chamber, Memorial Avenue, Kaikohe
ON Wednesday, 2 December 2020 AT 9.30 am

PRESENT: Cr Felicity Foy, Deputy Mayor Ann Court, Cr Dave Collard, Cr Rachel Smith (Via TEAMS), Cr Kelly Stratford, Cr John Vujcich, Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Chairperson Mike Edmonds, Te Hiku Community Board Chairperson Adele Gardner (via TEAMS)

STAFF PRESENT: Shaun Clarke (Chief Executive Officer), Andy Finch (General Manager Infrastructure and Asset Management), Dean Myburgh (General Manager District Services), William J Taylor, MBE (General Manager Corporate Services), Sheryl Gavin (General Manager Strategic Planning and Policy - Acting)

1 Karakia Timatanga – Opening Prayer

Councillor Foy read the Local Government Act to open the meeting followed by a Karakia from Councillor Stratford.

2 Apologies and Declarations of Interest

That apologies from Mayor John Carter be received and accepted.

3 Deputation

Nil

4 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

4.1 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Agenda item 4.1 document number A3001125, pages 14 - 18 refers.

Committee Resolution 2020/9

Moved: Cr Kelly Stratford

Seconded: Cr Dave Collard

That the Infrastructure Committee confirm that the minutes of the meeting held 21 October 2020 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

5 Information Reports

5.1 Infrastructure and Asset Management (IAM) Monthly Business Report for October 2020

Agenda item 5.1 document number A3014745, pages 19 - 19 refers.

Committee Resolution 2020/10

Moved: Cr Kelly Stratford

Seconded: Deputy Mayor Ann Court

That the Infrastructure Committee receive the report Infrastructure and Asset Management (IAM) Monthly Business Report for October 2020.

Carried

6 Public Excluded

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Committee Resolution 2020/11

Moved: Cr Felicity Foy

Seconded: Cr John Vujcich

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

6.1 - Ratcliffe's Bay Boat Trailer Parking

s7(2)(b)(ii) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information

s7(2)(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

Carried

7 Meeting Close

The meeting closed at 11.23 am.

The minutes of this meeting will be confirmed at the Infrastructure Committee meeting to be held on 10 February 2021.

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

CHAIRPERSON

Infrastructure Committee Meeting Agenda

10 February 2021

5 Information Reports

5.1 Electrocoagulation Wastewater Treatment Update

File Number: A3036914

Author: Tania George, EA to GM - Infrastructure and Asset Management

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

Purpose of the Report

The purpose of the report is to present the Electrocoagulation (EC) Wastewater Treatment report prepared for Council by BECA.

Executive Summary

· Elected Members have asked for information about the EC process for wastewater treatment.

· This report introduces a report prepared by BECA evaluating the process, with particular reference to the Taipa Wastewater Treatment plant (TWWTP).

· This report was presented to the Council meeting on 10 December 2020 and was referred back to the Infrastructure Committee for consideration.

Recommendation

That the Infrastructure Committee notes the report Electrocoagulation Wastewater Treatment.

1) Background

The treatment of wastewater through the process of EC has been promoted over the past few years, in particular by Mr Kurmann in relation to the Resource Consent renewal for the TWWTP.

Council have commissioned BECA to undertake a review of the EC process. A copy of the full report is included as attachment 1.

2) Discussion and Options

The report prepared detailing the current assessment of EC technology and the applicability of an EC treatment plant for the Taipa East Coast Wastewater Scheme has been based on historic information held by Council, Mr Kurmann and a report on EC by National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA). Additional information was drawn from the Resource Consent hearing evidence for Taipa Wastewater treatment resource consent renewal and publicly available resources on the internet.

The key observations from the report are:

1. The EC process is a mature treatment technology based on the electrolytic liberation of soluble metal ions from metallic plates to provide coagulation of the wastewater stream. In addition to the liberation of metal ions there are a number of electrooxidation reactions that produce oxidants (hydroxide radicals, hypochlorite) that enhance the reduction of contaminants. Several commercial suppliers of EC equipment are available, including completely containerised units. All are located internationally outside of New Zealand.

2. EC has been successfully applied to a variety of commercial full-scale industrial applications. It is less frequently applied to municipal wastewater treatment, particularly at larger scale where it is less economic than conventional treatment processes. We are not aware of any EC treatment plants in New Zealand treating municipal wastewater.

3. The specific application of EC to the TWWTP Scheme has been considered as a concept proposal based on treatment of the wastewater from different locations within the existing pond system. The preferred treatment location would be the effluent discharge from the final maturation pond. This location is considered to apply the lowest organic load to the EC process, consisting primarily of algae solids, and to make most use of the maturation pond volume for peak flow buffering.

4. Testing of EC treatment of algal pond effluent reported by NIWA and similar tests by Mr Kurmann has shown that a good-settling sludge can be obtained that would favour a simple clarifier for post treatment. Thickening of the sludge by centrifugation for disposal is considered by Mr Kurmann, although little detail of the equipment is available. The quantity of sludge produced has not been identified. The potential of sludge disposal to the existing settlement pond is an option to reduce dewatering costs.

5. The effluent quality from the EC process is required to meet the discharge criteria set out in the Resource Consent conditions. The performance of the EC process in terms of effluent suspended solids, BOD/COD, phosphorus, heavy metals and microbiology is considered likely to be adequate to meet the consent conditions. The ability of EC to meet the ammonia limit of <10mgN/L is less certain as removal rates of 50% - 80% may not be sufficient, given the relatively high inlet ammonia concentrations reported.

6. Capital and operating costs are difficult to determine from the available information specific to the TWWTP proposal as no actual equipment specification has been provided. Mr Kurmann has given a budget cost of the EC unit as $950,000 and a cost of $200,000 for the sludge dewatering centrifuge. Costs for the balance of plant, e.g. pumping, power supply, civil works, buildings etc. are not provided and would have to be estimated.

7. Power consumption has been estimated in the report based on NIWA test results and typical literature values for EC operation. A typical reported value is of the order of 1kWh/m3 treated. For the TWWTP consented design average flow of 790m3 /d a power demand of approximately 790kWh/d could be typical. At design flow this is an annual cost of some $83,000. Power costs would vary depending on the installation location where there may be lower flows.

8. While solar power could be an option to offset the daily power demand it is unlikely that the cost of a battery system to cover night time and cloudy periods would be viable. Further financial analysis would be required to define CAPEX and operating return.

9. Other operating expenses relate to the periodic replacement of the electrodes (6 – 8 weeks) with an estimated cost of $14,900 pa and an operator expense of $8,500 pa (data from Mr Kurmann).

10. The current information provided on the detail of the proposed EC treatment process for the TWWTP is insufficient to assess whether the process will be economically viable for the improvement of the effluent for discharge to the stream or for irrigation.

Reason for the recommendation

To provide information relating to the electrocoagulation treatment process.

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial implications.

Attachments

1. NZ1-16515038 - Electrocoagulation Wastewater Treatment - A2973395 ⇩

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.	N/A
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.	Potentially 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.	N/A
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 (for example – youth, the aged and those with disabilities.	N/A
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	None
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report