Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting - Thursday, 8 April 2021

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 April 2021

COUNCIL MEMBERS REGISTER OF INTERESTS

Name	Responsibility (i.e. Chairperson etc)	Declaration of Interests	Nature of Potential Interest	Member's Proposed Management Plan
Hon Mayor John Carter QSO	Board Member of the Local Government Protection Programme	Board Member of the Local Government Protection Program
Hon Mayor John Carter QSO	Carter Family Trust
Deputy Mayor Ann Court	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 Clendon	Chairperson – He Waka Eke Noa Charitable Trust	None		Declare if any issue arises
	Member of Vision Kerikeri	None		Declare if any issue arises
	Joint owner of family home in Kerikeri	Hall Road, Kerikeri
David Clendon – Partner	Resident Shareholder on Kerikeri Irrigation
David Collard	Snapper Bonanza 2011 Limited	45% Shareholder and Director
David Collard	Trustee of Te Ahu Charitable Trust	Council delegate to this board
Felicity Foy	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.
	112 Commerce Street Holdings Ltd	Owner of commercial property in Commerce Street Kaitaia.
	Foy Property Management Ltd	Owner of company that manages properties owned by Foy Farms Rentals and Flick Family Trust.
	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 Coastal Plumbing NZ Limited
Felicity Foy - Partner	Friends with some FNDC employees
Mate Radich	No form received
Rachel Smith	Friends of Rolands Wood Charitable Trust	Trustee
	Mid North Family Support	Trustee
	Property Owner	Kerikeri
	Friends who work at Far North District Council
	Kerikeri Cruising Club	Subscription Member
Rachel Smith (Partner)	Property Owner	Kerikeri
	Friends who work at Far North District Council
	Kerikeri Cruising Club	Subscription Member and Treasurer
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
Moko Tepania	Teacher	Te Kura Kaupapa Māori o Kaikohe.	Potential Council funding that will benefit my place of employment.	Declare a perceived conflict
	Chairperson	Te Reo o Te Tai Tokerau Trust.	Potential Council funding for events that this trust runs.	Declare a perceived conflict
	Tribal Member	Te Rūnanga o Te Rarawa	As a descendent of Te Rarawa I could have a perceived conflict of interest in Te Rarawa Council relations.	Declare a perceived conflict
	Tribal Member	Te Rūnanga o Whaingaroa	As a descendent of Te Rūnanga o Whaingaroa I could have a perceived conflict of interest in Te Rūnanga o Whaingaroa Council relations.	Declare a perceived conflict
	Tribal Member	Kahukuraariki Trust Board	As a descendent of Kahukuraariki Trust Board I could have a perceived conflict of interest in Kahukuraariki Trust Board Council relations.	Declare a perceived conflict
	Tribal Member	Te Rūnanga ā-Iwi o Ngāpuhi	As a descendent of Te Rūnanga ā-Iwi o Ngāpuhi I could have a perceived conflict of interest in Te Rūnanga ā-Iwi o Ngāpuhi Council relations.	Declare a perceived conflict
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

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 April 2021

MINUTES OF Far North District Council
Ordinary Council Meeting
HELD AT THE Council Chamber, Memorial Avenue, Kaikohe
ON Thursday, 25 February 2021 AT 10.02 am

PRESENT: Mayor John Carter (HWTM), Deputy Mayor Ann Court, Cr David Clendon, Cr Dave Collard, Cr Felicity Foy, Cr Mate Radich, Cr Rachel Smith, Cr Kelly Stratford, Cr Moko Tepania, Cr John Vujcich

IN ATTENDANCE: Mike Edmonds (Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Chairperson), Adele Gardner (Te Hiku Community Board Chairperson), Belinda Ward (Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board),

STAFF PRESENT: Shaun Clarke (Chief Executive Officer), Glen Rainham (Acting General Manager Infrastructure and Asset Management), Dean Myburgh (General Manager District Services), William J Taylor, MBE (General Manager Strategic Planning and Policy - Acting), Janice Smith (General Manager Corporate Services - Acting)

1 Karakia Timatanga – Opening Prayer

His Worship the Mayor John Carter opened the meeting and Cr John Vujcich commenced the meeting with a prayer.

2 MAYORAL ANNOUNCEMENTS

· Rangitoto Reserve (Hihi Bay) – Residents request the transfer of this Council Reserve into Department of Conservation ownership.

· Duffus Trust in Russell are looking for support from Council.

· Working Party Delegations – ensure that the delegations are right and expectations and terms of reference are clear. Any changes are signed off by Council.

· Cr Stratford - Manifesto update for Disability Action Group - key points are:

o members of public are frustrated with people parking in mobility spaces, and lack of enforcement by Council because these spaces are on private supermarket property.

o developers need to consider the needs of people with disability or mobile needs when completing projects.

o need to make sure the levels of service capture the new engineering standards.

· Cr Foy - Procurement Policy;

o concerns about delivery of Capital Work program, particularly Shovel Ready projects.

o need a system that highlights risks for lack of output.

· His Worship the Mayor attended the opening of the Kerikeri Mens Shed and received complimentary comments about Council staff for work being done in the community.

· Notes that the Community Board Chair’s report is included in this agenda and His Worship the Mayor invites the Chairs to make any further comments in the meeting today.

· Extraordinary meeting 3 March 2021, 3:30pm in Chambers.

3 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

3.1 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Agenda item 5.1 document number A3052352, pages 12 - 30 refers.

Resolution 2021/8

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr Kelly Stratford

That Council confirm the minutes of the Council meetings held 10 December 2020, 21 December 2020, and 2 February 2021 as a true and correct record.

Carried

4 Reports

4.1 Vodafone Licence

Agenda item 6.1 document number A3073394, pages 31 - 38 refers.

Resolution 2021/9

Moved: Cr Rachel Smith

Seconded: Cr Moko Tepania

That the Far North District Council:

a) in its role as administering body of the local purpose (quarry) reserve and pursuant to its powers under Section 48A of the Reserves Act 1977, grants a licence to Vodafone to operate a telecommunications facility over 610m2 of local purpose (quarry) reserve, being Section 3 Block XIII Whakarara Survey District.

b) in its role as the Minister of Conservation’s delegate, consents to the granting of the aforementioned licence. The terms of the licence shall be:

i) Term: 10 years

ii) Annual rental: $9,000 plus GST (if any)

iii) Rent review: 3 yearly from commencement date; linked to Consumer Price Index (CPI)

Carried

Cr Moko Tepania left meeting at 11:32 am – 11:34 am

Cr Kelly Stratford declared a conflict for agenda item 6.2 and did not participate in the discussion or decision making.

4.2 Transfer of Local Purpose (Esplanade) Reserve to Landowners of Kopuakawau Block

Agenda item 6.2 document number A3084332, pages 48 - 52 refers.

Resolution 2021/10

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr David Clendon

That:

a) Council, subject to the directions of the Māori Land Court, approve the transfer of Lot 9 DP 102838 being Local Purpose (Esplanade) Reserve to the landowners of Kopuakawau, or to such body or Trust as the Māori Land Court directs; and

b) the transfer of land is to occur at no cost to Council.

Carried

4.3 Options Report Treated Water Supply Regulation

Agenda item 6.3 document number A3083951, pages 53 - 60 refers.

Motion

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr John Vujcich

That Council, under section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002:

a) agrees that making a new Treated Water Supply Bylaw is the most appropriate way to regulate reticulated water supply in the Far North District;

b) requests that staff prepare a statement of proposal to make a new Treated Water Supply Bylaw.

Amendment

Moved: Cr Rachel Smith

Seconded: Cr Kelly Stratford

c) notes that in order to ensure the bylaw is not revoked, that it will need to be finalised by Council at the 25 September Council meeting

The amendment became the substantive motion.

Resolution 2021/11

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr John Vujcich

That Council, under section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002:

a) agrees that making a new Treated Water Supply Bylaw is the most appropriate way to regulate reticulated water supply in the Far North District;

b) requests that staff prepare a statement of proposal to make a new Treated Water Supply Bylaw.

c) notes that in order to ensure the bylaw is not revoked, that it will need to be finalised by Council at the 25 September Council meeting

Carried

4.4 Adoption of the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document and Supporting Information

Agenda item 6.4 document number A3070043, pages 61 - 64 refers.

Consultation document and supporting information are still going through audit process. An extraordinary meeting has been scheduled for 3 March 2021 for 3:30 pm to adopt the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 Consultation Document And Supporting Information.

4.5 Amendment to Rating Delegations

Agenda item 6.5 document number A3074131, pages 65 - 76 refers

Resolution 2021/13

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr Moko Tepania

That Council approves the amended Rating Delegations for 2021, as attached.

Carried

4.6 Elected Member Report - 2020 Young Elected Member Hui

Agenda item 6.6 document number A3039899, pages 77 – 85 refers.

Meeting adjourned 11:11 am – 11:23 am

Resolution 2021/14

Moved: Cr Moko Tepania

Seconded: Cr Rachel Smith

That Council:

a) note the report entitled “Elected Member Report – 2020 Young Elected Member Hui.

b) that a YEM Hui Organisation Working Party be established to progress this and subsequent hosting should the bid be successful.

c) that Cr Smith and Cr Tepania be appointed as co-chairs of this working party and that appropriate staff members, ideally from Democracy Services are appointed to the working party to progress the bid.

d) approve an initial financial commitment of up to $10,000 should the bid be successful.

e) working party work with the Chief Executive to report back to Council.

In Favour: Mayor John Carter, David Clendon, Dave Collard, Felicity Foy, Mate Radich, Rachel Smith, Kelly Stratford, Moko Tepania and John Vujcich

Against: Nil

Abstained: Deputy Mayor Ann Court

carried

4.7 Changes to the 2021 Formal Meeting Calendar

Agenda item 6.7 document number A3079410, pages 86 - 87 refers>

Resolution 2021/15

Moved: Cr John Vujcich

Seconded: Cr Rachel Smith

That the Executive Review Committee meeting scheduled for 9 March 2021 be rescheduled to 22 March 2021.

Carried

NOTE: Cr Felicity Foy reminded Council of it’s commitment to hold 2 Council meetings or workshops in Kaitaia this year.

5 Information Reports

5.1 Community Board Updates January - February 2020

Agenda item 7.1 document number A3083969, pages 88 - 103 refers.

Resolution 2021/16

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr Dave Collard

That Council note the following Community Board minutes:

a) Te Hiku Community Board – 26 January 2021.

b) Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board – 3 February 2021.

c) Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board – 4 February 2021.

Carried

NOTES

Chair Adele Gardner – Te Hiku Community Board:

· Rangitoto Reserve report to be presented to Te Hiku Community Board and then to Council.

Chair Mike Edmonds – Kaikohe Hokianga Community Board:

· Community Board delegations.

· Community Board sub-committee set up to receive information for Glysophate spraying in Hokianga. Potential for combined community boards to address the matter together with other Boards.

Chair Belinda Ward – Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board:

· pg 101 requesting urgent report on existing to give effect to levels of services in the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa ward.

· Follow-up on service related contracts with staff attending the Board meetings to report on these.

· Pressure on the Board with the number of people wanting assistance for funding.

· Requests contact details for District Facilities staff be provided to Community Board chairs in cases of emergency.

Cr Stratford left the meeting 11:44 pm – 11:47 am.

5.2 Transitional Legislation on MĀori Representation

Agenda item 7.2 document number A3073875, pages 104 - 105 refers.

Resolution 2021/17

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr Moko Tepania

That the Council receive the report Transitional Legislation on Māori Representation.

Carried

12:03 pm His Worship the Mayor John Carter asked In-House Counsel George Swanepoel to address the matter of the Kauri Dam raised by Cr Radich.

5.3 CEO Report to Council 01 November 2020 - 31 December 2020

Agenda item 7.3 document number A3086904, pages 109 - 109 refers.

Resolution 2021/18

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr John Vujcich

That the Council receive the report CEO Report to Council 01 November 2020 - 31 December 2020.

Carried

6 Public Excluded

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Resolution 2021/19

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr Felicity Foy

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 - Confirmation of Previous Minutes - Public Excluded	s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons 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)	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
6.2 - Re-appointment of Directors for Far North Holdings Limited	s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons s7(2)(f)(i) - free and frank expression of opinions by or between or to members or officers or employees of any local authority	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
6.3 - All of Government Electricity Providers	s7(2)(b)(ii) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information s7(2)(h) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable 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)	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

7.1 Confirmation of Information and Decisions to be Released in Public

Resolution 2021/10

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr John Vujcich

That Council confirms that the information and decisions contained in the part of the meeting held with public excluded be restated in public meeting as follows:

a) item 6.2 - Re-Appointment Of Directors For Far North Holdings Limited; and

b) item 6.3 - All Of Government Electricity Providers, with the total value redacted,

All of Government Electricity Providers

Agenda item 8.3 document number A3077994, pages 37 - 41 refers.

Resolution 2021/13

Moved: Mayor John Carter

Seconded: Cr Dave Collard

That:

a) Council approve the recommendation to enter into four contracts with the following Energy suppliers (Pricing Supplements) for the Supply of Electricity to the Far North District Council from 1 July 2021 to the following dates:

Electricity Providers	Contract Period
Genesis Energy	1 July 2021 to 30 June 2024
Contact Energy	1 July 2021 to 29 February 2024
Contact Energy - Ventia	1 July 2021 – 29 February 2024
Meridian Energy	1 July 2021 to 29 February 2024

b) the Total Value of the contracts over the term of the agreements is REDACTED.

c) Council delegate the execution of the contracts and approval and execution of any variations to the contracts to Far North District Council’s Chief Executive Officer.

Carried

.Carried

8 Karakia Whakamutunga – Closing Prayer

Cr Stratford closed the meeting with a karakia

9 Meeting Close

The meeting closed at 1:07 pm.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 8 April 2021.

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

CHAIRPERSON

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 April 2021

6 Reports

6.1 Solid Waste Bylaw Review

File Number: A3127952

Author: Briar Macken, Planner

Authoriser: William J Taylor MBE, General Manager - Strategic Planning and Policy (Acting)

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To agree that the Solid Waste Bylaw should continue without amendment.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· The Solid Waste Bylaw (the Bylaw) is due for review by 05 May 2021.

· The Bylaw has been mostly effective in regulating people’s behaviour to address identified problems relating to solid waste.

· The current Bylaw has not been effective in regulating minimising recyclables in the landfill waste stream. The components of the Bylaw that refer to waste separation are not monitored or enforced due to a lack of available staff.

· There are several Central Government policies due to be finalised in 2021 which may require amendments to the Bylaw.

· The Bylaw is the most appropriate way of addressing solid waste problem in the Far North District.

· The Bylaw should continue without amendment.

· The Strategy and Policy Committee considered this report at their meeting on 23 March 2021 and makes the following recommendation to Council.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council:

a) agree, under section 155(1) of the Local Government Act 2002, the Solid Waste Bylaw 2016 is the most appropriate way of addressing solid waste problems in the Far North District

b) agree, under section 155(2) of the Local Government Act 2002, the Solid Waste bylaw 2016:

i) is the most appropriate form of bylaw

ii) does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990

c) agree the provisions of the Solid Waste Bylaw be reassessed in conjunction with the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan review, which is due by 2023, or after central government legislation comes into effect.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

The Strategy and Policy Committee passed the following resolution at the 23 March 2021 meeting:

The Solid Waste Bylaw 2016 was made on 05 May 2016 utilising the Council’s discretionary functions under the following Acts:

· Local Government Act 2002

o section 146 specifically allows for a bylaw regulating solid waste

· Waste Minimisation Act 2008

o section 56 allows for a bylaw to regulate the collection, transportation and disposal of waste

· Health Act 1956

o section 64 allows for a bylaw to regulate solid waste to protect public health and prevent nuisance

· Litter Act 1979

o section 12 allows for a bylaw to give effect to the provisions of the Litter Act which regulates the control of litter.

Under section 158 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Council’s Solid Waste Bylaw (the Bylaw) is due for review by 05 May 2021. Under section 160(1) of the Local Government Act 2002, a review requires the Council to make the determinations required by section 155 of the Act, namely:

(a) is the Bylaw the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem with respect to solid waste; and, if it is:

(b) the bylaw is the most appropriate form of bylaw; and

As per section 56 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, any bylaw must not be inconsistent with the Council’s waste management and minimisation plan. The Waste Management and Minimisation Plan is due for review by 2023.

To inform solid waste related decisions, the Council will be undertaking a review under section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002 for solid waste services.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

Problem to be addressed

The Determination Report (June 2015) for the Bylaw identified a number of problems relating to solid waste in the Far North District. Following a consultation process, a bylaw was determined to be the most appropriate way to address the following problems:

· To meet the Council’s legal requirements under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, specifically

o minimising recyclables in the landfill waste stream

o gathering accurate data for waste planning

· Protecting public health and safety, and avoiding nuisances including

o control of hazardous wastes

· Control of litter including

o control of waste generated by events

o control of waste receptacles in a public place

· Control of waste generated by multi-unit developments.

Disposal of domestic type waste in a public place (illegal dumping) is a significant problem for the Far North District. Illegal dumping includes general household rubbish, large appliances, and furniture. Illegal dumping is regulated under the Litter Act 1979 and cannot be further regulated by a bylaw.

A review of RFS data and internal consultation with Council staff has not identified any additional problems relating to solid waste that need to be addressed.

However, Central Government is in the process of consulting on and implementing several waste-related proposals that may need to be addressed in a bylaw, as outlined below:

Government proposal	Overview	Report due	Impact on the Council
Improve data collection	- Create a centralised database	March 2021	- May require Bylaw amendment
	- National consistency of data

Increase Waste Disposal Levy	- Include additional landfill types	Consultation in 2021	- Increase revenue for the Council
Increase Waste Disposal Levy	- Increase levy to $60 per tonne by 2024	Consultation in 2021	- Amendments to Waste Minimisation Act 2008

Standardisation of kerbside rubbish collections	- National consistency in kerbside rubbish collections	Mid-2021	- May require changes to kerbside rubbish collections including provisions for food scraps
Standardisation of kerbside rubbish collections	- National consistency in kerbside rubbish collections	Mid-2021	- May require Bylaw amendment

Container return scheme	- Consumers receive financial incentive for returning containers	Early 2021	- May require changes to kerbside rubbish collections
Container return scheme		Early 2021	- May have regulatory impact

Review findings
The Bylaw has been effective in regulating people’s behaviour to address the following problems:

· gathering accurate data for waste planning

· protecting public health and safety, and avoiding nuisances

· control of hazardous wastes

· control of waste generated by events

· control of waste receptacles in a public place

· control of waste generated by multi-unit developments.

Therefore, the Bylaw is still the most appropriate way of addressing those problems with respect to solid waste.

The Bylaw has not been effective in regulating minimising recyclables in the landfill waste stream. The components of the Bylaw that refer to waste separation are not monitored or enforced due to a lack of available staff. Budgetary constraints mean that it is not possible to employ staff to enforce this component of the Bylaw.

Therefore, the form of the bylaw may no longer be the most appropriate. This report considers what other options for the form of the bylaw may be more appropriate to deal with that problem.

Option One: Status quo: The Bylaw stays in force with no changes (recommended option)

It is highly likely that once the Central Government proposals are finalised (later in 2021), the Bylaw will need to be amended to accommodate legislative changes to the Waste Minimisation Act 2008.

Both Whangarei District Council and Kaipara District Councils will be reviewing their solid waste related bylaws after the release of the finalised Central Government proposals. Therefore, there is a future opportunity to have regional consistent solid waste bylaws.

Advantages and disadvantages of the status quo

Advantages

- Waiting to amend the bylaw will allow for the bylaw to:

- meet any new legislative requirements

- be informed by the section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002 review

- align better with the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan

- be more cost effective in that there will be less consultation costs than if the Bylaw was amended now

Disadvantages

- Bylaw continues to have provisions that are unnecessary because the Council

does not enforce them

Option Two: Amend the Bylaw

The provisions of the Bylaw referring to waste separation are revoked because they are unnecessary if the Council cannot assign resources to enforce them.

However, it is possible that future Central Government policy will require the Council to regulate waste separation.

Amending the Bylaw now to revoke the provisions about waste separation will have little effect on the public (as it is not enforced). However, if the Council needs to reinstate the provisions following legislative changes, it may lead to reputational risk as it may appear the Council is not knowledgeable of Central Government proposals.

Advantages and disadvantages of amending the Bylaw

Advantages	- Removing provisions that are unnecessary because the Council does not enforce them

Disadvantages	- Extra consultation and resource costs in amending bylaw now and again in after Central Government policy changes
	- Risk of consultation fatigue
	- Reputational risk

Option Three: Do nothing: Revoke the Bylaw

If the Bylaw is not reviewed by May 2021, the Bylaw will automatically revoke in May 2023.

The problems that the Bylaw is addressing are not controlled by other bylaws, policies or legislation.

The Council does not contract services for the collection and transportation of waste and so has no other means to address issues relating to solid waste collection.

Advantages and disadvantages of revoking the Bylaw

Advantages	- None

Disadvantages	- Extra consultation and resource costs in making a new bylaw if required by upcoming Central Government policy changes
	- Less authority to manage commercial waste collection services
	- Risk of increased health and safety, and nuisances’ issues related to solid waste
	- Risk of not meeting current and upcoming legislative changes under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008
	- Reputational risk

Take Tūtohunga / Reason for the recommendation

The bylaw is still the most appropriate way of addressing the problems with solid waste and is in the most appropriate form for now. A new form of bylaw may be needed when Central Government proposals are finalised.

New Zealand Bill of Rights Assessment
The Bylaw may potentially have implications on the rights to freedom of movement and freedom of expression. For example, the bylaw limits the times and specific locations in which approved containers can be placed for collection.

The Bylaw limits these rights only to the extent they create:

· a danger to health and safety

· a nuisance to others or the public generally

In addition, while the Bylaw will require waste collectors and operators to be licensed and comply with minimum standards, it does not limit public access to these services. The Bylaw only controls the methods used to carry out these services in order to meet waste management goals.

Therefore, any limitations of the rights in question are justified in accordance with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

Next steps

If the Council agrees with the recommendation, a Proposal will be presented to the Strategy and Policy Committee outlining the low significance public consultation process as per section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002. The proposal is planned for the 20 July 2021 committee meeting.

Following consultation, presentation of final documents is planned for the 16 December 2021 Council meeting.

Proposed timeframes and governance touchpoints are subject to organisation wide priorities.

3) PĀnga PŪtea me ngĀ wĀhanga tahua / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

The cost of consulting on retaining the status quo will be met from existing operation budgets.

ngĀ Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Review Report - Solid Waste - A3071885 ⇩

2. Solid Waste Bylaw 2016 - A2674692 ⇩

3. Solid Waste Bylaw 2016 Control 1 Containers - A2674694 ⇩

4. Solid Waste Bylaw 2016 Control 2 Waste Separation - A2674695 ⇩

Te Hōtaka Take Ōkawa / 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.

He Take Ōkawa / Compliance requirement	Te Aromatawai Kaimahi / 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	As retaining the status quo will have little effect on ratepayers or level of service, the level of significance as determined by the Significance and Engagement Policy is low.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The following legislation applies to the decision recommended in this report: · Local Government Act 2002, section 146, 155 and 160 · Waste Minimisation Act 2008, section 56 · Health Act 1956, section 64 · Litter Act 1979, section 12.
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.	As the recommendation is to maintain status quo, the Community Boards views have not been sought.
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.	Seeking the views and input of iwi in the development of bylaws is integral. Māori will be provided an opportunity to contribute during the consultation stage of the bylaw development process.
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).	Affected and interested parties will be given an opportunity to share their views and preferences during the consultation phase including: · Waste collection service providers · Community groups concerned about solid waste in their community · Ngā Tai Ora – Public Health Northland · Ministry for the Environment · Northland Regional Council
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	The cost of consulting on retaining the current bylaw will be met from existing operation budgets.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 April 2021

1 Purpose

To describe and discuss the review of the Solid Waste Bylaw (2016).

2 Context and Situation

Under section 158 of the Local Government Act 2002, the Council’s Solid Waste Bylaw (the Bylaw) is due for review by 05 May 2021. The Council is required to consider whether the Bylaw is still the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem with respect to solid waste.

2.1 Council’s role relating to solid waste

Under section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002, the purpose of local government is to “… promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural wellbeing of communities, in the present and for the future”. Accumulation of solid waste can have a negative effect on a community’s wellbeing through direct impacts, such as affecting the physical health of people and causing environmental harm. However, accumulation of solid waste can also lead to loss of amenity and poor mental health, affecting the social and economic wellbeing of communities.

Under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, the Council is required to “encourage waste minimisation and a decrease in waste disposal in order to protect the environment from harm; and to provide environmental, social, economic and cultural benefits”. Council must promote effective and efficient waste management and minimisation within its district by adopting a waste management and minimisation plan (section 43). As per section 56 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, a bylaw must not be inconsistent with the Council’s waste management and minimisation plan.

To support the purpose of local government and the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, the Council has discretionary functions to regulate solid waste under the following Acts:

· Local Government Act 2002, section 146

· Waste Minimisation Act 2008, section 56

· Health Act 1956, section 64

· Litter Act 1979, section 12.

2.1.1 Local Government Act 2002

Council can specifically make a bylaw regulating solid waste under section 146a of the Act.

2.1.2 Waste Minimisation Act 2008

Under section 56, the Council can make a bylaw for the following purposes:

a) prohibiting or regulating the deposit of waste:

b) regulating the collection and transportation of waste:

c) regulating the manner of disposal of dead animals, including their short-term storage pending disposal:

d) prescribing charges to be paid for use of waste management and minimisation facilities provided, owned, or operated by the territorial authority:

e) prohibiting, restricting, or controlling access to waste management and minimisation facilities provided, owned, or operated by the territorial authority:

f) prohibiting the removal of waste intended for recycling from receptacles provided by the territorial authority by anyone other than—

i. the occupier of the property from which the waste in the receptacle has come; or

ii. a person authorised by the territorial authority to remove the waste.

2.1.3 Health Act 1956

Relating to solid waste, the Council can make a bylaw under section 64 for the following reasons:

a) improving, promoting, or protecting public health, and preventing or abating nuisances

b) regulating the handling and storage of noxious substances, or of goods which are or are likely to become offensive

c) for preventing the outbreak or spread of disease by the agency of flies, mosquitoes, or other insects, or of rats, mice, or other vermin.

2.1.4 Litter Act 1979

The Litter Act 1979 regulates the abatement and control of litter. The Council can make a bylaw under section 12 of the Act to give effect to the provisions of the Act.

3 Objectives

3.1 Purpose of review

To determine whether a bylaw is still the most appropriate way to address problems regarding solid waste in the Far North District as per section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002.

3.2 Review objectives

· To define solid waste related problems in the Far North District that are within Council’s function to control.

· To identify if a bylaw is still the most appropriate way to address the regulation of solid waste in the Far North District.

· To identify if the Bylaw meets current legislative requirements.

4 Problem definition

4.1 Scope

In scope

Problems relating to solid waste in the Far North District which are a function of Council to control or address.

Waste as defined in the Waste Minimisation Act 2008:

· any thing disposed of or discarded; and

· includes a type of waste that is defined by its composition or source (for example, organic waste, electronic waste, or construction and demolition waste); and

· to avoid doubt, includes any component or element of diverted material, if the component or element is disposed of or discarded.

Out of scope

· Waste in liquid form such as:

o Trade Waste as any liquid, with or without matter in suspension or solution, that is or may be discharged from a Trade Premises to the COUNCIL’s Sewerage System. Trade waste will not be considered as it is already regulated by the Trade Waste Bylaw and Resource Management Act.

o Wastewater, on-site wastewater system or anything to do with wastewater infrastructure. Control of wastewater is regulated other bylaws (e.g. On-site Wastewater Bylaw) and other legislation.

· Diverted material, as defined in the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, “any thing that is no longer required for its original purpose and, but for commercial or other waste minimisation activities, would be disposed of or discarded”.

· Problems which are not a function of the Council to control or address including:

o burning rubbish and smoke nuisance as it is a function of the Northland Regional Council and Fire and Emergency New Zealand.

o litter disposed of on privately owned land including Department of Conservation owned land and roadsides managed by Waka Kotahi

o accumulation of litter at events held on privately owned land.

· Waste discarded by roaming dogs. Dogs are regulated by the Dog Control Act 1996 and the Dog Management Bylaw 2018.

4.2 Purpose of current bylaw

The Determination Report (June 2015)^{^[1]} for the current Bylaw identified a number of problems relating to solid waste in the Far North District. The purpose of the current Bylaw is to contribute to:

· the regulation of the collection, transportation and disposal of waste;

· the protection of the health and safety of waste collectors, waste operators and the public;

· the management of litter and nuisance.

Following a consultation process, the current Bylaw was deemed to be the most appropriate way to address the following problems:

· To meet the Council’s legal requirements under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, specifically

o minimising recyclables in the landfill waste stream

o gathering accurate data for waste planning

· Protecting public health and safety, and avoiding nuisances including

o control of hazardous wastes

· Control of litter including

o control of waste generated by events

o control of waste receptacles in a public place

· Control of waste generated by multi-unit developments.

4.3 Other problems relating to solid waste not currently controlled or addressed by the Bylaw

A review of RFS data and internal consultation with Council staff has not identified any additional problems relating to solid waste.

5 Review of Bylaw

5.1 Council responsibilities to minimise waste as per the Waste Minimisation Act 2008

An audit conducted in 2011 identified that 80-90% of kerbside waste, and 30-40% of all waste delivered to landfill could potentially have been diverted¹. The current FNDC Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2017-2023 was adopted by the Council in May 2017. The Council has an ambitious goal, in the plan, of reducing waste sent to landfill from 320kg per person in 2015 to 200kg per person by 2023.

The Council has an obligation to encourage waste minimisation however, waste sent to landfill is impacted by external factors such as:

· Gross Domestic Product (GDP)- research shows that there is a direct correlation between GDP and volume of waste.

· Recycling facilities – What can be recycled is dependent on whether there is global availability of facilities to process the products.

Measuring the amount of waste sent to landfill may not be an accurate measure of effective waste minimisation.

5.1.1 Gathering accurate data for waste planning

To identify and monitor waste minimisation, the Council must have an accurate record of waste data. Kerbside waste collection is undertaken by private companies and kerbside collection waste data was unknown. The Council does not contract waste collection services and is therefore unable to include data collection as a component of a contract. To access accurate data regarding kerbside waste collections, the current Bylaw regulates private waste collection services to provide the Council specific data.

This section of the Bylaw has been effective in that the waste collection services are providing the Council with regular data. However, the Bylaw requires the provision of more data than what the Council currently requests. For example, the Bylaw stipulates that the waste collection services provide waste logbooks and receipts, which is not data that the Council currently requires.

5.1.2 Central Government proposal to improve data collection

As part of developing a more effective waste levy, central government is consulting on improving data collection at landfills, cleanfills and transfer stations. There is currently no centralised database of landfills, and data held by individual councils is of variable quality.

A report on the reporting requirements consultation is due to Cabinet in March 2021. The outcomes of the proposal may impact on the data required from waste collection services and may require an amendment to the Bylaw.

5.1.3 Minimising recyclables in the landfill waste stream

To address the problem of too many recyclables being sent to landfill, the Council encourages waste minimisation through education and regulation.

There are a number of barriers to recycling including lack of consistent kerbside recycling services, lack of transport access to recycling stations, and lack of incentives for the public to recycle i.e. kerbside recycling whilst cheaper still costs the user. Confusion as to what can and cannot be recycled is the main motivational barrier to recycling.

Funding for waste minimisation education activities is supported by the Waste Disposal Levy. Education includes activities such as providing information via the Council’s website, information leaflets, at community events, and presentations to organisations. Council staff provide advice to schools, businesses and community groups on recycling systems and event waste minimisation. Despite community education activities, RFS records identify that there is some confusion as to what can and cannot be recycled.

Community education is an effective tool to support behaviour change, however it does not provide a satisfactory solution for a small percentage of the population who knowingly breach waste collection rules. Furthermore, education and advice alone, will not be sufficient in managing private waste collection services who are largely driven by cost considerations.

Therefore, the current Bylaw regulates the separation of waste from recyclable materials. However, this section of the Bylaw is not effective in that it is not monitored or enforced due to the lack of an implementation plan and allocated resources.

5.1.4 Government proposal to increase Waste Disposal Levy

The Waste Disposal Levy (Levy) is a key incentive for diverting waste away from landfill to recycling and composting. The levy provides additional revenue for local authorities to implement their WMMPs. Central government is implementing annual incremental increases of the municipal landfill levy from the current $10 per tonne to $60 per tonne by 2024. The levy is to be expanded to include additional landfill types such as construction and demolition fills. Council staff estimate that when fully implemented, the new levy could increase the cost of the weekly kerbside rubbish bag by about $1.30.

Table 1: Planned changes to national waste disposal levy^{^[2]}

LANDFILL CLASS	1 JULY 2021	1 JULY 2022	1 JULY 2023	1 JULY 2024
Municipal landfill (class 1)	$20	$30	$50	$60
Construction and demolition fill (class 2)		$20	$20	$30
Managed fill (class 3)			$10	$10
Controlled fill (class 4)			$10	$10

The revenue received from the Levy must be allocated to waste minimisation initiatives such as upgrading or improving recycling systems and education programmes. The government still needs to confirm the investment plan to allocate waste levy funds. Changes in allocation require an amendment of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008. Consultation on the amendments to the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 is expected to begin in 2021. However, additional revenue from the Levy increase, may become available to territorial authorities as early as 2022.

5.1.5 Standardisation of kerbside rubbish collections

A WasteMINZ (May 2020)^{^[3]} report reviewed kerbside rubbish collections around New Zealand. Central Government is currently developing a strategic direction for kerbside collections based on the four key recommendations of the report, which are:

1. Standardise materials to be collected in domestic kerbside recycling collections across the country, and how they should be presented, to increase consistency, reduce confusion for householders and reduce contamination

2. Incentivise local authorities to collect food waste for composting to reduce kerbside residual rubbish to landfill

3. Incentivise local authorities to collect glass separately to other recyclable materials to improve the quality of all materials accepted in kerbside recycling

4. Provide best practice recommendations for food waste, recycling, and residual rubbish collections to increase consistency across the country.

Currently there is wide variance between districts as to what is collected by kerbside waste collections. For example, most kerbside recycling collections allow the collection of plastics 1 and 2 although some also collect 3, 4, 6 and 7 plastics. Although it is becoming increasingly difficult to find facilities who can recycle plastics 3-7, therefore most councils are stopping the collection of plastics 3-7. Some districts require recycling to be separated at kerbside i.e. separate wheelie bins / crates for glass, plastics, and cardboard / paper, and some districts allow co-mingling of recycling at kerbside i.e. all recycling in one container, which is later sorted at a facility.

Separation at kerbside encourages less contamination of recycling. Further to this, districts which collect fewer recycling materials have increased contamination as consumers are more likely to ‘wishcycle’ (placing items in recycling in the hope that they can be recycled). A recent national survey identified that the main motivational barrier to recycling was confusion as to what can and cannot be recycled (51% of respondents).

Some districts separate the collection of organic waste (food scraps and green waste). It is estimated that, in New Zealand, 50% of household waste is organic waste. Organic waste is responsible for a significant proportion of methane emissions from landfills. The separate collection of food scraps increases householder awareness of food waste, helping to reduce the amount of edible food wasted. Reducing food waste supports household economies and reduces climate emissions.

The aim of the strategic direction is to provide a strong signal to territorial authorities to move towards improved kerbside collections. A ten-year road map for improving kerbside collections is due mid-2021. Standardising kerbside collections may require an amendment to the Bylaw in that the Bylaw currently only specifies the separation of refuse and recyclables (in general).

5.1.6 Further upcoming government proposals regarding waste minimisation

Rethinking plastics
Central Government is currently consulting on two initiatives to remove hard to recycle plastics from our environment. The first initiative is to phase out unrecyclable plastic such as PVC and polystyrene food and beverage packaging by 2025. The second initiative is to continue the process of phasing out single use plastics. For example, single use plastics bags were prohibited from 2019. Other single use plastics which will potentially be phased out include plastic straws, single use plastic cups and lids, plastic cotton buds, plastic cutlery, and plastic drink stirrers.

Container return scheme (CRS)
An estimated 2.3 billion glass, plastic, aluminium, paperboard and other single use drink containers are consumed each year in New Zealand. CRS can encourage recycling and help to reduce litter in the environment. A CRS requires the consumer to pay a deposit on a beverage container at purchase. The deposit is refunded when the empty container is returned to a designated drop-off point.

Central government is investigating the feasibility of implementing a CRS for beverage containers. The investigation is considering the potential management systems, operating costs, and types of containers to be included i.e. plastic, glass, aluminium. The investigation report is due to cabinet at the end of 2020.

If implemented, a CRS is expected to impact the amount and composition of beverage containers collected at kerbside. Any changes to kerbside collection systems need to consider some flexibility to incorporate changes in quantities of beverage containers set out at kerbside that could result from the implementation of a CRS.

Proposed National Environmental Standard for the Outdoor Storage of Tyres^{^[4]}
Outdoor tyre storage can pose risks to the environment, and human health, particularly when stored in large volumes and/or located within or near sensitive receiving environments. The main risks associated with outdoor tyre storage relate to fire, discharge of contaminants, pests, financial liability and visual amenity impacts. The storage of tyres can currently be controlled through the Resource Management Act and bylaws made under the Local Government Act.

Cabinet is to decide on the draft National Environmental Standard for the Outdoor Storage of Tyres. If approved the new regulations will come into force in 2021 and the storage of tyres will be controlled by Northland Regional Council.

5.2 Protecting public health and safety, and avoiding nuisances

5.2.1 Health nuisance

Section 29 of the Health Act 1956 specifies a range of behaviours and conditions that are nuisances, in particular the following clauses are applicable to potential solid waste issues:

b) where any accumulation or deposit is in such a state or is so situated as to be offensive or likely to be injurious to health

c) where any premises, including any accumulation or deposit thereon, are in such a state as to harbour or to be likely to harbour rats or other vermin

q) where there exists on any land or premises any condition giving rise or capable of giving rise to the breeding of flies or mosquitoes or suitable for the breeding of other insects, or of mites or ticks, which are capable of causing or transmitting disease

RFS records show that there are incidents where people are concerned about rubbish accumulating on neighbouring properties leading to a health nuisance by attracting pests, and an odour nuisance.

A bylaw remains the most appropriate regulatory tool for controlling the accumulation of waste that may lead to a health nuisance.

5.2.2 Health and safety of kerbside collections

The collection and transportation of waste can lead to potential health and safety, and nuisance issues. The Bylaw regulates certain components of the collection and transportation of waste to minimise the risk. For example:

· Placement of containers / bags ensures

o pedestrian safety

o more efficient waste management service – reducing traffic obstruction

o reduced nuisance caused by placement i.e. not blocking driveways etc

· Approved containers / bags

o ensure containers are not too big or too heavy for waste collector staff

· Controlling collection times ensures

o traffic is not blocked during rush hour,

o noise from collections is not at inappropriate times

· Controlling types of rubbish collected ensures waste collectors, the public and the environment, are not exposed to hazardous and/or infectious waste.

Kerbside collections are managed by private waste collection services. This report has not investigated the health and safety records of the private waste collection services. RFS records show only one reported health and safety issue regarding kerbside collections in which rubbish from a destroyed rubbish bag was strewn across the footpath and was a potential tripping hazard for a blind resident.

RFS records show there are incidents in which rubbish bags are deposited on the kerbside or at approved collection points at inappropriate times (too early, too late etc) and are destroyed by rats, birds, or roaming dogs. RFS records show that some people in the community are concerned the approved collection points attract rats to the area.

The current Bylaw Control 1 – Containers regulates the times in which approved containers can be placed on the kerbside for collection. However, due to lack of Council resources, this is not actively monitored and responds reactively to complaints. Waste collection services are responsible for clearing all pre-paid kerbside collection bags. Bags that are placed at incorrect times are searched for potential evidence by the waste collection service in order to issue an infringement by Council staff.

In line with the Local Government Act 2002 section 145(b), and the Health Act 1956 sections 23(e) and s64(1)(a), a bylaw remains the most appropriate regulatory tool for controlling the deposition of dangerous, hazardous and infectious substances within the waste stream. However, community education advocating best practice waste management behaviour is required in order for the bylaw to be effective.

5.3 Control of litter

Litter and littering in general are regulated by the Litter Act 1979. However, the current Bylaw specifically regulates litter with regards to controlling kerbside rubbish collections.

The causes of illegal dumping are complex. Barriers to disposing of rubbish either via kerbside collections or at a transfer station include but are not limited to:

· Financial constraints

· Transport access to transfer stations when kerbside collections are unavailable

· Lack of understanding to the damage caused by illegal dumping.

Further regulation of illegal dumping will not address the problem.

In the past, litter along the side of Council-controlled roads has been managed by community volunteers. However, community volunteers are now required to implement a traffic management plan to address health and safety concerns. These plans are considered a barrier for community groups and the number of litter control events has significantly reduced. The Council has not allocated resources for roadside litter control.

5.3.1 Control of waste generated by events

Community events such as sports events, markets, festivals etc can overwhelm existing public rubbish bins and significantly increase litter, creating a public nuisance. The current Bylaw requires all event holders to have an approved waste management and minimisation plan to address waste minimisation and prevent the accumulation of litter in a public place. The Bylaw is only applicable to events held on council-controlled land.

The Bylaw has been effective in increasing the amount of material diverted from landfill and reducing the amount of litter during and post-events.

A bylaw remains the most appropriate regulatory tool for controlling waste management and minimisation at events. However, community education advocating best practice waste management behaviour is required in order for the bylaw to be effective.

5.3.2 Control of waste receptacles in a public place

The current Bylaw controls the use of non-licensed or non-approved waste receptacles in a public place i.e., non-prepaid black bags placed out for kerbside collection, which amounts to littering or illegal dumping.

Non-licensed or non-approved waste receptacles in a public place are searched for potential evidence by Council staff in order to issue an infringement.

A bylaw remains the most appropriate regulatory tool for controlling the use of non-licensed or non-approved waste receptacles in a public place. However, community education advocating best practice waste management behaviour is required in order for the bylaw to be effective.

5.4 Control of waste generated by multi-unit developments

At present, there is not many multi-unit residential properties in the Far North, although it is

expected that over time more units will be built, particularly in coastal holiday areas. There is a need to

ensure that adequate provisions are made for waste services at these premises, both at design stage and operationally once the units are occupied.

Broadly, a multi-unit development refers to a property comprising two or more separately occupied household/residential units, whether in the same building or in separate buildings, and held

either in common ownership or in separate ownership located on the one site.

Whilst the Building Code (Clause G15 Solid Waste) stipulates that such “buildings shall be provided with space and facilities for the collection, and safe hygienic holding prior to disposal, of solid waste arising from the intended use of the buildings”, this clause does not apply to multi-unit dwellings if there is an independent access, or if there is a private open space at the ground level.

Building Code provisions are therefore considered inadequate for amenity protection, and for accommodating the waste management needs of residents, for the following reasons:

· Where a development is exempt from Clause G15:

o The provision of an independent site access does not guarantee that multi-unit developments are designed with sufficient on-site waste and recycling storage areas. Furthermore, existing bylaw provisions prohibit the storage of waste and recycling material within a public place.

o The provision of a private open space at the ground level does not guarantee that this open space is available or accessible for waste storage or servicing needs.

· Where Clause G15 is deemed applicable to a development:

o It does not specify a minimum site size for on-site waste and recycling storage. It is, however, noted that Building Code provision G15/AS1 provides detail of a possible ‘acceptable solution’ for waste storage, which when complied with, will be deemed acceptable in terms of Building Code compliance.

6 Potential impacts on Bylaw development

6.1 S17a review

The previous Roadside Rubbish and Recycling report presented to Council in December 2020 indicated a full S17A Service Delivery Review is planned in 2021, followed by a public tender for the solid waste services. The current north and south solid waste contracts expire on 30 September 2022.

Changes in the service delivery of solid waste, i.e., moving to a rates funded system may require an amendment to the Bylaw.

6.2 Potential to have regional consistency

To reduce confusion amongst communities, 19 territorial authorities across the Waikato / Bay of Plenty regions have successfully subscribed to a consistent solid waste bylaw and waste management and minimisation plan.

The Whangarei District Council (WDC) Solid Waste Management Bylaw 2013 is due for review in 2023. However, WDC will most likely review their bylaw ahead of schedule in response to the forthcoming central government recommendations. Kaipara District Council is looking to separate out certain components of their consolidated bylaw and is planning to make a new solid waste bylaw in the next couple of years.

Therefore, there is potential to create a regionally consistent solid waste bylaw for the Northland Region. Initial discussions have indicated that a regionally consistent bylaw could align with either the Waikato / Bay of Plenty bylaw or the newly made Wellington City Solid Waste Bylaw. The current Bylaw is already consistent with the Waikato / Bay of Plenty bylaw. There are some consistencies between the current bylaw and the Wellington City bylaw, although the Wellington City bylaw contains components that are not justified for FNDC’s more rural setting.

6.3 Waste management and minimisation plan

Under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, the waste management and minimisation plan must be reviewed every six years. Therefore, the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2017 – 2023^{^[5]} is due for review by 2023.

As per section 43 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, a waste management and minimisation plan must provide for the following:^{^[6]}

a) objectives and policies for achieving effective and efficient waste management and minimisation within the territorial authority’s district:

b) methods for achieving effective and efficient waste management and minimisation within the territorial authority’s district, including—

i. collection, recovery, recycling, treatment, and disposal services for the district to meet its current and future waste management and minimisation needs (whether provided by the territorial authority or otherwise); and

ii. any waste management and minimisation facilities provided, or to be provided, by the territorial authority; and

iii. any waste management and minimisation activities, including any educational or public awareness activities, provided, or to be provided, by the territorial authority:

As per section 56 of the Waste Management Act 2008, a bylaw must be consistent with the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

Therefore, amendments to the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan may require amendments to the Bylaw.

7 Discussion

7.1 Is a bylaw still the most appropriate way to address the regulation of solid waste in the Far North District?

The review has identified that a bylaw is still the most appropriate way to address the following solid waste problems:

· To meet the Council’s legal requirements under the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, specifically

o minimising recyclables in the landfill waste stream

o gathering accurate data for waste planning

· Protecting public health and safety, and avoiding nuisances including

o control of hazardous wastes

· Control of litter including

o control of waste generated by events

o control of waste receptacles in a public place

· Control of waste generated by multi-unit developments

7.2 Is the current bylaw effective?

The current Bylaw has been effective in regulating the following:

· gathering accurate data for waste planning

· protecting public health and safety, and avoiding nuisances

· control of hazardous wastes

· control of waste generated by events

· control of waste receptacles in a public place

· control of waste generated by multi-unit developments

Therefore, the Bylaw is still the most appropriate way of addressing those problems with respect to solid waste.

However, community education advocating best practice waste management behaviour is required in order for the bylaw to be effective.

Although, the Bylaw has been in place for five years without any apparent problems, the components of the Bylaw referring to minimising recyclables in the landfill waste stream are not effective.

Due to not allocating sufficient resources the components of the Bylaw that refer to waste separation are not enforced and therefore the Bylaw is not effective in minimising recyclables in the landfill waste stream. Either the Bylaw needs to be amended and the components referring to waste separation removed or this section of the Bylaw needs to be actively monitored and enforced.

However, given that central government is considering standardising kerbside collections, including organic collections, the Bylaw may need to be amended once the Government proposals are finalised to allow for a range of waste types collected at kerbside. Therefore, it may be imprudent to amend the Bylaw as there is a risk that Central Government will require changes to kerbside collections and the Bylaw will need to be amended again.

Both Whangarei District Council and Kaipara District Councils will be reviewing their solid waste related bylaws after the release of the finalised central government proposals. Therefore, there is an opportunity to have regional consistent solid waste bylaws. Further to this the Council is undertaking a S17a review for solid waste services, and the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan is due for review by 2023.

An increase in resources to actively monitor and enforce solid waste regulation in the Far North District may help to not only encourage adherence to the current Bylaw but also reduce the problem with illegal dumping. Illegal dumping is a complex problem and further investigation as to potential council interventions is required.

Community education advocating best practice waste management behaviour remains to be required in order for the bylaw to be effective. The upcoming increases to the Waste Levy may provide extra resources for more effective education.

8 Conclusion

Bylaw controls, in conjunction with effective education, remain a necessary regulatory mechanism for efficient and effective waste minimisation operations across the Far North District. However, the problem of ineffective regulation regarding the separation of waste from recyclables caused by non-existent monitoring and enforcement will need to be addressed.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 April 2021

6.2 Hihi Wastewater Treatment Plant Capital Works Business Case

File Number: A3127943

Author: Mary Moore, Business Case Specialist

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

Te Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To present the detailed business case for the replacement of the Hihi Wastewater Treatment Plant and progress the planning of this capital works by approving the advancement of the preferred option identified, Option 3 - Membrane Bio Reactor, to detailed design.

Te WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

Replacement of the Hihi Wastewater Treatment Plant has been the subject of investigation, discussion, and consultation without success for the last 20 years. The plant is currently in such poor condition that it is at risk of complete failure, with periodic breaches of consent conditions occurring and the risk of injury to operators is high. The plant is unable to meet seasonal demand and replacement is now the only option due to asset conditions beyond repair.

This project is required to meet Council’s strategic priority - Affordable core infrastructure - and Community Outcome - Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable.

The detailed business case demonstrates a similar capital cost for Options 2 – Activated Sludge Plant (ASP) and 3 – Membrane Bio Reactor (MBR) with a slightly higher Whole of Life cost for MBR. However, after factoring in quality and time. MBR is the preferred option as it will deliver the required level of service. This compares to ASP which will deliver the required level of service most of the time.

The budget included in the Long-Term Plan 2018-2028 is insufficient to undertake the minimum required remedial works without replacing the treatment plant. Revised budget forecasts are currently included in Years 1 and 2 of the proposed Long-Term Plan 2021-2031. Additional budget may be required in Year 3, but this would be quantified in detailed design.

The Long-Term Plan 2021-2031 public consultation phase provides the opportunity for the district to answer the following questions:

- Do we need it?

- Is it the timing correct?

- Is the budget provision appropriate?

As affordability and the impact on rates continues to be a critical constraint in reaching an acceptable solution, further community consultation will provide them the opportunity to agree:

- Are the options relevant?

- Is the preferred option likely to achieve the best outcomes?

- Does the preferred option represent value for money?

Given the advanced deterioration of the plant, implementation of an acceptable solution is now regarded as a matter of urgency in order to avoid this community completely losing this service. While affordability continues to impede efforts to resolve the situation, it is acknowledged that this remains a critical issue for this community due to application of the current funding model.

This report was presented to the Infrastructure Committee at their meeting on 24 March 2021. The Infrastructure Committee makes the following recommendation to Council.

ngĀ tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council:

a) approves the detailed business case preferred Option 3 – Membrane Bio Reactor, to be located on the existing Hihi Wastewater Treatment Plant site, to be advanced to detailed design and community consultation

b) notes the potential cost of the preferred option and the impact upon rates.

1) te TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

The small coastal township of Hihi is located within the Doubtless Bay area of the Te Hiku ward, a short distant across the harbour from the Mangonui township. A popular retirement and holiday spot, Hihi’s residential population numbers 200 during the winter months, growing to 400 during summer and peaking during the Christmas holiday period (24 Dec – 7 Jan) to 600+. All properties are served by roof tank water supply, so water usage is low for the catchment and connectors to the wastewater scheme include a campground operation.

Originally a temporary installation constructed circa 1975, the Hihi Wastewater Treatment Plant was designed using a ‘least expense’ approach with capacity to meet the needs of approximately 200 people. The treatment plant is located within the residential area with discharge of treated water to the harbour is via a wetlands system located a short distance outside of town. The consent for the plant expires in November 2022.

From early 2001, Council records have indicated the plant is structurally at the end of its life and unsafe. If it is not replaced the risks of injury to onsite personnel and of catastrophic failure is high. Periodic breaches of consent conditions are occurring due to insufficient flow and load treatment capacity to meet seasonal and peak population demand.

Relocation of the plant outside the residential area (adjacent to the wetlands) using the MBR option was investigated and widely supported by the community (79%) but was eventually (2011) discounted as viable on a cost/benefit basis.

In March 2019 a Conceptual Design Options report was prepared by WSP Opus. The options considered were:

- Conventional Activated Sludge

- Fixed Film Treatment

- Membrane Bioreactor (MBR)

- Other (Low energy treatment, Storm storage, relocation of treatment plant, and other discharge location)

The first three options were compared with the recommendation being to progress the MBR option for the purpose of setting a project budget. A peer review was also commissioned which raised several concerns about the disadvantages of the MBR option and further investigation was undertaken.

A structural condition assessment of the treatment plant was undertaken in the presence of the maintenance operator during October/November 2019 to confirm previously observed issues (2014) and assess if any further damage had occurred. While the assessment confirmed multiple issues and recommended substantial remedial works, the overall condition of the plant remained poor and at risk of failure.

In November 2019 an indicative business case highlighted several issues requiring resolution to enable a detailed business case to be completed. This prompted a Business Risk Assessment Workshop (Dec 2019) followed by an Options Workshop (Jan 2020). Both workshops were attended by FNDC (asset management & planning and project delivery), Far North Waters & Broadspectrum (operations & maintenance), as well as external engineering consultants.

The Options Workshop considered a long list of options:

Option 1 - Do minimum (refurbish aeration tank only)

Option 2 - Activated Sludge Plant (ASP)

Option 3 - Pump to Mangonui

Option 4 - Moving Bed Bioreactor

Option 5 - Membrane Bioreactor

From this long list, the following short list was determined with Option 3 – MBR identified as the preferred option based on estimated costings v. benefits:

Option 1 - Do minimum (tank refurbishment)

Option 2 - Activated Sludge Plant (ASP)

Option 3 - Membrane Bioreactor Plant (MBR)

The March 2020 Hihi Options Review report summarises these workshops and the Business Risk Assessment Workshop report (Appendix F) provides a comprehensive assessment of the issues and the associated risks.

The final steps to completing the detailed business case was to peer review the estimated costings and include a Whole of Life (WOL) analysis and a Rating Impact comparison.

Note: Attachments to this report have been abridged to those principal reports referenced in the Detailed Business Case. All other reports and appendices are available upon request.

2) Te matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

The detailed business case (Attachment 1) considers the following three options using a Whole of Life approach:

Option 1 - Do Nothing

Option 2 - Activated Sludge Plant (ASP)

Option 3 - Membrane Bioreactor Plant (MBR)

The outcome of this approach using the Options Workshop cost estimates reveals Option 3 - MBR as the recommended option as summarised below.

Option 1 - Do Nothing

This option will not address the existing problems and this plant is not expected to meet future consent requirements once the consent is replaced in 2022.

The significant risks of this option include the increasing risk of injury to operators and the catastrophic failure of the plant leaving the community with no wastewater treatment and negative environmental consequences, the consequential needs to manually dispose of waste daily and a high risk of enforcement action being taken against Council.

Emergency measures (24/7) will be required to provide interim services to the community until such time as a replacement plant is commissioned.

This option is not recommended.

Option 2 - Activated Sludge Plant (ASP)

A conventional solution known to operators, will achieve likely consent conditions for renewal in 2022, benefit the environment through improved effluent quality, be designed for future growth and peak loads and enable efficient operating and asset maintenance.

Performance is expected to drop during seasonal increases in load, particularly on ammonia and suspended solids, the overall rating of an ASP for this community is that it will deliver required levels of service most of the time.

Additional known risks associated with the site and process limitations will require ongoing monitoring and active management. The decommissioning and installation phase will also require close management to minimise plant downtime and control of these costs. Until a detailed design is completed it cannot be confirmed that this type of plant will fit or allow construction within the allowable footprint and additional funding may be required to accommodate this.

As ASPs are more susceptible to variable flows, repairs to the network are considered essential to the success of this project to reduce/eliminate irregular influx from stormwater.

Wetlands - the long-term deferral of maintenance and the impact of the most recent weather events indicates both the connective pipe network and wetlands need remedial work. The condition of the rising main between the treatment plant and the wetlands is currently unknown but may well require renewal.

While the condition of the wetlands does not directly impact the operation of the treatment plant and it is not an interdependency for replacement of the treatment plant, the business case includes this work is for transparency and completeness.

This option is not recommended.

Option 3 - Membrane Bio Reactor (MBR)

This option will ensure levels of service are maintained, will achieve likely future consent requirements, can be designed for future growth and peak loads (no drop in performance) and the need for the wetlands may be eliminated. Staged construction could minimise plant downtime and the plant’s modular nature may enable relocation. The ability of an MBR to cope with seasonal loads may mean that the repair work to the network (required by ASP) is not imperative for the success of the treatment plant replacement.

MBR is a new system for FNDC and FNW Alliance which introduces the risk of recruitment and retention of suitably trained personnel as well as on-going operational costs. Membranes require a high level of maintenance and regular replacement (5-10 years) to ensure the plant operates efficiently and, being a more technical plant to manage, there will be a need for highly trained personnel including an on-site full-time operator. Increased energy usage and the need for regular chemical cleaning also contribute to higher running costs.

The slightly higher capital and Whole of Life costs of an MBR system returns better outcomes through the plant delivering a very high quality of effluent regardless of changes in load and is not susceptible to poor settlement due to Nocardia. These outcomes are particularly desirable for this community given the plant’s location within the residential area and coastal proximity. A shorter construction timeframe also represents a desirable outcome for both the community and Council.

While there is the possibility of the MBR not requiring the wetlands, the existing wetlands would require decommissioning to ensure it did not pose an on-going environmental risk. The business case includes this work is for transparency and completeness.

Community consultation will be required to ensure the relevant options have been considered, and whether the preferred option will result in the best outcomes and represents value for money.

This option is recommended.

Other alternative options that could be considered to mitigate the overall cost of the project would include amendments to District Plan zoning to increase the number of potential residential properties connected or moving to individual on-site disposal. Both of these alternative options would have challenges, particularly in relation to climate change and sea level rise. Staff have not undertaken any diligence on these options.

Te Take Tūtohunga / Reason for the recommendation

The detailed business case recommends Option 3 – MBR as the preferred option to achieve the Community Outcome and required levels of service based on an overall analysis of quality, time and whole of life cost analysis.

3) NgĀ PĀnga PŪtea me ngĀ wĀhanga tahua / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

Due to the age and low-cost nature of the original plant, combined with a reactive maintenance approach, replacement of the plant will require a significant level of “new” capital investment.

The Long-Term Plan 2018-2028 includes a budget of $1.89m for refurbishment of the treatment plant which was scheduled for delivery in FY 2019 - 2020.

Considerable effort has been invested since 2018 in specifying requirements and identifying possible options through structural assessments, design options, community consultation, and various stakeholder workshops to assess business risk and options. All of this, including the detailed business case, demonstrates current budget provision as inadequate, with timely solutions expected to cost upwards of $6m.

The draft Long-Term Plan 2021-2031 currently has a budget provision of $6m for the capital replacement of the treatment plant which is scheduled for delivery in FY 2022 and 2023. The detailed business case indicates a budgetary requirement of $6.3m, including network renewal, excluding wetlands works to be funded through Sludge Management budgets.

These costings will be updated as part of the detailed design phase.

The attached detailed business case estimates the capital costs of each of the three options as follows (these figures exclude contingency and professional fees):

Option 1 – Unknown

The cost of emergency measures required in the event of failure will be a full operational cost and as this is expected to be a 24/7 service for which the daily cost is estimated at $15k - $20k. This cost would continue until such time as a new plant is commissioned which is could take anywhere from 12 – 24 months for which the capital cost would be like Options 2 or 3.

If successfully prosecuted, the Court may impose a fine which the RMA specifies a maximum fine of $300k for a natural person and $600k for any other person.

Option 2 - $6,215,951

Option 3 - $6,970,973 (including $600k for network repairs)

Council’s approach to funding the provision and availability of wastewater services is that each scheme will pay its own interest and depreciation costs using a separate targeted capital rate, whereas operating costs are funded based on a districtwide operating rate.

The above costs result in a new capital rate per SUIP (connection) of $1,458.59 (Option 2 – ASP) and $1,851.01 or $1,677.48 (Option 3 including and excluding network repairs respectively). The capital rate is on-going but does not commence until the financial year after the project is completed which is forecast as November 2023. These new rate value represents an increase of $1,000 - $1,400 per SUIP.

Operating costs

The total direct operating cost of the existing treatment plant increased 62% from 2018 ($112k) to 2020 ($183k). Current year direct operating costs are already tracking towards a 20% increase ($220k) on the 2020 FY. The additional costs reflect the additional input required by the plant’s operator to keep the plant functioning.

No additional operational rate impact has been calculated as the detailed business case whole of life analysis has used operational costs for both options like the actual total direct operating costs. The detailed design will provide accurate operating costs that will be used to better inform the impact on the on-going operational rate but at this point

While the impact of Options 2 and 3 on the Hihi community’s rates is significant this must be weighed up against the unknown cost of ‘Do Nothing’.

ngĀ Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Capital Works Business Case Hihi Wastewater Treatment Plant - A3068094 (under separate cover)

2. Indicative Business Case - A3071541 (under separate cover)

3. Indicative Business Case - Appendix A - Item 14 - A3071878 (under separate cover)

4. Hihi WWTP Activated Sludge Reactor - Report Only - A3071492 (under separate cover)

5. Hihi Options Review - A2894649 (under separate cover)

6. Hihi Options Review - Appendix F - Business Risk Assessment Workshop Report December 2019 - A3071520 (under separate cover)

7. Hihi Options Review - Appendix G - Minutes of Option Workshop January 2020 - A3071523 (under separate cover)

8. Hoskin Civil QS Report August 2020 - A3071535 (under separate cover)

Te Hōtaka Take Ōkawa / 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.

He Take Ōkawa / Compliance requirement	Te Aromatawai Kaimahi / 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 matter is of high significance as the proposal will generate considerable community interest and the should the plant fail the prospect of adverse national publicity is high.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The relevant community outcome is: ‘Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable’.
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 issue has specific relevance to the Hihi community. The Community Board’s views have not been sought as the issue relates to the provision of core infrastructure which is outside the scope of the Community Board.
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 will be included as part of the community consultation process with particular regard to environmental impacts.
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).	Hihi community, ratepayers and local iwi/hapu will be included in the community consultation process.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	Financial provision included within the LTP 2018-2028 has been identified as insufficient. Revised financial provision of $6m has been included in the draft LTP 2021-2031 for delivery of the capital works in financial years 2022 and 2023. Final costings would be determined in the detailed design phase. The rating impact of this is therefore contained within the rates movements of the LTP 21-31.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 April 2021

6.3 Northland Transportation Alliance (NTA) - Resourcing Request - Supporting Delivery of 2021/24 Long Term Plan Transport Programmes

File Number: A3112133

Author: Calvin Thomas, Northland Transport Alliance Manager

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

Te Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

The purpose of this paper is to support a request for three additional Far North District Council (FNDC) transportation full time employee (FTE) positions. These positions are a subset of a total of nine positions identified as required to support the delivery of the 2021/24 District Council Transport programmes across the region.

Te WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· The Northland Transport Agency (NTA) provides transportation services across the Far North and the remainder of Northland

· The NTA comprises the three constituent District Councils, Northland Regional Council and Waka Kotahi (NZTA)

· Staff are seconded into the NTA from the constituent Council’s

· FNDC has no roading staff outside of the NTA

· Due to the growth in workload due to increasing transportation budgets, the NTA are now seeking approval to increase the number of staff to reduce the engagement of external consultants

· The total growth proposed for the NTA is nine FTE; FNDC contribution being three FTE

· This proposal has no direct implication on FNDC staffing budgets; the cost being met through Waka Kotahi subsidy and work budgets

· Total FNDC staff numbers will increase from 383 FTE to 386 FTE because of this proposal

· Whangarei and Kaipara District Councils have approved the growth in FTE

ngĀ tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council:

a) notes the significant increase in District and Regional Transportation budgets since the beginning of the 2018/21 Long Term Plan cycle.

b) notes the additional employment related costs incurred through the additional FTE’s is offset through job costed recoveries and does not result in any additional increase to proposed transportation budgets within the 2021/24 LTP.

c) notes the proposal acknowledges and accounts for indicated risk to available National Land Transport Fund Funding.

d) approves the recruitment of three (3) additional FTE’s to be employed by FNDC as a component of the total nine (9) FTE’s to be recruited into the Northland Transportation Alliance to support delivery of the 2021/24 Northland Council’s Transportation programme.

1) te TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

1.1 NTA Resourcing Proposal

In February 2021 the Northland Transportation Alliance Leadership Group were provided a paper (Attachment 1) requesting the approval of a total of the nine (9) new FTE positions below to support the NTA’s delivery of the Region’s 2021/24 LTP transportation programmes.

Department	Position	Hiring Council
Asset Strategy & Management	Asset Manager	WDC
Asset Strategy & Management	Graduate Asset Engineer	FNDC
Road Safety & Traffic Engineering	Senior Development Engineer, Transportation	WDC
Road Safety & Traffic Engineering	RSAP Program Manager	FNDC
Road Safety & Traffic Engineering	Graduate Transportation Engineer	FNDC
Maintenance & Operations	Corridor Access Request (CAR) Specialist	FNDC
Maintenance & Operations	Regional Field Compliance Assessor	WDC
Maintenance & Operations	Streetlighting Services Manager	KDC
Business Performance	Customer Services Lead	WDC

Of the nine Regional positions above, three are direct replacements for existing full-time equivalent resources presently covered through engagement of consultants.

Following consultation with Council P&C Managers on the proposal, the following three positions were determined to best align with FNDC as the hiring Council:

· Graduate Asset Engineer – Although a regional role, it is intended this role will primarily support the FNDC Asset Manager with asset management and data for FNDC and will be based in the Far North area. None of the three current NTA Graduates cadets are FNDC employed.

· Senior Development Engineer – New role with specific funding applied under Road to Zero funding in Asset Management Plan (AMP). To provide Council with oversight and direction of the delivery of Road Safety Programmes, of which the Far North holds the most significant budget of those in Northland.

· CAR Specialist – Although regional role, required to support the increasing number of Corridor Access Requests and associated compliance requirements, this FNDC focussed position will provide a level of succession planning for existing FNDC CAR Specialist who has indicated his intent to retire in the near future.

Due to the resourcing model of the NTA the proposal relies on acceptance and approval from the three NTA partner District Councils; approvals have already been received from both Kaipara and Whangarei Chief Executives for their allocated positions.

1.2 Associated increasing Regional Transportation budgets

As demonstrated in the table below, in the period since year one of the current LTP (2018/19), base council transportation budgets have increased by approximately 50%. To date this progressive volume increase has been addressed through a combination of external consultant engagement and work prioritization. However, this is seen as a short-term solution and not sustainable given the projected lift in Council’s Transportation budgets indicated in draft 2021/31 LTP’s.

The table above excludes historic or on-going work volumes associated with external funding where it is anticipated that resources to deliver this work will continue to be supplemented using consultant resources.

2) Te matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

2.1 Choice and distribution of hiring Council

The NTA model requires each seconded FTE to be employed by a designated home Council. Where most of the anticipated work is associated with a single Council it is desirable for that Council to be the hiring Council, whereas if the role is of either a specialist technical or regional nature the specific hiring Council is determined through a combination of best fit (duties and location) and maintaining a level of employment balance across Councils.

2.2 FTE staff versus engagement of consultants

Where vacancies exist or peak work-loads dictate, consultants are engaged to fill resource gaps, manage work-load peaks or provide specialist services where the technical skill does not exist within the organisation (i.e. bridge design).

The current proposal looks to address the current heavy reliance on consultant resources in the areas of Asset Management and Development Engineering, two areas of work deemed to be core business for any Transportation business unit. Through proceeding with this proposal there is an associated downstream impact of freeing up existing staff resources who are presently overseeing and managing consultant workloads to concentrate on and complete their primary duties.

Should the proposal not be approved, these routine day-to-day tasks will continue to be required to be completed by consultant resources noting that consultancy hourly rates are generally higher than the recovery rate cost of internal NTA seconded staff.

Te Take Tūtohunga / Reason for the recommendation

To obtain approval to increase the overall FNDC staff headcount seconded into the NTA by three FTE.

3) NgĀ PĀnga PŪtea me ngĀ wĀhanga tahua / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

3.1 Recovery of NTA seconded staff costs

Through the NTA staffing model, the direct and overhead costs for staff are recovered through each hour worked being costed directly to an existing transportation budget item. This methodology effectively treats each NTA employee as a consultant resource with each productive hour booked to an individual job, irrespective of which council employees the person or is funding the associated work.

Recovery rates are calculated for each position to ensure all associated costs are fully recovered throughout the year, with any additional FTE cost attracting equivalent recoveries resulting in a net zero impact.

Through booking each hour to a specific transportation job the labour cost then attracts Financial Assistance Rate (FAR) subsidy (current rate of 67%, increasing to 69% for 2021/24).

This methodology allows specialist NTA staff to be assigned to work across Councils as required, with the cost of the associated work being incurred by the Council the work is for, and the resulting recovery for the staff time credited back to the employing Council to offset the employment costs.

At present approximately 20% of District Council work across the region is undertaken by an employee employed by one of the other District Councils.

3.2 Impact on transportation budgets

Due to the recovery rate methodology used within the NTA for tracking and assigning labour costs, all staff costs associated with delivering transportation activities are booked to, and covered by, Council’s transportation budgets.

As demonstrated on the next table, due to the increasing transportation budgets, the proposed increase in direct employee numbers still results in a reduction in the percentage of this cost versus overall transport budgets compared with 2018/19, primarily as a result of increasing organisational efficiencies and a greater spread of the recovery of fixed overheads.

*2021/22 FTE numbers exclude the three direct consultant replacement positions as these costs were in addition to staff costs incurred in previous years

3.3 National Land Transport Funding (NLTF) risk on future budgets

Due to the current uncertainty of available NLTF funding for the 2021/24 period, the proposal assumes the resource levels required to maintain existing (2020/21) programmes as this has been indicated to be the likely minimum level of Maintenance, Operations and Renewals funding available.

Additionally, with the greatest funding risk related to Capital Works, the future resourcing proposal does not include any additional Capital Works delivery resourcing (Project Managers) with delivery of fluctuating volumes in this area to be managed through engagement of consultant resources as required, as has been the case to support recent delivery of the additional Central Government funded works across the region.

To provide assurance on the viability of the proposal, a comparison of the increased labour cost against the lower (-15%) 2019/20 budgets has been undertaken as provided in the table below showing that while the percentage of labour cost at 7.59% is greater than the full 2021/22 budget submission on the previous table it remains lower in comparison to 2018/19.

ngĀ Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. 2021 NTA Additional Resource Request - February NTALG - A3112186 ⇩

Te Hōtaka Take Ōkawa / 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.

He Take Ōkawa / Compliance requirement	Te Aromatawai Kaimahi / 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.	Not Applicable.
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.	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.	Not Applicable.
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).	Not Applicable.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	As discussed and outlined in the report.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 April 2021

6.4 Rates Arrears Policy

File Number: A3132825

Author: Margriet Veenstra, Manager - Transaction Services

Authoriser: Jaime Dyhrberg, General Manager - Corporate Services (Acting)

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

Council has arrears on General Title rate accounts of $6,363,707 (as at 28/02/2021). Collection processes have been established that involve using Law North and Council’s In-house Legal Services team to seek judgment through the District Court to secure the debt.

There are a range of debt recovery options that can be taken once judgment is received and it is important that there is a Policy on the actions to be taken and the circumstances in which each would apply.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· Council has arrears on General Title rate accounts of $6,363,707 (as at 28/02/2021).

· So far 21 cases have progressed to judgment in the district court with Law North for the rates arrears owed and costs awarded.

· Debt secured through judgment has a six-year limitation period as per the Limitation Act 2010, after which the debt becomes statute barred and must be written off.

· Law North provided a comprehensive memorandum with all the debt recovery options available to council.

· As there are various debt recovery options, it is important to have a policy to enable staff to determine suitable options in line with Council’s preferences.

· The Assurance, Risk and Finance Committee considered this report at their meeting on 12 February 2020 and made the following recommendation to Council.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council:

a) approve the enforcement options attached to the report be formalised into an operational policy under which next steps following a District Court judgement will be assessed.

b) agree that in broad terms, any arrears that relate to “bare land” sites will automatically progress straight to rating sale.

c) agree that all other cases will be measured against the policy options and reviewed on a case by case basis.

d) agree that the CFO and GM Corporate Services will review each case and approve the most appropriate course of action for collection of debt.

e) agree that any cases where the opinion of the CFO and GM Corporate Services is that a rating sale is the most appropriate course of action, that endorsement will be sought from Council.

f) agree that any actions taken will be reported back to the Assurance, Risk and Finance Committee as part of the quarterly Revenue Recovery report.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

From July 2019, a process has been undertaken with Law North to attempt to engage with the ratepayers who are in arrears and secure payment of debt. Unfortunately, 15 of these cases have resulted in applications to the District Court for judgment to secure the debt and to date a charging order has been registered against 11 properties.

Under the Limitation Act 2010, there is a limited period of six years, which starts after the debt becomes due and where, after the limitation period has expired, the creditor can no longer chase the debtor for the outstanding amount. The same applies to judgment debt which means the debt becomes statute barred and must be written off.

Additionally, although the debt at the time of filing for judgment has been secured, rates will continue to be charged and further debt will accumulate against the rate account for the property. Of the 19 cases, 5 property owners have since paid the debt and the rate accounts are paid up to date. For the remaining 14 the judgment debt and the rates charged since then are still unpaid.

There are various options available to council to collect payment of the secured debt and unpaid rates. A policy needs to be adopted to ensure a correct decision-making process is followed to avoid conflict as any council action or inaction, is always subject to judicial review and must be justified.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

The Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 allows Council to seek judgment to secure outstanding rates and then ultimately either lease or sell the property if the arrears are not paid within a specified timeframe. However, these are the last-resort type remedies if all other options have failed and Law North have provided a comprehensive memorandum with various options available to council which is attached to this report.

Each debt collection option should be considered for each individual case, while considering numerous factors including (but not limited to):

· the financial position of the debtor,

· the personal situation of the debtor,

· whether the debtor has tried to pay in the past, or ignored Council,

· whether the debtor is a company or a private individual,

· whether the land is a home or an investment

· the size of the debt.

Once these have been considered, a plan must be decided on and implemented at staff/management level, guided by policy agreed at Council level. The policy must be fair and reasonable to all involved and flexible to allow for exceptions when justified. Rating sales in a residential or family home context are a last resort and other enforcement options should be considered first. In a commercial or vacant lot context, rating sales can be used earlier on in the process. However, rating sales are both a lawful and justifiable collection method and Council should consider the ratepaying owners who ultimately carry the burden if rates are not recovered. The CFO has delegation to authorise a rating sale on behalf of Council, but as this is potentially an emotive action, endorsement will be obtained from Council prior to any action being taken.

District Court enforcement options s133 District Court Act 2016: Methods to enforce a judgment for payment of money in the District Court.

· Charging order over property

· Warrant to seize property / chattels

· Garnishee proceedings

· Attachment order against income

High Court enforcement options:

· Bankruptcy and liquidation

Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 enforcement option:

· Rating sale

District Court enforcement

Charging order over property (District Court Act 2016 s.184)

It is common process for mortgagees to register a charging order against a property.

Council may obtain a charging order against the property which prevents the debtor from selling the property until the debtor pays the judgment as the title of the land cannot be transferred to the new owner. Costs for the charging order are added to the judgment debt.

Although there is a standard condition and undertaking in the NZ sale and purchase agreements for rates to be paid upon the sale of a property, it is not a requirement and this clause can be removed. Informal and family sales commonly result in unpaid rates. It is also a legal requirement for Council to remove the secured debt balance from the property rate account and move to a separate account in the debtor’s name. There is a probability for a rates certificate to be issued upon request, showing only the unsecured debt and therefor the property is sold without an undertaking to pay the secured debt.

Recommendation: Council applies for a charging order over all properties it has secured a judgment debt to preserve Council’s position.

Financial Assessment (District Court Act 2016 s.149 and s.151)

Often before the formal steps are taken, a financial assessment is a starting point to establish the debtor’s financial circumstances. They must make a declaration of their income, liabilities, and assets. It allows Council to consider next steps and their feasibility, like an attachment order over income.

There are two types of financial assessment procedures:

1. A court assessment (by phone) of the debtor’s ability to pay. This procedure is undertaken by the Court (not Council or lawyers) and carries a small fee ($80) which is claimable, including the costs. If the Court cannot assess the debtor’s finance over the phone, they can issue a summons, but the Council as creditor is not entitled to attend.

2. A hearing which Council/lawyers attend to assess the debtor’s ability to pay. The cost to file is more than the phone assessment (either $130.00 or $180.00 depending on if the Court will serve the notice, or it is done privately), and can be claimed back.

Recommendation – Option 2 - to request a hearing which Council/lawyers attend as this will ensure Council is able to assess the debtor’s ability to pay and whether this is an appropriate amount to clear the debt. An attachment order can be ordered by the courts during the hearing. This should only apply to property types where the owner is the resident at the property.

Warrant to seize property / chattels (District Court Act 2016 s.167)

· A warrant to seize property is a warrant that requires the bailiff or constable to whom it is directed to seize and sell goods of a judgment debtor for payment of the following debts:

(a) the judgment debt, or so much of it that remains unpaid; and

(b) the costs of executing the warrant; and

· By the warrant, the bailiff or constable is authorised to seize:

(a) the goods of the judgment debtor, except:

(i) his or her tools of trade to a value not exceeding $5,000; and

(ii) his or her necessary household furniture and effects, including clothing for the judgment debtor and his or her family, to a value not exceeding $10,000; and

(b) money, bank notes, and securities (that is, bills of exchange, promissory notes, bonds, specialties, or other securities for money).

· The warrant must be in a form approved by the chief executive.

· The Governor-General may from time to time, by Order in Council, amend subsection (2) by increasing any amount specified in that subsection.

If assets are seized, the debtor has 5 days to pay in full or the items are sold at public auction. Costs (auction, towing of cars) is deducted from the sale so the balance might be insufficient to cover the debt. This option is only feasible if Council knows the location of the debtor, they know the debtor has assets and the debtor is at home during the day, as bailiffs only work standard business hours. Consideration needs to be made whether Council is willing to take away the only transport for an owner/family.

Recommendation: If a financial assessment hearing has taken place, and it is established that the owner is not able to pay the debt but has multiple cars/boats which are not required for the owner to maintain employment or adequate lifestyle then this option should be considered. This should only apply to property types where the owner is the resident at the property and the property belongs to them.

Garnishee proceedings (District Court Act 2016 s.180)

If someone (sub-debtor) owes Council’s debtor money, Council can apply to the courts for that money to be paid to Council instead. A sub-debtor would be a bank where the debtor has money on deposit or a current account, a company if the debtor is an owner or family trust with assets.

The filing fee would be $250.00 and 40% of costs can be recovered. The sub-debtor however can refuse to pay and so Council will be forced to apply the same the enforcement options as with Council’s debtor.

Recommendation: Council only commences with Garnishee proceedings if Council is aware of funds owed and the value would clear the debt with Council in full.

Attachment order against income (District Court Act 2016 s.155)

An attachment order is served on the debtor’s employer, work and income, ACC, or other provider of income to the debtor. The employer or other, will then be required to take a % from the debtor’s income to Council. No more than 40% of net income can be taken and when setting the amount to be taken, the Courts will consider all the debtor’s liabilities including rent, mortgage, and current rates. If a debtor leaves their employment or benefits seize, Council will be obliged to seek an alternative collection option or apply for a new attachment order if they are with a new employer.

Recommendation: Council only seeks an attachment order for smaller debts, less than $5,000, and where the total debt can be paid within a three-year period while current rates are also paid.

High Court enforcement (High Court Rules 2016 Subpart 3, part 23 and part 24)

Bankruptcy and liquidation

Bankruptcy and liquidation can be considered together as the recovery procedures are similar. Bankruptcy is for personal debtors and liquidation for companies. Both will result in another entity taking over the debtor’s assets and selling them if necessary.

Council has used bankruptcy proceedings in the past to recover debt from a debtor whose property in the Far North District was worth less than the debt owed but he owned property in Auckland. Council was not able to proceed with a rating sale for the property in Auckland but was able to secure the sale of the property as part of the bankruptcy proceedings.

This will require separate legal proceedings in the High Court which can be costly.

Recommendation: Council only proceeds with bankruptcy or liquidation proceedings when this action will result in the recovery of all the debt owed by the debtor.

Local Government (Rating) Act 2002 enforcement

Rating Sale

A rating sale is the last remedy for Council when all other options have failed. A rating sale is possible once a judgment for unpaid rates remains unpaid for three months following judgment. Council must file a notice with the Court and the Court will provide notice of our intention to sell to anyone with an interest in the land. If the debt remains unpaid after six months, the land may be sold.

The Rating Act contains procedural rules for implementing a sale and the process is not managed by Council but by the District Court. The Court registrar will appoint an estate agent and auctioneer, although they will converse with Council on the reserve to be set for the auction.

The priority of payment following a sale is:

1. Court fees.

2. The judgment debt(s) for unpaid rates, plus interest, costs and expenses.

3. All further rates owed on the same land at the time of sale, even if the rates are outside the period of limitation under the Limitation Act 2010.

4. Encumbrances on the rating unit (mortgages, charges).

5. Any other judgment for unpaid rates, for other rating units in our district, owed by the ratepayer.

6. Any other rates due at the date of sale, for other rating units, even if the rates are outside the period of limitation under the Limitation Act 2010.

7. Balance proceeds of sale are paid to the Public Trust for that office to deal with.

The main benefit to a rating sale is that Council can recover the secured debt, other rates debt and previously statute barred debt, and all before any other lending secured over the property. Rating sales do create mixed publicity which would need to be managed especially if the property is a residence of the owner.

However, if the property is bare land, commercial premises, or an investment property, then rating sale would be the most suitable and least costly option available to Council. Not only will Council be able to recover the debt, but a new owner will also be more likely to pay their rates.

Recommendation: Where a rating sale is deemed to be the most suitable course of action, these cases will be brought back to Council for endorsement prior to any action being taken.

Take Tūtohunga / Reason for the recommendation

A policy outlining the steps that could be taken following the issuance of a District Court judgment is required to guide staff on the actions Council would wish to occur.

3) PĀnga PŪtea me ngĀ wĀhanga tahua / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

Costs are recoverable from the ratepayer in most cases if recovery of the judgment debt is enforced within the six-year limitation period.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Enforcement Options Memorandum - A3129736 ⇩

2. Rate Arrears Policy Process Flow - A3129667 ⇩

Hōtaka Take Ōkawa / 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.

He Take Ōkawa / Compliance Requirement	Aromatawai Kaimahi / 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 is 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.	Relevant legislations are referenced throughout the report.
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.	Community Board views have not been sought as this relates to a district matter of financial impact beyond the delegation of the Community Board.
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.	This is applicable for general title land only and not considered to have any impact on 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 (for example – youth, the aged and those with disabilities).	This does not impact any persons identified in legislation.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	As at 28 February 2021, Council had arrears on General Title rate accounts of $6,363,707.
Chief Financial Officer review.	This report has been reviewed by the Chief Financial Officer.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 April 2021

MINUTES OF
Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Meeting
HELD AT THE Council Chamber, Memorial Avenue, Kaikohe
ON Wednesday, 3 March 2021 AT 10.31 am

PRESENT: Chairperson Mike Edmonds, Member Emma Davis, Member Louis Toorenburg, Member Kelly van Gaalen, Member Alan Hessell, Member Laurie Byers, Member John Vujcich, Member Moko Tepania

IN ATTENDANCE:

STAFF PRESENT: Shaun Clarke (Chief Executive Officer), Kathryn Trewin (Funding Advisor), Ken Ross (Community Development Advisor), Aisha Huriwai (Team Leader – Democracy Services), Marlema Baker (Meetings Administrator).

Reminder from Chair Mike Edmonds that the meeting was being livestreamed.

1 Public Forum

· David Cortesi – kids on bikes in Kaikohe township a major safety concern.

· Rachel Smith and Moko Tepania – Outward Bound Scholarships; Partnership opportunity for FNDC and our Community Boards, supporting our young people. (Document tabled)

· Shaun Reilly – Bikes down the footpath in Kaikohe. Attended Taiamai Residents meeting. Ohaeawai road naming. Bridge railing over Pekapeka stream needs repair. Footpaths in Ohaeawai need attention. Dam needs to be moved to Hillcrest Road. Roadside mowing.

· Charmaine Peri. Roading issues in Otaua. (document tabled)

· Shem Kerr – Broadwood Bridge. The Chairperson requested a report for the April meeting. (document tabled)

Meeting adjourned 11:33 am – 11:49 am.

2 Speakers

· CHI Festival Funding Application - Willie Maihi and Bill Edwards – Bill supports Willie’s application (Heritage role). Willie Maihi acknowledged Council for their help with the Kaikohe Aerodrome CHI Festival but requested they reconsider the application considered at the last meeting.

3 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

3.1 Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Agenda item 6.1 document number A3052575, pages 10 - 16 refers.

Resolution 2021/12

Moved: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

Seconded: Member Emma Davis

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board confirms the minutes of their meeting held 3 February 2021 as a true and correct record.

Carried

4 Reports

4.1 Road Naming - 5978B State Highway 12, Ohaeawai

Agenda item 7.1 document number A3080628, pages 17 - 36 refers.

Resolution 2021/13

Moved: Member Moko Tepania

Seconded: Member John Vujcich

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board, pursuant to Council’s Road Naming and Property Addressing Policy #2125, name a private road, Te Mania Drive that is currently addressed at 5978b State Highway 12, Ohaeawai as per application and maps (A3080460).

Carried

4.2 Road Naming - 6 Bisset Road Kaikohe

Agenda item 7.2 document number A3083222, pages 37 - 57 refers.

Resolution 2021/14

Moved: Member John Vujcich

Seconded: Member Alan Hessell

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board, pursuant to Council’s Road Naming and Property Addressing Policy #2125, name a private road, Timatanga Place that is currently addressed at 6 Bisset Road, Kaikohe as per map (A3080456).

Carried

4.3 Kaikohe-Hokianga Statement of Community Board Fund Account as at 31 January 2021

Agenda item 7.3 document number A3083803, pages 58 - 60 refers.

Resolution 2021/15

Moved: Member Moko Tepania

Seconded: Member Alan Hessell

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board receives the report Kaikohe-Hokianga Statement of Community Board Fund Account as at 31 January 2021.

Carried

4.4 Motion to Rescind Previous Funding Decision

Resolution 2021/16

Moved: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

Seconded: Member Alan Hessell

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board rescinds the previous resolution 2020/60 made 7 October 2020 regarding item 6.5 Funding Application: Maihi Memorial Parks Charitable Trust.

Resolution 2020/60

Moved: Member Laurie Byers

Seconded: Member Louis Toorenburg

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board, in considering the provisions of the Community Grant Policy authorise the sum of $1,000 (plus GST if applicable) to be paid from the Board’s Community Fund account to Maihi Memorial Parks Charitable Trust for costs towards the CHI Festival 2021 to support the following Community Outcomes:

(i) Proud vibrant communities.

(ii) Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable.

Carried

Carried

4.5 Funding Application

Agenda item 7.4 document number A3086614, pages 61 - 69 refers.

4.5a Resolution to exclude the Public

Resolution 2021/16

Moved: Member Louis Toorenburg

Seconded: Member Alan Hessell

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

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

4.5b Motion To Move out of Closed Meeting into Open Meeting

Resolution 2021/17

Moved: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

Seconded: Member Moko Tepania

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board moves out of closed meeting into open meeting.

Carried

4.5c Funding Application

Agenda item 7.4 document number A3086614, pages 61 - 69 refers.

Motion

Moved: Member Moko Tepania

Seconded: Member John Vujcich

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board, in considering the provisions of the Community Grant Policy authorise the sum of $1,000 (plus GST if applicable) to be paid from the Board’s Community Fund account to Maihi Memorial Parks Charitable Trust for costs towards the CHI Festival 2021 to support the following Community Outcomes:

(i) Proud vibrant communities.

(ii) Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable.

lost

Resolution 2021/18

Moved: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

Seconded: Member Emma Davis

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board, in considering the provisions of the Community Grant Policy declines to make an out of policy decision regarding the funding application for Maihi Memorial Parks Charitable Trust .

Carried

4.6 Project Funding Reports

Agenda item 7.5 document number A3084602, pages 70 – 89 refers

Resolution 2021/19

Moved: Member John Vujcich

Seconded: Member Moko Tepania

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board note the project reports received from:

a) Ngapuhi Hokianga ki te Raki Incorporated Society

b) North Hokianga A&P Show (2020 report)

c) Te Rau o Te Huia

Carried

5 Information Reports

5.1 Community Funding and Reporting Review

Agenda item 8.1 document number A3085298, pages 90 - 91 refers

Resolution 2021/20

Moved: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

Seconded: Member John Vujcich

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board receive the report Community Funding and Reporting Review.

Carried

5.2 Community and Customer Services Report 1 July 2020 - 31 December 2020

Agenda item 8.2 document number A3082526, pages 92 - 99 refers

Resolution 2021/21

Moved: Member Kelly van Gaalen

Seconded: Member John Vujcich

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board receive the report Community and Customer Services Report 1 July 2020 - 31 December 2020.

Carried

5.3 Items of business not on the agenda which cannot be delayed - Cycling Bylaw Enforcement

Resolution 2021/22

Moved: Member Moko Tepania

Seconded: Chairperson Mike Edmonds

That the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board resolves, under Section 46A (7), LGOIMA, to address the Community Cycling Bylaw and the Chairperson provides the following information during the public part of the meeting:

a) the reason the item is not on the agenda is that it was raised at this meeting during Public Forum as a major community concern.

b) the reason why the discussion of the item cannot be delayed until a subsequent meeting is that urgent action is required.

and

c) write a letter to the NZ Police regarding concerns around the antisocial cycling behaviour in the Kaikohe community and the need for enforcement of its laws and bylaws.

Carried

6 Meeting Close

The meeting closed at 12:48 am.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed at the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board Meeting held on 7 April 2021.

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

CHAIRPERSON

Welcome to the latest summary report of Council activities

Introduction from Shaun Clarke, Chief Executive

January is typically a quieter month as staff and Elected Members return from holiday. It is traditionally a time to plan for the year ahead, and I took the opportunity to seek face-to-face meetings with each of the Councillors and Community Board Chairs to understand what they would like to see achieved for this year. Reflecting on these discussions, the anticipated feedback from our CouncilMARK assessment and what our customers are saying will lead to a different lense for how we deliver our work – more on this in the next update.

Having enjoyed four months of only Level 1 COVID restrictions, three new cases of community transmission were detected and on 14 February 2021 Auckland moved to Alert Level 3 and the rest of the country to Alert Level 2 for an initial period of 3 days, and on 18 February Auckland moved to Alert Level 2 and the rest of the country to Alert Level 1. This had minimal operational impact, with Elected Member workshops still held with limited staff in-person and with social distancing measures. On 28 February Auckland moved back to Alert Level 3 and the rest of NZ at Alert Level 2 until 7 March.

The hybrid of having remote working and office-based working formally commenced 2 February. An Elected Members lounge was developed at Kaikohe headquarters by repurposing the Committee room, and a large collaboration area was developed in the former IAM space. Thanks to this initiative, staff are enabled to work from home making the transition between COVID alert levels smooth. The message during Alert Level 2 is to work at home if you can do and if you need to come into the office ensure you have safe social distancing measures in place. Daily communications were sent to staff updating them on key messages, and these were forwarded to Elected Members for their reference.

The Senior Leadership Team (SLT) commenced Your Voice action sessions with staff. These open forums were an opportunity for the SLT to hear directly from staff and have a two-way dialogue on what it’s like to work at FNDC. These sessions are scheduled to conclude March. In February I announced Darren Edward’s appointment to the General Manager – Strategic Policy & Planning role. We are pleased we were able to recruit a high-caliber leader to fill this strategically important position and welcome Daren back to FNDC on 24 May.

As well as listening to staff, these months were about preparing to listen to our communities through Navigating Our Course (seeking feedback on the Representation Review, FN2100, Long Term Plan and Māori Wards). This was through workshops with Elected Members to gain their guidance, planning content, graphics and face-to-face consultation events.

During this period water restrictions were put on and then lifted. Level 3 water restrictions were placed on Kaitaia in mid-January and on 2 February Level 3 water restrictions were applied to Kawakawa and Kaikohe and Kerikeri and Level 2 for Paihia-Opua-Waitangi On 19 February a significant reduction in demand prompted the Council to reduce Level 2 water restrictions at Paihia, Opua and Waitangi. We were able to remove all restrictions for Kerikeri and decrease Kaikohe restrictions from Level 3 to Level 2 on 25 February. The Sweetwater bore was opened temporarily for tanker supply, and work continues on a separate bore site at Sweetwater to be operational for next Summer. Drilling and testing on a second bore at Tokareireia (Monument Hill) in Kaikohe was completed in February. The project aims to provide a reliable secondary water supply that will make Kaikohe far more resilient to future droughts.

Other achievements during this period included –

· Roading maintenance, operations and renewal contracts have exceeded 90% compliance for the first six months of the financial year.

· Successful mediation for the Taipa Wastewater Treatment Plant which will see Council work with Ngāti Kahu hapū and community representatives to find the best upgrade option.

· Business case for adopting water monitoring software, given the significant data requirements of the Three Waters reform package and customer demands, is in the final stages of being drafted.

· We are seeing consequential benefits of the Te Tai Tokerau Worker Redeployment initiative – while this work is coming to an end, our contract RSL has extended the contracts for some to help with peak seasonal demand and the MBIE flood funding programme.

· In January new speed limits were introduced on Council-administered roads between Kaeo and Ohaeawai following a public consultation process that gathered 166 submissions from the community.

· The Kerikeri Domain BBQ providing opportunity for anyone interested in Kerikeri’s central green space to find out about the planned improvements, which include new landscaping and upgrades to lighting, the skate park, playground and basketball court.

· The first of three playground swings specifically designed for children and adults in wheelchairs was opened at the Jaycee Park playground in Kaitaia.

Operational performance during this period saw –

· 25.06% decrease in financial interactions at Service Centres

· 10.50% decrease in calls to the Contact Centre

· 170.43% increase in AskUs emails received. The large increase was due to a technical issue which saw approximately 7,000 ‘no reply’ emails go into the AskUs email inbox. Staff had to sort through them and delete them.

· 0.15% increase in building inspections booked

· 25.09% decrease in visits to Service Centres

· 46% decrease in i-SITE visitor numbers

· 22% decrease in i-SITE retail revenue

· 53% decrease in i-SITE transaction spend

· 42% decrease in i-SITE transaction numbers

· 5.1% increase in digital library use reflecting increased range of resources and summer borrowing growth

· 0.8% decrease in book checkouts reflecting steady book borrowing during the holiday period and a short month

· 656 RFS’ received for Animal Management during January – February 2021, over 60 more than for the previous two months, reflecting more people out and about with dogs over the summer holiday period

· 61 dogs were impounded across the District with 10 dogs rehomed through the Council’s website

· 21 food business verifications were completed and 31 proactive alcohol license Good Host Visits (GHV) were conducted, with 60% of all licensed premises in the District having had GHV’s

· 74 health inspections completed

· 233 noise complaints were received with 141 of these received in January, reflecting the busy holiday festive season. Response rates have improved in February, (92%) compared with 77% in January

· Only six RFSs regarding parking concerns received across the district

· Only 74 resource consent applications were received over this period, considerably lower than previous two months (151) due to the holiday period

· 100% of all resource consents were processed within statutory time frames in January

· Five of the six applications that went over time in February were applications that were received during lockdown and delays in obtaining engineering advice regarding transport and stormwater matters on time

· Discounts applied to consent processing for 2020/2021 to the end of February is $41,734.99 noting that for the same period last year there had been $176,299.82 applied, reflecting our increased performance in meeting statutory time frames

· Building consents received for January (85) and February (145) were higher than last year for both months

· 165 building consents were issued, 100% within statutory timeframes

· 99.66% of building consents were issued within the legislative timeframe of twenty working days for this financial year

· The average number of days to issue a consent is 12.28 working days (against the 20-day statutory requirement) and 31.81 calendar days

· Overall CCC compliance for 2021 remains above 95%, but the team is looking to improve monthly compliance to 100%

· 87 Building Warrant of Fitness (BWOF) audits were undertaken, reinforcing the success of the mobile inspection tool that has been introduced as part of business improvements.

· 111 BWOF RFSs were received during January/February, consistent with this time of year and previous summers.

· 59 Notices to Fix were issued for breaches of the Building Act and 8 Infringements were issued for building-related breaches.

· A total of 13 Certificates of Acceptance were approved

· 58 pool inspections were carried out, the fail rate for this period was 34%. This total is of concern, given that it is the middle of summer. Follow up checks are planned during the coming weeks and appropriate steps will be taken to achieve compliance.

· Revenue from the Hokianga ferry ticket sales for this financial year are approximately 30% higher, primarily as a result of high domestic tourism market due to the COVID-19 pandemic

Governance

Workshops

The month of January was quiet with activity ramping up during the month of February:

· Long Term Plan, one workshop

· District Plan, one workshop

· FN2100, one workshop

· Māori wards, one workshop

The workshop format is invaluable in providing an overall strategic direction, which in turn allows Members at formal Council meetings to make informed decisions.

Community Board Workshops

Representation review workshops were held with each Community Board on 28 January 2021. These workshops were designed to gather feedback on current or new communities of interest and effective representation. These workshops were well attended with some great feedback received. Following on from these workshops, staff attended each Community Board meeting during the month of January and February to capture feedback from elected members unable to be at the workshops. This information will now form part of the representation discussions with the Mayor and Councillors.

Training

Mayor, Chairs of Committees, and Community Board Chairs (and deputies) attended an in-house workshop on Chairing Meetings, facilitated by Meeting Solutions Limited on 11 February 2021. This training had been planned a full year earlier but was repeatedly pushed out due to COVID related lockdowns and availability issues. This is part of the formal training programme for elected members, over and above those members with individual professional development plans.

Action Sheets/Decision Tracking

A review tracking the status of Council decision into action has been completed. Staff have been gathering data for the calendar year during this quarter to inform a baseline and targets for a report to the Assurance, Risk and Finance Committee in May. Action sheets are already in place for Council, Committees and Community Boards.

CEO Office

People and Capability

CEO Office

No recruitment changes amongst the CEO office groups.

A selection of staff in leadership from across the departments attended a leadership workshop in the new year ran by P&C to discuss the needs of the organisation. The outcomes from this are being worked on by the Talent & Development Manager. Regular organisational communications on new starters and the reward & recognition program has launched on TK3

Creating Great Workplaces – Remote Working Consultation

The hybrid remote working and office-based model formally commenced on 2^nd February 2021. All staff who elected to be office based are allocated a permanent desk. Office reconfiguration was carried out at headquarters, which included the creation of an Elected Members lounge and a large collaboration area in the former IAM space.

Cadetship Scheme

Three Cadets commenced at FNDC during January 2021 for a ten-month term. The Cadets are allocated to the Building Consents, District Planning and Environmental Services departments. They will receive support from both FNDC and the Ministry of Social Development during this time.

“Your Voice” Organisational Survey 2020

Survey details have been made available to all groups with the intent that discussion will cascade down through all people in the group. Since the survey is confidential, feedback comments reflect broad areas of one-way concern or approval. To allow for further two-way communication in these areas, six open discussion sessions are being led by the Chief Executive and members of the SLT. Held across the three main centres, these sessions are an opportunity for all FNDC people to speak their minds and get a committed response. The feedback gathered at these sessions will inform the action plans within the groups. A change on COVID level has delayed these sessions but they will be completed in March.

Infrastructure & Asset Management Group

The long-standing vacancy of Manager – Asset Management & Infrastructure Planning has been filled. A fixed term position for 3 Waters Hydraulic Modeller is approved and advertised, funded by 3 waters reform initiative – a talented candidate has been identified. The Infrastructure and Asset Management leadership group participated in a Team Management Profiling session ran by P&C which identifies ways to improve communication and engagement across the group. The engagement was high and provided an opportunity for the group to discuss their vision.

Strategic, Planning & Policy

An ideal candidate for the General Management position has been identified after a panel interviewed five candidates, including some internal applicants. Internal candidate secured for the new Sustainability Programme Coordinator position. Recruitment for two Strategic Planner positions have taken place (both existing vacancies). District Planning and Community Development is facing a busy period coming into consultation.

Corporate Services Group

The General Manager – Corporate Services Group was seconded to lead the Strategic Planning & Policy Group, while this position is recruited to. This has resulted in acting up and development opportunities for this Corporate Services leadership role, which has included Tier 3 Managers stepping up. The Manager - Transformation & Assurance is currently acting as General Manager - Corporate Services Group, with backfill provided by the Manager – Project Management.

The recruitment campaign for the two-year fixed term Principal Advisor – Sustainable Procurement position was not successful, with no suitable candidates. This vacancy is to be re-advertised with a new campaign to attract talent to this key position.

District Services Group

The Manager - Community & Customer Services position is temporarily being covered by delegated authority on a rotational basis. The Manager – Libraries, Manager – iSites and Manager- Customer Care have all acted up to this position, enabling cohesive coverage while linking to development opportunities.

Staffing, Salaries and Training

Current Staffing Levels

Actual Full Time Equivalent (FTE) at 28 February 2021	Annual Plan Establishment (FTE)
354.33	382.53

*New approved FTE applied

Salaries and Training

Financial Performance as at 28 February 2021	YTD Actual	YTD Budget	YTD Actual vs Budget	Annual Budget
Salary Costs	$19,861,950	$19,912,601	$50,651	$30,452,195
Training Costs	$238,671	$523,944	$285,273	$901,179
Trainings as a % of Salaries (Sector average is 4%)	1.2%			3.0%

Vacancies

Department	FTE Available
CEO/Communications/People & Capabilities	0
Corporate Services	5.0
District Services	10.00
Infrastructure & Asset Management/NTA	9.0
Strategic Planning & Policy	4.2
FNDC TOTAL (FTE) * includes part time & full time EST Position Vacancies	28.2

Customer Service

Customer Experience Programme

Customer Satisfaction

We are launching our new customer feedback surveying platform at the beginning of March. As a result, there is no performance data for this reporting period. The customer surveys will be back dated to cover interactions during set up period. The next report will include responses for this period as well.

The new platform called AskNicely will helps us to understand and act on our customer feedback. Not only is the system a smart way to gather feedback it will give us real time voice of the customer information that allows us to respond, act on insights and grow our customer first focus.

We are continuing to request feedback from customers when we close their request for service or complete their application but will be expanding the teams we cover and ditching our old mail-based form. We will also be providing QR codes in our venues for visitor feedback.

They system allows for a digital first approach where we will now email our customers. The survey gives them the opportunity to tell us their story and what is important to them.

We are excited to present this platform to Elected Members on the 11^th of March.

Customer Journeys

In addition to the above work, the Customer Experience Improvement Programme is also focusing alignment changing customer behaviors and other organisation initiatives. A programme of work is under development to ensure customers experiences are improved by our processes and systems. This involves systematically going through our customer facing teams (starting with Transport) and undertaking a customer journey mapping and diagnostic programme to ensure that our system and processes are as customer friendly as possible.

This programme will also inform and aid in the delivery of a number of other customer initiatives across our organisation (i.e., Target Operating Model Service Catalogue, Pathways review, communications assistance with content and responses, BI Reporting, training on systems and customer contact channels).

Health, Safety & Wellbeing (HSW)

Summary of Activities

1. H&S inspections undertaken at the new Northern Animal Shelter - Kaitaia with Infrastructure Capital Works team and contract partners.

2. Kaikohe Fire Evacuation debrief undertaken following fire false alarm. Full review of current fire warden numbers underway, consideration to include Remote Working Project and new permanent based staff.

3. Remote Working Risk Assessments reviews for those staff working under hybrid model undertaken, 50% completed at the time of this reporting period.

4. Lone Worker Safety Solutions & Vehicle GPS Project – phase 2 technology order placed with the supplier and training to be scheduled for March 2021.

5. Investigation support to a contractor following a vehicle roll-over incident. NZ Police were notified, and the staff was un-injured. Full investigation summary report is due in March.

PeopleSafe Stories Types during the reporting period

PeopleSafe 12 Month Rolling Incident Rate

During the two-month reporting period there were 14 PeopleSafe incidents/events told, covering 19 story types. The average number of incidents per month has decreased further and now sits at 7.5 incidents/month.

Communication

Activity summary

January and February remained a busy period for the Communications Team. Water restrictions were in force at most of our water supplies, so our messaging was focused on raising community awareness about water shortages. The team also provided significant support to the Engagement Team as it prepared for the Navigating Our Course community consultation.

Media releases

The team issued nine media releases during the eight-week reporting period. Five of these media releases were about water restrictions and the Council’s response to the dry weather. The other four were about:

· Hapū support for plans to upgrade maritime facilities at Rangitane near Kerikeri

· New speed limits on more than 60 roads in the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Ward

· A draft, five-year strategy Museum @ Te Ahu was seeking community feedback on

· The unveiling of a Kerikeri Domain concept plan at a community BBQ.

Media enquiries

The team responded to 49 media enquiries in January and February. The top topic of enquiry was Council water supplies, which accounted for 13 enquiries. Other main subjects of interest were animal management and roads.

Social media

The team was active on social media, particularly Facebook, during January and February. Outputs included:

· 61 Facebook posts on a range of topics, especially water restrictions

· 281 new Facebook page ‘likes’, increasing the number of people who ‘like’ the Council’s Facebook page from 5,871 to 6152.

Mayoral support

The team drafted four Mayoral columns/blogs about:

· Challenges in 2020 and Council drought-resilience projects

· Our economic recovery projects

· The Navigating Our Course community consultation

· Roading and the Integrated Transport Strategy.

CEO support

The team produced six editions of weekly newsletter The Weekender, numerous communications to staff about COVID-19, as well as talking points for weekly videos to staff.

Other support and outputs

· A four-page quarterly newsletter about Council projects. This was posted to ratepayers with third quarter rates bills in January.

· Fortnightly newspaper adverts in four local newspapers about our rubbish and recycling. services, water restrictions and the Navigating Our Course consolidated consultation.

· Information stalls about water shortages at the Kaikohe and Kaitaia A&P Shows.

· Critical involvement in the production of a six-minute video about the Navigating Our Course consolidated consultation.

· Graphic design support to promotional materials for the Navigating Our Course consultation

Strategy

Corporate Planning

Long Term Plan (LTP)

January saw the beginning of audit activities on the Consultation Document and supporting information for the LTP. At the end of the period an Audit Opinion had not been received but was imminent.

Steady progress was made on planning for engagement on the Consultation Document. Consultation will commence on 6 March for one month.

Strategy Development, Bylaws and Policies

Far North 2100 District Strategy

A workshop was completed with elected members on 17 February 2021 that walked the attendees through the draft Far North 2100 Strategy that was proposed for consultation. Modifications were made to the draft strategy that have been included in the draft that is going out for public consultation in March 2021.

Staff completed a workshop on placemaking and spatial planning with elected members on 17 February 2021. A follow-up workshop is planned for April 2021 that will further refine the programme of spatial planning and placemaking over the 2021 -2023 period leading in the governments planned resource management reforms.

Climate Change

We have successfully recruited to the position of Sustainability Programme Coordinator in February 2021. This position is key to the delivery of the climate change roadmap.

Workshops on embedding climate change into the decision-making processes of Council are being planned for May 2021.

Regional Accessibility Strategy

Staff have been analysing the results of the Te Tai Tokerau Regional Accessibility Survey completed in December 2020. The Disability Action Group was informed of the plans for a Regional Accessibility Strategy on 12 February 2021 by a Whangarei District Council staff member who is leading the development of the Strategy.

Parks and Reserves

A workshop with internal subject matter experts on challenges and issues associated with the acquisition, management of events and then disposal of Council administered, and controlled land was completed on 19 February 2021.

Bylaw Programme

On 25 February 2021 Council approved the making of a Treated Water Supply Bylaw to replace the current Water Supply Bylaw that will automatically revoke in October 2021.

Staff are working on an options paper based on a review of the Solid Waste Bylaw that will come to the 23 March 2021 Strategy and Policy Committee. The current bylaw is due a review as per the requirements of the Local Government Act on 5 May 2021.

Research has commenced on the development of a new Parking and Traffic Bylaw that will replace the current Parking and Traffic Control Bylaw that will automatically revoke on 17 June 2022.

An options paper for a new Onsite Wastewater Bylaw is planned to come to the 4 May 2021 Strategy and Policy Committee Meeting.

The development of an Animals Bylaw is currently on hold while staff focus on the development of a Treated Water Supply Bylaw.

Policy Programme

Staff are working on a review of the Psychoactive Substances Policy and Gambling Policy in alignment with the requirements under legislation. Options papers for the modifications and the continuation of these policies will be put to the Strategy and Policy Committee on 4 May 2021.

Iwi/ Hapū Relationships

Māori representation

On 5 February 2021, legislation was introduced under urgency to the house to amend the Local Electoral Act 2002 to align the treatment of Māori wards and constituencies with the treatment of general wards; and to remove all mechanisms for binding polls on the establishment of wards and constituencies.

During February 2021, Council held a workshop on Māori representation and whether or not to hold a non-binding poll for the 2022 Local Body Elections or to continue to hold a poll, albeit non-binding, at the same time as the next elections. The workshop was attended by Council and invited guests from across the community.

Council voted against holding a non-binding poll and in favour of gathering feedback on the issue during consultation on the Representation Review. The need for a formal decision was due to statutory timeframes associated with the wider representation review.

Te Oneroa-a-Tōhe Board

Te Rautaki o Te Oneroa-a-Tōhe/ The Ninety Mile Beach Plan was formally notified on 25 January 2021. A number of outstanding issues remain before the final document is released. The issues were grammatical, however, there were also a number of cultural stories which needed finalising. During January and February 2021, the Te Hono Manager worked with the Iwi Board members on final scripts to be included into the plan. A formal launch and ceremony is scheduled for April 2021.

Māori liaison

In February 2021, a ceremony was held to unveil a memorial at Ruapekapeka Pā in remembrance of the events that took place in 1846. Council provided support for this project after funding was gained via the Provincial Growth Fund (PGF) to carry out upgrades and safety measures to the existing road leading to the Pā site. The opening of Te Ahurea (formerly Rewa’s Village) took place in early February 2021. The site, owned by Ngāti Rehia, received PGF funding which enabled the hapū to turn the site into a new living showcase of Māori culture. Assistance was provided by Council in the provision of space for a Whare Waka to be built on the banks of the Kerikeri River. Both ceremonial events were supported by Te Hono.

Te Hono continued to support council infrastructure staff with the appeal pertaining to the East Coast Wastewater Treatment Plant mediation between Council and local hapū and iwi along with providing cultural advice and support. Likewise, Te Hono continue to provide advice and support for the the Kohukohu Wastewater Treatment Plant procurement of a Cultural Impact Assessment.

Māori Development

Over the last year the Te Hono Māori Development team completed over 600 assessments (including 100 unresolved applications) on Whenua Māori. During January and February 2021, the last of this backlog was cleared and the team are working on applications that are current lodgements. The team has streamlined the process and committed to providing quality and timely service to our customers. To support this improved customer service, they have made a commitment to turning around any request for service within 1 day and new rate remission applications completed for General Manager signoff within 5 days.

They had 147 queries inclusive of rate remission advice for the months of January and February 2021 and 59 referrals to external agencies, mostly to the Māori Land Court for further information.

Key: MLC = Māori Land Court. TPK = Te Puni Kōkiri. MPI/MBIE = Ministries of Primary Industry and Business, Innovation and Employment.

The team now have the capacity to support Māori Economic Development on whenua. They had one Whenua Māori trust successfully apply under the Incentivising Māori Economic Development Policy to support their Provincial Growth Fund application. The team has identified several Whenua Māori blocks in need of development support, so have committed to working with these landowners to achieve their development aspirations.

Community Wellbeing

Community Development & Funding

Council and Te Puna o Kupenuku continue to work towards a mutually acceptable lease agreement. Te Puna o Kupenuku have been building their resources and Council is tidying up loose ends such as the campus security system. Both parties are committed to making this partnership work to provide training opportunities and improve the wellbeing of the people of the Hokianga.

The Kai Ora Fund opened with applications rolling in. As well as the normal on-going Kai Ora Programme activity, Council has also been working with one of the Kai Ora partners (Mahitahi Hauora) and Whangaroa Health Services Trust and Te Rununga o Whaingaroa, exploring the possibility of building a Northland Food Security Network Hub in Kaeo. The Kai Ora Fund is open until 24^th March 2021.

A number of successful meetings have taken place in the Hokianga area raising awareness around the concepts of ‘Localism’, Integrated Planning and Communities of Interest. Meetings were held in Kohukohu, Broadwood, and Horeke. To date the community responses echo respective Community Plans and also align with Council’s current work in Social Procurement.

The community located on the southern shore of Doubtless Bay (from Cable Bay to Hihi and inland) has been asked if they wish to create a Community Plan for themselves, facilitated by staff. Following several orientation meetings, a strong and resourceful working party of 12 locals has been formed to ascertain the aspirations of the community and create a meaningful plan on their behalf.

At the request of the community, the Totara North community has engaged in a fast-tracked Council facilitated community planning process. The working group is highly active and engaged with good representation from all that make up this special and diverse community. The community aim to have their plan completed quickly in order to meet Long Term Planning submission deadlines.

Staff continue to deliver on the Nothing But Net digital strategy. Connected Northland, a project promoting the online training platform Drive is about to be delivered free to all Northlanders, launching early March 2021. This is a partnership under the Northland Digital Enablement Group (Northland Regional Council, Northland Inc, Whangarei District Council and Kaipara District Council) with funding from the US State Department. The Nothing But Net strategy document has been entered into the SOLGM Local Government Excellence Awards in the Martin Jenkins Award for Better Policy and Regulation category. The award recognises the development of robust and effective evidence-based policy or strategy that has become business as usual and used a methodology that can be transferred to other local authorities. Nothing But Net ticks these boxes and more and staff view it as being a real contender.

Council has selected three Māori youth for the TUIA Mentoring programme, which is part of the 'Mayor's Taskforce for Jobs' initiative. Our candidates are Council cadets Te Oi Singh and Justine Lyden, joining Codi Clarke from Ngapuhi Iwi Social Services who is returning to the programme in a leadership role after completing the course in 2020. Candidates will be sponsored by Council to attend 5 wananga throughout the year to be held all over Aotearoa New Zealand, as well as developing a mutually beneficial mentoring relationship with the Mayor and Councillors’ Moko Tepania and Rachel Smith. Our three rangatahi are grateful to be given this opportunity and believe the programme will help grow their knowledge and develop the skills they need to make positive changes for young people in Te Tai Tokerau.

Council in partnership with the Department of Conservation and Northland Regional Council has again been successful in running the Kaitiaki Program with funding from the MBIE Responsible Camping Fund. Staff were responsible for supervising the Ahipara Coastal Patrol and Te Rarawa’s Ahipara Kaitiaki groups. The Kaitiaki promoted positive behaviors through advocacy and educational messaging concerning responsible camping and assisted with messaging concerning illegal rubbish dumping. They provided a positive customer experience and they were instrumental in the Civil Defence response to the fire that engulfed the Gumfields and threatened the homes of many residents. We have received excellent feedback from customers about the programme.

Staff met with the Kaitaia Business Association Chair and their Co-Ordinator to discuss the reporting requirements to the Te Hiku Community Board regarding the Business Investment District. The Kaitaia Business Association Chairperson is working in collaboration with businesses, social services, government agencies, iwi, churches, not for profit organisations, Northland Inc., the Far North District Council and Civil Defence, to name a few. The Kaitaia Business Association and the Te Hiku Community Board have a solid working relationship and we expect the Te Hiku Rejuvenation Plan to be successful, in part, because of this positive relationship.

Staff facilitated the first meeting of 2021 of the Disability Action Group. An inclusive way of working has been well received by the Infrastructure and Asset Management team who are now very much involved in the meetings, much to the delight of the Disability Action Group. Lengthy discussions were had concerning footpath health and safety issues and the disabled. We believe there will be many positive outcomes from this new way of working collaboratively.

District Planning

Development of the new District Plan

The District Plan team conducted a workshop with Elected Members on 18 February 2021 to demonstrate the new integrated digital district plan. Matters covered included the progress of plan making and use from a paper-based district plan, to an on-line accessible plan and now a full searchable e-plan product with the digital map interface.

The new e-plan format is a mandatory direction for plan making under the National Planning Standard, established in November 2019. The new district plan has been authored alongside the development of the National Planning Standard and will mean that the plan will achieve the e-plan direction well within the 5 year mandatory timeframe dictated by the Standard.

The team also covered with elected members the development of the policy framework into zone and wide provisions, plan rules and standards. Each of the key elements of the plan were framed under the context of nine separate ‘Significant Resource Management Issues”. This allowed for a direct line of understanding of why certain zones, rules and methods have been applied in order to remedy big picture problem statements.

The same organisational context will be applied during engagement on the draft district plan allowing communities to observe the cascade of problem statements to policies and methods.

Engagement scheduled for March 2021 on the draft district plan alongside Far North 2100 and the 2021-31 Long Term Plan will allow for further demonstration of the short and medium term solutions for integrated management of land and infrastructure supply for housing and business land and strategic direction for the district.

Reform of the Resource Management System

The development of the district plan is taking place against the backdrop of proposed large-scale reform of land and environmental planning legislation. The Government announced on 10 February 2021 that the Resource Management Act (RMA) will be repealed and replaced with new legislation within the current parliamentary term. The reforms are based on a 2020 independent panel review of the planning system.

The Government’s aim is to introduce three new pieces of legislation aimed at improving the natural environment, enabling more development against specific environmental limits, improving housing supply and affordability, and providing an effective role for Māori.

The proposed legislation to deliver these outcomes are:

· The Natural and Built Environments Act (NBA) which replaces the RMA and will provide for land use and environmental regulation.

· The Strategic Planning Act (SPA) which will integrate with the NBA, the Local Government Act, the Land Transport Management Act and the Climate Change Response Act, and deliver regional spatial strategies

· The Climate Change Adaptation Act (CAA) which will address the complex legal and technical issues of managed retreat, funding, and financial adaptation.

The making of the new district plan continues to deliver outcomes such as local responses to growth, protection of natural resources and management of nationally important issues. These local plan making processes will continue in the near term under Schedule 1 of the RMA. The prioritised legislation in the reform package, the NBA, is scheduled for gazettal at the end of 2022. The proposed district plan will, at that time, have been notified and on the pathway to decision making, and importantly eligible to represent local issues into any new national planning regime.

Northland Forward Together

The Chief Executive’s forum met 15 February and the Mayoral forum met 1 March. The key priorities for these forums remain the government waters reforms, climate change, regional economic development and further enhancements to the Northland Transport Alliance. Māori wards has also been topical and Coastal Hazards was discussed at both forums. Solid waste and recycling are also a priority due to the upcoming reforms in the sector. Three carry over projects from the previous financial year; PGF and government funding, Digital Enablement and Regional ICT continue to be progressed and monitored.

Below is a snapshot of the nine work streams and the progress that has been made since previously reported and highlight progress made over the last quarter.

	Prioritised Projects for 2020	Lead Council	Status	Key Priorities	Achievement and Actions for next 3 months
1.	Four Waters	WDC	In Progress	· Government Reforms and potential amalgamation · Northland Re-arrangement Option · *Completion of Request For Information (RFI)	· The reforms propose three tranches: · Tranche One 2020-2021 – Council agreement to MOU, work with government, funding stimulus released to participating Councils and progress sector on entity design consideration. Government plans to introduce legislation. · Tranche Two 2021 - 2022– Councils opt into to multi-regional groupings and commence re-establishment planning and the release of further stimulus funding. · Tranche Three 2022 - 2023 – Formation of new entities and a further release of stimulus funding. · The three Territorial Authorities in Northland have signed up to Tranche One and submitted their Delivery Plans to CIP. · The three Northland territorial authorities are working hard to fulfil the requirements of the RFI process – a considerable amount of work that will provide in-depth analysis for investment. Far North and Whangarei are undertaking a more detailed RFI than Kaipara. At this stage there is reasonable confidence that the governments deadline for information provision has been achieved. · In December 2020 Northland Territorial Authorities senior infrastructure managers together with Rationale consultants undertook a two day Investment Logic Mapping (ILM) exercise to explore water services delivery options for Northland.
2.	Refining the Northland Transport Alliance (NTA)	WDC	In Progress	·	· Previously this item had focussed on ICT improvements. Following the NTA workshop held on 6 August, the NTA Delivery Model Improvement Plan was developed and presented to, and endorsed by, the NTALG at the November 2020 meeting (09/11/2020). · The improvement plan covers off 8 primary, and 3 secondary, work streams being: · Primary Work Streams: 1. Formalisation of NTA Contract Agreement 2. People & Capability 3. Health & Safety 4. IT Development 5. Branding 6. NTA Reporting 7. Procurement & Work Delivery 8. Resource Review · Secondary Work Streams 1. Financial Management (SSBU) 2. Financial Management (Operational) 3. Staff Engagement · An overview of the Improvement Plan and Work Streams was provided to each Council Leadership team and key work stream contributors through December 2020. · Work has commenced on Work Streams 3, 4, 5 and 8 plus sub-streams 1 and 3. A full progress update will be provided to the NTALG at the February 2021 governance meeting. · Suggested that once the formal report is approved and a new contractual agreement entered into, there are a series of meetings with Calvin, Chris and Jason with the Chief Executives and the key business support staff where obligations from both sides will be discussed.
3.	Climate Change	KDC	In Progress	· Inter-Council Joint Standing Committee · Adaptation Strategy · *Hazard mapping including coastal erosion and flooding	· Key areas of work for Climate Adaptation Te Taitokerau (joint staff working group - CATT): · Developing a regional adaptation strategy focussed on working with communities on long-term climate change adaptation · Drafting supporting strategy documents including a regional climate change risk assessment, local government adaptation toolbox, and adaptive pathways program scope and adaptation plan · Ensuring consistency in LTP proposals regarding CC adaptation · Supporting the establishment of the Joint Committee on Climate Change Adaptation · Providing feedback to central Government on climate change initiatives (such as the National Climate Change Risk Assessment and National Adaptation Plan). · The groups key current focus is the development of a regional adaptation strategy. The regional Adaptation Strategy is now in the early stages of development and will ultimately outline a ten-year work program to develop adaptation plans for key locations across the region. The strategy will pull together information from a series of technical reports covering a climate risk assessment (climate risk overview; coastal hazard risk analysis, adaptation options for local government and a 10-year adaptation plan (including adaptation methods, program scope, priorities and timeline). · Part one of the regional climate change risk assessment (an overview of climate risks in Northland) is being drafted by NRC and reviewed by CATT members. It is on track to be released as technical report in early 2021. This report will be followed by a coastal risk analysis and risk profiles, using updated coastal hazard mapping undertaken by NRC. These hazard maps cover coastal erosion and coastal inundation mapping with several sea level rise scenarios/timeframes. The full adaptation strategy is expected to be delivered as a digital resource in late 2021. · The adaptation strategy is in alignment with, and in support of, individual council's efforts to resource adaptation planning in their rohe. Adaptation planning projects are unlikely to get underway before the beginning of 2022, with additional resources expected for each council mid 2021 allowing a 6-month planning window prior to community engagement. · In parallel to the adaptation work of CATT, NRC are publishing new coastal hazard maps for consideration in the RPS and district plans. Workshops with each council to review the maps are scheduled for February and March. Maps are set to be released in early April. The timing aligns with district plan reviews by FNDC and WDC. · CATT is driving the establishment and providing administrative support for a regional governance structure for climate change adaptation involving councillors and tangata whenua. All councils have now approved the ToR and nominated representatives to the Joint Committee on Climate Change Adaptation. Scheduling is underway for the first hui, which will likely take place in March or April, pending representative availability. · MfE are currently engaging with local government regarding risk assessment methodologies and the upcoming national adaptation strategy and national adaptation plan. CATT members are participating in these hui and are key players in developing inter-regional cooperative adaptation knowledge-sharing.
4.	Regional Economic Development	NRC	In Progress	· *Re-organisation of Northland Inc. to a Regional Joint CCO	· NRC, KDC and FNDC staff have been working together to coordinate text for their respective LTP consultation documents. · NRC has established the Regional Economic Development Service Delivery Working Party which has two elected members from each of the three councils. It is chaired by NRC Cr. Justin Blaikie. The Working Party has two objectives: to provide advice to NRC on Northland Inc.’s Statement of Intent 2021-2024 and the appointment of three directors to Northland Inc. commencing 1 July 2021. The Working Party has met twice, providing input into a letter of expectations sent by NRC to Northland Inc, regarding the SOI 2021-2024. A draft SOI will be provided by Northland Inc. before 1 March. A timetable for undertaking the process of advertising, interviewing and selecting three directors has been agreed and implemented. · Documentation required for moving to joint ownership of Northland Inc. (e.g. shareholder agreement, changes to Northland Inc. constitution) is being drafted by lawyer
	Projects carried over from 2019
5.	PGF and CIP Funded Projects	FNDC	In Progress	· *Securing PGF funds for strategic projects and projects that enable employment creation and sustainability.	· On 1 July 2020, government announced $150M for Northland Infrastructure “Shovel Ready” Projects, with further announcements made up until central government elections. A schedule of the projects and the funding allocation is attached. · The focus once a Labour-government was announced was on getting the PGF funding agreements signed. This is now complete and projects into delivery phase with milestone reporting underway.
6.	Digital Enablement	FNDC	In Progress	·	· Jude Thompson, TTNEAP Portfolio Manager, is the new Chair of the DEG. The group met on Dec 3rd 2020 to finalise the launch of the 5th annual 2020-21 Northland Broadband Speed Test and the plan the Connected Northland regional online learning programme, funded by the US State Department and FNDC and launching in March 2021. Over 100 people have completed the survey and there is still one month before it closes. A quick scan of results shows upload speeds are very slow across the region. The group agreed NRC would draft a letter to Crown Infrastructure Partners questioning the slowness of the WISP build in Northland – and whether this was still a good use of funds with the much improved satellite technology now available and other networks coming on line in the near future e.g. Starlink. An additional request, outside of the DEG meeting, has been made by FNDC to NRC to include the lack of coverage on the Pou Herenga Tai Cycle Trail. In the letter. The trail is supposed to be a priority area in the RBI build but as yet nothing has progressed. The DEG discussed the possibility of the Far North Nothing But Net Digital Strategy (or parts of it like the Goals) being adopted at a regional level,. The strategy is being submitted to the SOLGM Awards by FNDC.
7	Regional ICT	FNDC	In Progress	·	· Limited activity/progress has been occurred with the end of year processes and LTP planning occurring across all Council teams. · One area of activity has progressed is supporting the Northland Transport Alliance (NTA) migrate the individual team members into a single Microsoft 365 environment. This is planned to rollout during Feb/March 2021. · One of the ongoing focus areas has been how each Council is able support the various stages of ‘working from home’ or hybrid working due to COVID-19. Each Council is working at various speeds and priorities depending on the operating model moving forward. · Alignment to some of the tools and learning are being shared with a view to support each other moving forward given the variation of where each Council is at. · · Mobility as a Service – NRC has completed this work with Spark for their mobile fleet and this is being used to help other Council to adopt a similar service. FNDC and WDC are now progressing with planning for moving into this service following on from the learnings from NRC. · Following 2020 ‘new normal’ activities, Cyber Security and ICT Security have become a key focus area for all the Northland Councils. FNDC, WDC and KDC are all working through this industry framework. This work is aligned to the Association of Local Government Information Managers (ALGIM) cyber security framework, audit and benchmarking process that is being delivered by a NZ based company called SAM for Compliance. · 'Northland Digital Collaboration Alliance’ has yet to be developed into a working model. This will be a focus during 2021. The focus will be to support each Council particularly with the ‘new normal’ that we are all operating under.
	Projects with a watching brief/ awaiting prioritisation
8.	Solid Waste Re-cycling	WDC	In Progress	· *Agility to ongoing changes to the re-cycling market and central government policy	· Ongoing changes in the market and central government policy related to solid waste and recycling requires that the TAs in the region keep a ‘watching brief’ on progress nationally to see where the opportunities and risks emerge. · Currently any collaboration on solid waste issues across Northland is done on an ad-hoc and informal basis. To maximise to the limited resources available to individual Councils and to take advantage of the efficiencies gained from taking a regionally consistent approach it is worth exploring regional collaboration opportunities. To this end a meeting of the Council staff involved in solid waste from each of the four Councils was held on the 7th December 2020. · The meeting confirmed some significant differences in the way that each council approaches the provision of solid waste services. · It was agreed that there would be some value in identifying common ground where we can collaborate particularly in order to access central government funding for solid waste infrastructure.
8.	Libraries	All	Lower Priority		· Requested by the Mayoral Forum as a regional opportunity. This has been noted as a lower priority and there is no update to date.

Corporate

Transformation and Assurance

Audit and Assurance

The Internal Audit and Assurance Programme for the 2021 calendar year has been rescoped to incorporate the findings of recent external audits and approved by SLT. The Programme will be presented to the Assurance, Risk and Finance Committee along with the refreshed Audit Recommendations Register.

Risk

Regular reporting, to the Assurance, Risk and Finance Committee, on the top organisational risks and their treatment plans continues.

Three risk progress reports were included in the February 2021 Risk Management Report to the Assurance, Risk and Finance Committee. The Risk Progress Reports on ARF003 Health Safety and Wellbeing Vulnerabilities, ARF006 Projects Priorities Delivery Delays and ARF012 Contract Management were presented.

Four risk progress reports with treatment plan updates are being prepared for the meeting of the Assurance, Risk, and Finance Committee in March. These updates are for ARF001 Climate Change Risk, ARF004 Asset Management Risk, ARF010 Customer Service Delivery Risk and ARF013 Drinking Water Resilience Risk.

We have successfully tested and implemented a process for decision-making on demoting a risk from the Top Organisation Risk Dashboard. Two recommendation reports have been presented, and accepted, by the Assurance, Risk and Finance Committee resulting in the demotion of both the ARF008 Civil Defence and ARF002 Building Consents – BCA status Risks from the Top Organisation Risk Dashboard. A recommendation, to demote ARF011 Organisational Cohesion Risk, from the Top Organisation Risk Dashboard will be made to the Assurance, Risk and Finance Committee in March.

We also completed the truncated December risk workshop in February, confirming the 2021 risk work programme for the Assurance, Risk and Finance Committee.

Finally, we are presenting an information report, to the Assurance, Risk and Finance Committee, in March to provide Elected Members a risk progress report on the risks associated with the programme of the externally funded “shovel ready” projects that form part of the Governments economic response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Transformation

The Creating & Enabling Great Workplaces Programme entered an ‘Implementation’ phase in January/February 2021. The official commencement date of 2 February 2021 for the new operating model has been followed with a clean out of all paper-based files across the organisation with teams either archiving, digitising or removing where appropriate. This has enabled the re-design of key spaces on the Level 1 Annex in headquarters Kaikohe and Level 2 in JBC, Kerikeri. Permanent office-based staff have now been allocated their desk spaces across all sites including Kaitaia.

A Councillors Lounge in Kaikohe was opened in February. For staff, Level 1 Annex in Kaikohe has been developed into a collaborative space and key hub for hybrid workers. Using existing furniture and some new office and IT equipment, this space will launch in early March. Level 2 JBC, Kerikeri will also benefit from a less intensive refit and launch in mid-March.

Digital Information Services

Executive Summary

The start of 2021 has seen several work stream activities gaining steam as we undertake the delivery of work for 2021.

One of the key focus activities for 2021 has been to ensure that the Digital Information Services department has adapted like the rest of Council with the various changes that occurred during 2020. Particularly our now permanent operating rhythm of working from home for a significant number of staff.

The first was the results of the internal ICT Satisfaction survey that was commissioned via the Association of Local Government Information Managers (ALGIM) and allow for Council to be benchmarked against other Councils in New Zealand. The second was the ALGIM ICT Cyber Security Audit which was well received by the committee given the changing landscape of how Council is operating since COVID-19 lockdown in March. Both activities will be key to the future workplans within the team.

Additional work has been progressing with support and deployment of the Creating and Enabling Great Workplaces programme with the new year deployment and configuration of new spaces in Kaikohe, Kerikeri and Kaitaia. This work has entailed deployment of new equipment and Teams rooms options to support the hybrid model.

A new operational planning process has been established to support current and future programmes of work and activities. The department is very mindful that we are in a position where we are not wanting to lose the gains created during 2020 as well as developing our new operating rhythm to ensure delivery of our work programmes.

ICT Operations and Delivery:

ICT Service Desk Requests

The number of ICT Service Desk requests received during the January-February 2021 period was 1,747. This number is down from 2,095 which were received in the November-December 2020 period. The number of outstanding requests yet to be resolved is 367.

External Phone Calls via Microsoft Teams

Work has further progressed to migrate external phone calls (making and receiving) from Skype for Business to Microsoft Teams. The initial technical configuration and testing has been completed by Spark and our ICT team. Twenty ‘Early Adopter’ staff have been moved over to Teams and are undertaking testing before it is rolled out to the rest of the Council staff. This project is due to be completed in March/April 2021.

Contact Centre Phone System Project

Work is currently underway with Datacom to migrate the existing Contact Centre phone system Genesys PureConnect, to a new cloud-based SaaS (Software as a Service) system called Genesys Cloud. This will provide a better customer and employee experience and will integrate with Microsoft Teams. The new platform will also provide great options for remote working should future lockdowns or significant events affect the contact centre team currently based in Kaikohe. The system is currently being configured whilst we wait for hardware to be delivered.

Library RFID Project

Work has progressed on the project to set up RFID (radio-frequency identification) tags in library books to enable the use of self-service kiosks in our Libraries. The ICT team have been testing software and a range of hardware devices to ensure the required expected level of performance and quality is achieved.

ICT Equipment

The ICT team have been working on fitting out the new Cloud space in Kaikohe with computer equipment. This has involved setting up 55 desks with dual monitors, docking stations or thin client computers, keyboards and mice. Three meeting rooms and one large workshop space is also being set up with Microsoft Teams enabled audio visual equipment.

External Email Warning Message

In mid-February we implemented a warning message that is displayed at the top of emails that are received from an external email address. The purpose is to highlight that the email has been sent from an email address outside of FNDC and extra caution should be taken before clicking on any links or opening any attachments.

Multi Factor Authentication (MFA)

MFA has been rolled out to all FNDC staff and will also be rolled out to contractors shortly. We are using the Microsoft Authenticator app which is installed on your smart phone or a hard token can be supplied if necessary.

MFA is used to ensure that when you log into a computer system you are who you say you are, by requiring at least two pieces of evidence to prove your identity. It adds a layer of protection to the sign-in process and reduces the risk of unauthorised access to sensitive data.

Cybersecurity Awareness Programme

We have purchased an online Cybersecurity Awareness Programme from SSS (IT Security Specialists) and ALGIM that will be rolled out to all staff and elected members. Attackers are always looking for a way into Council systems, which is why it is important for everyone in our organisation to have a good awareness of information security. Communications will go out to all staff over the next few weeks.

Antivirus Software Health Check

We have recently completed a health check of our antivirus software (Trend Micro) to ensure the configuration is set optimally and is performing effectively against an ever-growing variety of threats.

Data Insights and Programme Delivery:

Online Services

The following functionality has been made available and in use by customers, LIM Requests, ‘MyFNDC’ for customer RFS, infringement payments, registrations, mobile inspections RFS (internal users), building and resource consent applications. An initiative encouraging building and resource practitioners to become registered customers so that they can lodge building and resource applications online is underway.

The online payment of rates and water rates was released in January ready for payments in quarter three. Publicity is planned in quarter four when this new system is well bedded in. This publicity may include modifying the printed and electronic rates bill. This is the most effective way to communicate information about rates payment options to the target audience.

The mobile inspection functionality for hairdressers and mortuaries has recently been released and is now in production including end to end digital process for Admin, Inspectors and customers. Training has been provided to all inspectors using the new tablets. Analysis for food business inspections has started, with a solution to automatically update inspection results to MPI likely.

An events management solution has been built and is being tested by the business. This will allow applicants to apply for licenses and permits in order to organise events. Dog re-registration is awaiting testing prior to a soft launch. An approach for permits and licenses has been developed with preliminary scoping planned for mid-March.

The process for handling Online Services enhancement requests has been documented and a solution has been developed, the current backlog of enhancement requests is being evaluated and considered as items for online services stage 5 using this solution.

Support of the CRT due to changing COVID alert levels continue to impact the delivery of solutions.

Upgrade Programme

A draft programme of work that covers software and hardware security updates has been developed to ensure a regular schedule and release programme. This has been planned with consideration to significant business activities such as rates strike, financial year end and long-term plan consultation.

Enterprise Data Warehouse (EDW)

A considerable period has been spent planning and developing a design that will not only meet current reporting requirements but also allow for future needs. The agreed solution follows industry standards and best practices. Training and education of the internal team on enterprise data warehouse concepts and best practice continues as needs are identified.

The data vault, a core component of the data warehouse, has been constructed and handed over to SQL Services as the foundation for the data warehouse. Work will commence in the second week of March on the schema for building consents and Vision 2020.

Electronic Document Delivery

The Electronic Document Delivery enhancements that allow for form letters and other information to be directly emailed from Pathway has progressed well.

The training of staff in the management of the process has been completed and complementary manuals and guides published for them to use. One on one training sessions with staff around how to set up email as a preferred delivery method and how to prepare templates have also been completed.

Where appropriate, the form letters confirming a customer’s decision to use email delivery have been produced and staff trained in their use.

Information Management:

Property File ePathway Applications

Objective Support

Support requests resolved: 177

Files and folders created and approved: 201

Objective users’ changes/movements: 99

New User setup/staff movements: 20

Northland Information Management Professionals (NIMP)

NIMP was established in 2012 to bring together the information management professionals from the various Northland councils and provide networking, support, collaboration and learning opportunities. The first quarterly meeting of 2020 was hosted by WDC on 12 January. Matters discussed included:

· NTA SharePoint project

· New ISO standard for an IM management system

· NRC Objective migration

· KDC SharePoint taxonomy

· WDC in-house scanning bureau

The next meeting will be hosted by FNDC on 7 May

Archives NZ Annual Report

On 19 February Archives NZ released their annual report on the state of Government recordkeeping, including the collated results of their annual survey. The report reflects on the challenges of recordkeeping in the face of COVID-19, highlights where improvements are needed and where Archives will focus efforts in the coming year.

Business Intelligence and GIS:

Enterprise Data Warehouse Workshops

Work on the Data Vault in preparation of the new warehouse has been completed. The build has been handed over to our vendor for the creation of the Datawarehouse.

Ci-Anywhere Finance

Key user training on Data Analytics, Reporting and Accounts Payable has been completed in preparation for the upgrade to Ci-Anywhere.

Ci-Anywhere Human Resources:

Ci-Anywhere key processes have been configured ready for business training and Phase 1 go-live 6 April. This includes:

· System configuration, design, testing and implementation of the Recruitment module (previously done via Scout)

· Preparation for development and automation of forms and approvals, replacing existing business processes.

· Classification and documentation of FTE operational movements, reconciliation, and detailed reporting

· Preparation for the automation of the resignation process, associated tasks, and internal communication

Geospatial Information Services:

Water Scheme Modelling (IAMS)

A consolidated dataset that is secure and dynamic for one of our external vendors Morphum for the water scheme modelling has been created. This enabled the vendor to use our GIS self-service portal and extract data as needed with the project.

Flood Modelling (IAMS)

A consolidated dataset that is secure and dynamic for one of our external vendors GHD for flood modelling has been created. This enabled the vendor to use our GIS self-service portal and extract data as needed with the project.

Supporting District Administration/Democracy Services with the Representation Review

A detailed subdivision boundary maps showing roads/rivers/properties on the boundaries has been created so that Community Board Members have a clearer understanding of their subdivision area. Putting together maps and data from various sources to show outcomes of boundary amendments during consultations.

Generally, to create a visual display of a suggested boundary change and the consequent impact of the change on population numbers and representation ratios.

Supporting District Planning with the District Plan Review

We are receiving draft maps from consultant, tidying them up to FNDC GIS and record-

keeping requirements, checking they meet Ministry for the Environment ‘National Planning.

Standards’ criteria and adding them to the District Plan ePlan (ISOvist).

This process ensures that FNDC fulfils MfE/RMA requirements and appropriate record management policies.

Operational Financial Performance - As at 28 February 2021