Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting - Thursday, 8 August 2024

8 August 2024

6.1 Representation Review 2024 - Arotake Whakaahuatanga Tangata 2024 - Final Proposal

File Number: A4774682

Author: Casey Gannon, Manager - Democracy Services

Authoriser: Jacine Warmington, Group Manager - Strategic Relationships

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

This report recommends that Council adopt the Representation Review 2024 - Arotake Whakaahuatanga Tangata 2024 final proposal as outlined in the recommendation.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· Territorial Authorities are required to conduct a Representation Review at least once every six years. Far North District Council conducted a full Representation Review in 2021 and conducted a further representation review in 2024 to focus on:

o the structure of Far North Māori ward

o the subdivision names

o Representation of councillors appointed to community boards

· A Representation Review is a review of Council membership and the basis of election, the total number of councillors, how councillors are elected (wards, district-wide, a mix of both), and a review of community boards.

· If Council decide to be represented by wards the Representation Review considers how many wards, boundaries, names, and the number of councillors for each ward. Should community boards be retained, the representation review is to consider the number, names and boundaries of community boards and the number of elected and appointed members.

· Council resolved an initial proposal on 9 May 2024 and received submissions from 16 May to 17 June 2024. A hearing was then conducted on 9 July 2024.

· Council must now resolve a final proposal and publicly notify this for appeals and/or objections.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That the Far North District Council, in accordance with sections 19H and 19J and clauses 1 and 2 of Schedule 1A of the Local Electoral Act 2001, adopt the following as its final proposal for the review of representation arrangements for at least the 2025 triennial local elections:

a) the Far North District Council to comprise the Mayor elected at large and 10 councillors elected under the ward system, specifically 6 general ward councillors and 4 Māori ward councillors.

b) the Far North District Council be divided into 4 wards, these being:

i) Kaikohe-Hokianga General Ward (represented by 1 general ward councillor), comprising the area in the current Kaikohe-Hokianga General Ward map as shown on Attachment 1.

ii) Te Hiku General Ward (represented by 2 general ward councillors), comprising the area in the current Te Hiku General Ward map as shown on Attachment 1.

iii) Bay of Islands-Whangaroa General Ward (represented by 3 general ward councillors), comprising the area in the current Bay of Islands-Whangaroa General Ward map as shown on Attachment 1.

iv) Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward (represented by 4 Māori ward councillors), comprising the whole of the district in the Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward map as shown on Attachment 2.

The three general wards, the number of general ward councillors per ward, the ward populations (estimated at 30 June 2023) and the population ratio per general ward councillor are as follows:

General Wards
Ward	Population	Number of councillors	Population per councillor	Difference from quota	% Difference from quota
Te Hiku General Ward	13,900	2	6,950	-1,127	-13.95%
Bay of Islands-Whangaroa General Ward	26,500	3	8,833	757	9.37%
Kaikohe-Hokianga General Ward	8,060	1	8,060	-17	-0.21%
Total	48,460	6	8,077

c) In accordance with section 19V(2) of the Local Electoral Act 2001, the population that each general ward councillor represents must be within the population range of 8,077 +/- 10% (7,269 – 8,884) unless particular community of interest considerations justify otherwise. The representation of Te Hiku General Ward falls outside of the stipulated range – to comply would limit the effective representation of communities of interest by either splitting communities of interest or uniting communities with few commonalities.

a) d) the Far North District Council be divided into 3 subdivided communities, these being:

i) Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community subdivided into:

(1) Kawakawa-Moerewa Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed Kawakawa-Moerewa Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

(2) Kerikeri Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed Kerikeri Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

(3) Paihia Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed Paihia Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

(4) Russell-Ōpua Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed Russell-Ōpua Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

(5) Waipapa Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed Waipapa Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

(6) Whangaroa Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed Whangaroa Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

being the existing community board and subdivision areas

ii) Kaikohe-Hokianga Community subdivided into:

(1) Kaikohe Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed Kaikohe Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

(2) North Hokianga Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed North Hokianga Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

(3) South Hokianga Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed South Hokianga Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

being the existing community board and subdivision areas.

iii) Te Hiku Community subdivided into:

(1) Doubtless Bay Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed Doubtless Bay Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

(2) Kaitāia Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed Kaitāia Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

(3) North Cape Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed North Cape Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

(4) Karikari-Awanui Subdivision comprising the area in the proposed Karikari- Awanui Subdivision map as shown on Attachment 4.

being the existing community board and subdivision areas.

e) there be 19 community board members being:

(i) 7 members elected from the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board comprising:

1) Kawakawa-Moerewa Subdivision – 1 member

2) Kerikeri Subdivision – 2 members

3) Paihia Subdivision – 1 member

4) Russell-Ōpua Subdivision – 1 member

5) Waipapa Subdivision – 1 member

6) Whangaroa Subdivision – 1 member

and 2 members of the Council 1 representing Bay of Islands- Whangaroa General Ward and 1 representing Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward appointed to the community board by Council.

(ii) 6 members elected from the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board comprising:

1) Kaikohe Subdivision – 3 members

2) North Hokianga Subdivision – 1 member

3) South Hokianga Subdivision – 2 members

and 2 members of the Council representing either the Kaikohe-Hokianga General Ward or Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward appointed to the community board by Council.

(iii) 6 members elected from Te Hiku Community Board comprising:

1) Doubtless Bay Subdivision – 1 member

2) Kaitāia Subdivision – 3 members

3) North Cape Subdivision – 1 member

4) Karikari-Awanui Subdivision – 1 member

and 2 members of the Council representing either Te Hiku General Ward or Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward appointed to the community board by Council.

The three subdivided community boards, the number of members per subdivision, the subdivision populations (estimated at 30 June 2023) and the population ratio per member are as follows:

Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board
Subdivision	Population	Number of councillors	Population per councillor	Difference from quota	% Difference from quota
Whangaroa Subdivision	4,350	1	4,350	-617	-12.42
Waipapa Subdivision	5,070	1	5,070	103	2.07
Kerikeri Subdivision	10,800	2	5,400	433	8.71
Paihia Subdivision	5,320	1	5,320	353	7.10
Kawakawa-Moerewa Subdivision	5,080	1	5,080	113	2.27
Russell-Ōpua Subdivision	4,150	1	4,150	-817	-16.45
Total	34,770	7	4,967

In accordance with section 19V(2) of the Local Electoral Act 2001, the population that

each member of the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board represents must be within the population range of 4,967 +/- 10% (4,470 – 5,464) unless particular

community of interest considerations justify otherwise. The representation of the

Whangaroa Subdivision and the Russell-Ōpua Subdivision fall outside of the

stipulated range - to comply would limit the effective representation of communities of interest by either splitting communities of interest or uniting communities of interest with few commonalities.

Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board
Subdivision	Population	Number of councillors	Population per councillor	Difference from quota	% Difference from quota
North Hokianga Subdivision	2,700	1	2,700	-90	-3.23
South Hokianga Subdivision	4,870	2	2,435	-355	-12.72
Kaikohe Subdivision	9,170	3	3,057	267	9.56
Total	16,740	6	2,790

In accordance with section 19V(2) of the Local Electoral Act 2001, the population that

each member of the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board represents must be within

the population range of 2,790 +/- 10% (2,511 – 3,069) unless particular community of

interest considerations justify otherwise. The representation of the South Hokianga

Subdivision falls outside of the stipulated range - to comply would limit the effective

representation of communities of interest by either splitting communities of interest or uniting communities of interest with few commonalities.

Te Hiku Community Board
Subdivision	Population	Number of councillors	Population per councillor	Difference from quota	% Difference from quota
North Cape Subdivision	3,370	1	3,370	-507	-13.07
Karikari-Awanui Subdivision	3,880	1	3,880	3	0.09
Doubtless Bay Subdivision	4,310	1	4,310	433	11.18
Kaitāia Subdivision	11,700	3	3,900	23	0.60
Total	23,260	6	3,877

In accordance with section 19V(2) of the Local Electoral Act 2001, the population that

each member of Te Hiku Community Board represents must be within the

population range of 3,877 +/- 10% (3,489 – 4,264) unless particular community of

interest considerations justify otherwise. The representation of the North Cape

Subdivision and the Doubtless Bay Subdivision fall outside of the stipulated range as to comply would limit the effective representation of communities of interest by either splitting communities of interest or uniting communities of interest with few

commonalities.

d) The Far North District Council changes the name of the Whatuwhiwhi Subdivision to Karikari-Awanui Subdivision.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

The Local Electoral Act (LEA) requires every local authority to undertake representation arrangements review at least once every six years, or if Māori wards/constituencies are introduced. Council undertook its last representation arrangements review in 2021 and is therefore required to undertake its next review in 2027. However, Far North District Council has chosen to conduct a representation review in 2024.

The current representation arrangements are:

· Mayor elected ‘at large’.

· 10 councillors elected from 4 wards (3 from the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa General Ward, 1 from the Kaikohe-Hokianga General Ward, 2 from Te Hiku General Ward and 4 from the Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward).

· 19 community board members elected from 3 subdivided community boards (7 from the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board, 6 from the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board and 6 from Te Hiku Community Board).

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

DISCUSSION

Legislative Requirements

Part 1A of the LEA sets out the requirements for representation arrangements review. Issues that a local authority is required to consider include:

· whether councillors (other than the Mayor) are to be elected by electors of the district as a whole (at large), by electors of two or more wards, or in some cases by a mix of electors of the district (at large) and by electors of wards;

· the proposed number of councillors to be elected in each category (at large/ward/mixture - if applicable);

· the proposed name and boundaries for each ward;

· whether there should be communities and community boards, and if so, the nature of a community and structure of a community board;

· whether one or more communities should be constituted;

· whether any community board should be abolished or united with another community;

· whether the boundaries of a community should be altered;

· whether a community should be subdivided for electoral purposes;

· the number of members of a community board (including the number elected and appointed);

· whether members of a community board to be elected by electors of a community as a whole, or by electors of two or more subdivisions, or by electors of each ward (if community comprises two or more wards);

· the name, boundaries and number of members of each subdivision of a community (if adopted).

Key Principles

In undertaking representation arrangements review, the following key principles are required to be considered:

· communities of interest

· effective representation

· fair representation

Process

The process to follow when undertaking a representation arrangements review is:

1. identify the district’s communities of interest;

2. determine the effectiveness of members by looking at the overall number of members, the number of members elected from general and Māori wards and whether they represent the district as a whole or from wards or by a mixture, in order that members are effective (are able to listen to and represent constituents effectively);

3. investigate whether there should be community boards, and if so, the number, boundaries, number of members, whether they be subdivided etc;

4. determine that members fairly represent their constituents by ensuring the average population ratio is no more than a +/- 10% variance.

Communities of Interest

The district’s land use is predominantly rural with supporting service towns. The largest residential concentrations are Kaitāia, Kaikohe and Kerikeri.

The district is currently divided into four wards and Council considers that the current ward boundaries still largely reflect the district’s communities of interest Ngā Tai o Tokerau, Bay of Islands-Whangaroa, Kaikohe-Hokianga and Te Hiku.

The district is also currently divided into three subdivided community boards (Bay of Islands- Whangaroa, Kaikohe-Hokianga and Te Hiku), which Council still considers appropriate.

Community board subdivision boundaries are able to be altered in a representation review under section 19J(2)(c) LEA. As part of the 2021 representation review the Awanui area was brought into the Whatuwhiwhi subdivision where Awanui was previously a part of the North Cape subdivision. This final proposal recommends a name change to reflect that change. (Attachment 3)

The informal feedback received showed a majority of submissions in favour of the name change Karikari-Awanui Subdivision although a verbal submission and written submissions were not in favour of the name change.

Effective Representation

The Far North’s estimated resident population at 30 June 2023 was 74,700, 26,300 of this being the Māori Electoral Population (MEP) and 48,400 being the General Electoral Population (GEP).

The number of Māori and general ward councillors is determined by a formula set in legislation that depends on the total number of councillors, the MEP and the GEP of the district. Under that formula, with a total of 10 ward councillors, there would be 6 general ward councillors and 4 Māori ward councillors.

Council also considers that 19 community board members also provide effective representation (access and availability) to local communities.

Fair Representation

If the district is divided into wards, the membership of the general wards is required to provide approximate population equality per member, which means each elected member representing a general ward should represent about the same number of people. This is referred to as the fair representation ‘+/-10% rule’. To calculate this, each general ward’s GEP is divided by the number of general ward councillors elected in each general ward, which should produce a figure no more than 10% greater or smaller (+/-10%) than the total GEP of the district divided by the total number of general ward councillors (the quota). As there is only one Māori ward, the fair representation criteria do not apply to the Māori ward.

The latest population estimates (as at 30 June 2023) confirm that Te Hiku General Ward, the Whangaroa and Russell-Ōpua Subdivisions of the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board, the South Hokianga Subdivision of the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board and the North Cape and Doubtless Bay Subdivisions of Te Hiku Community Board do not comply with the fair representation criteria.

The reasons for the non-compliance in Te Hiku Community Board is that achieving compliance would require moving the ward boundary south to increase the population by approximately 320 people. This would mean moving large areas from either the Kaikohe-Hokianga General Ward or Bay of Islands-Whangaroa General Ward likely dividing a community of interest.

The reasons for the non-compliance in the subdivisions of the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa, Kaikohe-Hokianga and Te Hiku Community Boards is that these subdivisions reflect communities of interest, and that making boundary changes to achieve compliance would result in dividing communities of interest and in uniting communities of interest that share few commonalities.

The formal consultation period on the Initial Proposal between 12 August and 12 September included online and hardcopy survey options in both English and te reo Māori. The consultation included kanohi ki te kanohi (face-to-face) events and engagement throughout the district in particular a focus in Te Hiku as the communities in Te Hiku were the communities of interest identified as the most affected communities in this Representation Review in collaboration with Te Hono team.

An online survey was made available through pamphlets and posters that had a QR code asking for public input on 5 questions specific to the representation review.

1) Do you agree with the proposal to increase the number of councillors appointed to Bay of Islands-Whangaroa community board (with voting rights) to two councillors per community board, one from the Bay of Islands- Whangaroa General Ward, and one from the Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward?

2) Do you agree with the proposal to increase the number of councillors appointed to Te Hiku Community Board (with voting rights) to two councillors from Te Hiku General Ward or the Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward?

3) Do you agree with the proposal to increase the number of councillors appointed to the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board (with voting rights) to two councillors from the Kaikohe-Hokianga General Ward or the Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward?

4) Do you agree with the proposal to rename the Whatuwhiwhi Subdivision of Te Hiku Community Board to Karikari- Awanui Subdivision?

5) Do you wish to make a verbal submission to the Councillors? Verbal submissions are scheduled for Tuesday 9 and Wednesday 10 July 2024.

86 valid submissions were received, the Initial Proposal consultation data (Attachment 5) and full detail submissions (Attachment 6) are attached. The data includes all responses received for each question and a drill down - snapshot of responses received from the relative ward, or community of interest.

A consultation at Te Ahu for the larger Te Hiku community was conducted with minimal uptake. The Karikari Hall was also open for a consultation event. The feedback received during and after the event at Karikari Hall indicated that most of the community travel out of the area for work and that an after-hour event would be preferred in future for increased engagement.

There was a clear indication that the community in Whatuwhiwhi was unaware of the change made to the boundaries to the Whatuwhiwhi subdivision to include Awanui during the 2021 Representation Review. Concerns raised during consultation indicated a deeper dive into this community of interest needs to be considered in the next Representation Review where boundaries, subdivision names and fair and effective representation will be discussed at greater length. A verbal submission received from Keringawai Evans, Vice Chairperson of Haititaimarangai Marae Trust in relation to the proposed name change and can be reviewed on the verbal submission live stream link below (from 31.40). Three additional verbal submissions received included Manuela Gmuer-Hornell (from 1.10), Fiona King (from 12.30) and Robyn Tauroa, Whangaroa Papa Hapu (from 21.30).

Representation Review 2024 - Arotake Whakaahuatanga Tangata 2024 - Initial Proposal verbal submissions live stream.

Considerations for the final proposal

The key issues identified in the public submission process were:

Appointment of councillors to community boards

A majority of the submissions received did not support the decision to increase the number of councillors appointed to the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board, Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board or Te Hiku Community Board. The comments revealed that the most common reason for not supporting this was financial reasons, followed by a belief that no councillors should be appointed to community boards.

The Far North District Council believes appointing councillors to community boards has value and leads to positive outcomes. Currently, the councillors appointed to community boards are solely from the general ward in which the community board is situated. However, Council believes that these appointments should be able to include Māori ward councillors. It is therefore recommended that the final proposal includes:

· 2 councillors appointed to the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board (1 from the Bay of Islands-Whangaroa General Ward and one from the Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward)

· 2 councillors appointed to the Kaikohe-Hokianga Community Board (from either the Kaikohe-Hokianga General Ward or the Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward)

· 2 councillors appointed to Te Hiku Community Board (from either Te Hiku General Ward or the Ngā Tai o Tokerau Māori Ward)

Changing the name of the Whatuwhiwhi Subdivision of Te Hiku Community Board to the Karikari-Awanui Subdivision.

A majority of the submissions received supported the decision to change the name of the Whatuwhiwhi Subdivision of Te Hiku Community Board to the Karikari-Awanui Subdivision. The most common reason provided was that Karikari-Awanui better represents the area covered by the community board. The most common reason stated by those not supporting the name change was that Whatuwhiwhi held significance, and there had been a lack of consultation about the name change.

The Far North District Council believes the name Karikari-Awanui best reflects the area covered by the community board. It is therefore recommended the Whatuwhiwhi Subdivision of Te Hiku Community Board be renamed to the Karikari-Awanui Subdivision.

Take Tūtohunga / Reason for the recommendation

Taking into account feedback from our communities, community boards, Te Kuaka – Te Ao Māori Committee and Council, it is recommended to progress the final proposal as recommended.

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

There are no budgetary considerations as a result of this report.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Representation Review 2024 - Arotake Whakaahuatanga Tangata 2024 - Final Proposal - General Wards - A4803818 ⇩

2. Representation Review 2024 - Arotake Whakaahuatanga Tangata 2024 - Final Proposal - Māori Ward - A4803037 ⇩

3. Representation Review 2024 - Arotake Whakaahuatanga Tangata 2024 - Final Proposal - Karikari-Awanui Subdivision - A4803233 ⇩

4. Representation Review 2024 - Arotake Whakaahuatanga Tangata 2024 - Final Proposal - Community Board Subdivisions - A4803818 ⇩

5. Representation Review 2024 - Arotake Whakaahuatanga Tangata 2024 - Data - Initial Proposal Consultation - A4775404 ⇩

6. Representation Review 2024 - Arotake Whakaahuatanga Tangata 2024 - Initial Proposal Submissions - A4819744 ⇩

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	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	A representation review can be considered to be of medium significance in accordance with FNDC’s significance and engagement policy. This report incorporates feedback from public consultation to inform Council’s final proposal. 171 submissions were received.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	Local Electoral Act, Local Government Act.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	It has district wide relevance. Community Boards have been consulted twice in developing the initial proposal with Council, and Community Board Chairs have been invited to every workshop with Council since 24 June 2020 (along with deputy chairs leading into the last two rounds of workshops in 2021).
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. State the possible implications and how this report aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi.	The establishment of Ngā Tai o Tokerau has had a significant impact on Māori and is in line with the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi - Protection, Partnership and Participation.
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).	There are no persons (other than those identified already) who are likely to be particularly affected by the representation review.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	The remuneration for elected members is set by the Remuneration Authority so there are no new budgetary implications as a result of the representation review. Budget has been set side in this financial year to run communications and engagement initiatives to ensure that our communities are informed of the changes – being the representation review, the electoral system and the establishment of Māori wards.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 August 2024

6.2 Northland Forward Together - Te Taitokerau Kōkiri Ngātahi

File Number: A4774936

Author: Roger Ackers, Group Manager - Planning & Policy

Authoriser: Guy Holroyd, Chief Executive Officer

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To seek approval of Northland Forward Together - Te Taitokerau Kōkiri Ngātahi as the local government strategic collaboration document across the Northland Councils.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· The Northland Mayoral Forum agreed on 26 February 2024 to revise the Northland Forward Together document adopted by all the Northland Councils over a period from late 2015 to early 2016.

· Following a workshop on 19 March 2024 and subsequent discussion and feedback form all Councils a draft revised Northland Forward Together – Te Taitokerau Kōkiri Ngātahi document was developed as the updated local government strategic collaboration document across the Northland Councils.

· The approval of the draft revised Northland Forward Together – Te Taitokerau Kōkiri Ngātahi document by Te Kaunihera o Te Hiku o te Ika Far North District Council is now sought in alignment with the other Northland Councils who have adopted this document.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council:

a) approve the Northland Forward Together – Te Taitokerau Kōkiri Ngātahi document as the local government strategic collaboration document across the Northland Councils.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

An original Northland Forward Together document was adopted and signed by each of the four Northland local authorities in late 2015/early 2016. A key driver behind the development of the original document was to reflect in writing a strong willingness to work collaboratively across the four councils.

The Triennium Agreement 2022‐2025 between the four Northland local authorities, signed at the Northland Mayoral Forum meeting on 20 February 2023, contained a commitment to review the original Northland Forward Together Strategy.

The review process and proposed changes were discussed at Northland Mayoral and Chief Executives Forum meetings during 2023. A key direction given was to streamline the document and incorporate the regional priorities as agreed by the Northland Mayoral Forum.

At the Northland Mayoral Forum meeting on 26 February 2024, it was agreed that a revised Northland Forward Together document considered at that meeting would be presented to the Northland Forward Together Strategic Workshop on 19 March 2024. The purpose of doing this was to inform and obtain feedback from all elected members of the proposed changes to the document. Following the workshop discussion on 19 March, an opportunity was also provided to every council to submit additional feedback.

Based on the workshop discussion and the additional feedback received, the Northland Mayoral Forum are recommending that the attached two‐page reset be adopted as the new Northland Forward Together strategic collaboration document for Northland local government.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

Option One: Te Kaunihera o Te Hiku o te Ika Far North District Council does not adopt the Northland Forward Together - Te Taitokerau Kōkiri Ngātahi as the local government strategic collaboration document across the Northland Councils.

Advantages	Disadvantages
Allows council to focus on its own priorities.	Sends a signal to the other Northland local authorities that council does not wish to work with them, undermines collaboration efforts that are taking place.

Option Two (recommended option): Te Kaunihera o Te Hiku o te Ika Far North District Council adopts the Northland Forward Together - Te Taitokerau Kōkiri Ngātahi as the local government strategic collaboration document across the Northland Councils.

Advantages	Disadvantages
Maintains and builds momentum in the work that local governments are doing together.	Will require some additional staff time to collaborate across councils and other parties.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

Adopting the attached document sends a clear signal that Te Kaunihera o Te Hiku o te Ika Far North District Council is open to collaborating on regional strategic matters with the other Northland Councils.

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

There are no financial or budgetary implications associated with the recommendation being made in this report.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Northland Forward Together - Te Taitokerau Kokiri Ngatahi - A4775176 ⇩

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	As per the Council’s Significant and Engagement Policy the recommendation made in 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.	There are no specific Council polices, legislation or community outcomes that relate to the recommendation made in this report. However, in general there are desires and aspirations expressed in a range of strategies adopted by the Council and the Long Term Plan to work collaboratively with the other Councils in Northland.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	The recommendation made in this document has District wide relevance.
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. State the possible implications and how this report aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi.	Council recognise and acknowledge the need to collaborate on regional level in Te Pae o Uta and in Whanaungatanga Ki Taurangi, and Te Kuaka.
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).	There will be a general interest from people and communities across the District in the recommendation being put forward in this document. However, there is no requirement to seek out the specific views of any individual groups or people on the recommendation being made.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	There are no financial implications associated with the recommendation being made in this report.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 August 2024

6.3 Joint Delivery of Local Government Economic Development Services in Northland: Expansion to include WDC

File Number: A4780555

Author: Jonathan Slavich, Chief Financial Officer

Authoriser: Charlie Billington, Group Manager - Corporate Services

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To seek approval to sell shares in Northland Inc to Whangārei District Council and expand membership in the Joint Delivery of Local Government Economic Development Committee (JREDC) to include Whangārei District Council (WDC).

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· On 1 July 2021, Far North District Council (FNDC), Kaipara District Council (KDC), and Northland Regional Council (NRC) became joint shareholders of Northland Inc Limited.

· On 16 July 2024, Whangārei District Council adopted its 2024-34 Long Term Plan, including a decision to become a joint shareholder of Northland Inc Limited and to provide funding into the Investment Growth Reserve (IGR).

· The recommendations in the paper include the sale of ten (10) of the 40 Northland Inc shares held by Far North District Council to Whangārei District Council, a revised Shareholders’ Agreement, and terms of reference for the Joint Regional Economic Development Committee.

· On 18 April 2024, the Joint Regional Economic Development Committee agreed that the recommendations should be put to their respective councils for decision.

· WDC will be making decisions to purchase shares from the three councils, agree to the Shareholders’ Agreement and the Terms of Reference for the JREDC, and decide their membership on the JREDC at its meeting on 25 July 2024.

· If all three current shareholder councils approve the sale of shares, Northland Inc will move from being a council-controlled organisation (CCO) jointly and equally controlled by Northland Regional Council, Far North District Council, and Kaipara District Council, to being a CCO jointly and equally controlled by NRC, FNDC, KDC, and WDC. Each of these four councils will own thirty shares in Northland Inc; currently, NRC, KDC, and FNDC each own forty shares in Northland Inc.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council:

a) sell 10 shares in Northland Inc Limited to Whangārei District Council at a price of $2 per share and authorises the Chief Executive Officer to sign the Share Sale and Purchase Agreement (Attachment One) and Share Transfer Form (Attachment Two) to execute the sale and,

b) authorise the Chief Executive Officer to sign the revised Northland Inc Limited Shareholder Agreement (Attachment Three); and

c) adopt the updated Terms of Reference for the Joint Regional Economic Development Committee (Attachment Four).

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

In 2017, a review of local government economic development service delivery in Northland under section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002 recommended that all four Northland councils share joint ownership of Northland Inc. In 2020, the Mayoral Forum agreed to a proposal to transition Northland Inc into a joint council-controlled organisation for economic development.

Following public consultation under section 56(1) of the Local Government Act 2002 and as part of the Long Term Plan (LTP) 2021-2031 consultation process, Far North District Council (FNDC) and Kaipara District Council (KDC) decided to become shareholders of Northland Inc. Whangārei District Council (WDC) did not consult.

On 1 July 2021, FNDC, KDC, and Northland Regional Council (NRC) became joint and equal shareholders of Northland Inc. This was accomplished by NRC selling 40 shares to both KDC and FNDC.

On 29 May 2024, following consultation on the Long-Term Plan 2024-2034, WDC agreed to become a shareholder of Northland Inc. WDC noted the importance of having a strong regional body to drive better economic outcomes for the Whangārei district. This decision was confirmed when WDC adopted its 2024-34 Long Term Plan at its meeting on 16 July 2024.

WDC agreed to commit total investment funding of $475,000 in 2024/25 and $587,000 in 2025/26, and to review the benefits of their involvement in Northland Inc before committing further funding beyond 2025/26. The committed funding will go into the Investment Growth Reserve (IGR), which is the common fund into which the three current shareholders place their funding commitments to regional economic development as set out in their respective LTPs.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

Sale of Shares

Each of the three current council shareholders owns 40 shares in Northland Inc, representing one-third of the total 120 shares. In the original (current) shareholders’ agreement, each of the three shareholder councils committed to selling ten (10) of their 40 shares to Whangārei District Council (WDC) if WDC decided to become a shareholder. These transactions will result in joint and equal ownership of Northland Inc by the four councils, with each owning 30 shares, or one-quarter of the total 120 shares. Each of the current shareholders will sell the shares to WDC at a price of $2 per share, which is the price originally paid by the councils for the shares. This process for moving to joint and equal ownership with WDC was agreed to by the Joint Regional Economic Development Committee (JREDC) at its meeting on 18 April 2024.

The process of selling these shares will be facilitated by staff from all four councils and overseen by the lawyers who provided the required documents for the execution of the sale. The documents include a common Share Sale and Purchase Agreement signed by all four councils as parties to the agreement (Attachment One) and a Share Transfer Form between FNDC and WDC (Attachment Two). These documents set out the terms under which the share sale and transfer will be made. Arrangements will be made for these transactions to happen on the same day once the last of the four councils involved has agreed to the necessary decisions.

Shareholders’ Agreement

On 1 July 2021, a Shareholders’ Agreement was prepared and signed by Northland Inc and each of the three current shareholders. The Shareholders’ Agreement sets out the terms between the parties in relation to the management and ownership of Northland Inc, its activities, and the rights and obligations of the shareholders. Among other things, the Shareholders’ Agreement sets out the rights attached to shares, the appointment of directors, the procedures for board meetings, matters requiring joint committee approval, the issue of new securities, and share transfer restrictions.

A small number of changes to the Shareholders’ Agreement are proposed in light of WDC becoming a shareholder. A few other minor changes are proposed to tidy the document. These changes have been prepared by lawyers appointed by NRC, acting on behalf of current shareholders, with review by WDC legal representatives. At its meeting on 18 April 2024, the JREDC agreed that these changes be provided to the three current shareholder councils for their agreement.

The changes in light of WDC becoming a shareholder include listing WDC as a specific party to the agreement, adding a clause 1.3 to terminate the previous agreement, and revising clause 11 to set out the process for any shareholder to exit ownership. A new clause 17 has been added to outline the funding commitments expected of shareholders and the process for resolving disputes regarding funding. The other changes relate to deleting unused definitions, clarifying the quorum of shareholders (clause 6.2) to ensure consistency with quorum requirements for the Joint Regional Economic Development Committee, adding a minimum monetary value for long-term contracts requiring Joint Committee approval, and modifying references to the Constitution of Northland Inc, as no changes to this are being proposed.

The new Shareholders’ Agreement requires signatures from all parties, i.e., Northland Inc and the four shareholder councils. The new agreement will be dated the same day as the share transactions occur.

Joint Committee Terms of Reference

In 2021, a JREDC was established. The main reason for establishing the JREDC was to give it all the responsibilities, duties, and powers of a local authority as a shareholder in a CCO under the Local Government Act 2002, so that these could be enacted by one joint committee decision rather than three separate council decisions. JREDC was also given responsibility for the allocation of funding from the IGR). The IGR is the common pool into which the shareholder councils place their funding commitments to regional economic development as set out in their respective Long-Term Plans.

Three changes are proposed to the JREDC terms of reference. First, changes are made to incorporate WDC as a member, allowing it to appoint two elected members as full members of the joint committee and one as an alternate in the event that either of the two nominees is unable to attend. This brings the total number of members to eight, two from each shareholder council.

Second, provision is made for a change in membership of JREDC if any of the member councils ceases to be a shareholder of Northland Inc. This has been inserted to allow for the smooth transition in the operation of JREDC should WDC decide to no longer be a shareholder in Northland Inc following the two-year review that WDC specifically included in their LTP 2024-2034 deliberation decision. Finally, with the passage of time, the requirement that the inaugural Chair be an elected member of NRC is removed.

At its meeting on 18 April 2024, the JREDC agreed that these changes be provided to the three current shareholder councils for their agreement.

The formation of joint committees is provided for in the Local Government Act 2002 (Schedule 7, Clauses 30 and 30A). Clause 30A(1) states that a local authority must not appoint a joint committee under clause 30(1)(b) unless it has first reached agreement with every other local authority or public body that is to appoint members of the committee. Under Clause 30A(2), an agreement under subclause 30A(1) must also specify:

a) the number of members each local authority or public body may appoint to the committee;

b) how the chairperson and deputy chairperson of the committee are to be appointed;

c) the terms of reference of the committee;

d) what responsibilities (if any) are to be delegated to the committee by each local authority or public body; and

e) how the agreement may be varied.

The Terms of Reference (TOR) document for the Joint Regional Economic Development Committee (Attachment Four) addresses the requirements above, and by each council resolving to adopt the terms of reference, the requirements of Clause 30A(1) are considered to be met.

Options

Option one – Sell shares in Northland Inc to WDC and expand membership in the JREDC (recommended option)

This option agrees to the set of decisions that move to the joint delivery model for local government economic development services with WDC, including the sale of shares in Northland Inc to WDC, and the expansion of membership in the JREDC.

Advantages of selling shares in Northland Inc to WDC and expanding membership in the JREDC

· Completes the process of WDC becoming a shareholder in Northland Inc and member of the JREDC.

· Provides additional funding into the IGR, allowing for a greater level of enabling investment across the region.

· Enables JREDC to serve as a demonstration of regional unity, on economic development issues, to stakeholders inside and outside the region.

· Enables a greater level of regional coordination in conversations with central government and private firms about investment and development opportunities.

· Enhances Northland Inc’s ability to advocate for the region and secure funding for economic development projects.

Disadvantages of selling shares in Northland Inc to WDC and expanding membership in the JREDC

· Council dilutes its shareholding of Northland Inc, decreasing its level of influence over the CCO’s operations and board composition.

· Increases the operational complexity of the JREDC.

Option two – Status quo – Do not sell shares in Northland Inc to WDC and do not expand membership in the JREDC

This option does not agree to the set of decisions to move to the joint delivery model for local government economic development services with WDC.

Advantages of not selling shares in Northland Inc to WDC and expanding membership in the JREDC

· Maintains FNDC’s current level of influence over Northland Inc and its board.

· Doesn’t increase the complexity of the JREDC.

Disadvantages of not selling shares in Northland Inc to WDC and expanding membership in the JREDC

· Limits the capacity of Northland Inc to advocate for our region, when talking to central government and businesses.

· Likely to decrease the operational funding available to Northland Inc, hindering its ability to support small businesses, given the JREDC’s desire to increase the size of the IGR.

· Negatively affects Northland’s ability to secure funding from the Regional Infrastructure Fund (RIF), given the government’s stated desire to see a high level of regional coordination around the fund.

· Indicates a lack of regional unity and coordination on economic development priorities, which could limit Northland’s access to central government funding, beyond the RIF.

· Could damage FNDC’s relationship with the other three local authorities given their support for WDC’s decision to become a shareholder.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

This joint delivery model includes joint and equal ownership of Northland Inc by the four local authorities, membership of all four councils on the JREDC, and additional funding into the IGR to support regional economic development activities.

Extending the delivery model to include WDC will also enhance Northland Inc’s ability to advocate for investment and development in the region in conversations with central government and private firms.

The JREDC is fully supportive of these changes. Preventing WDC from joining the JREDC and becoming a shareholder in Northland Inc could severely damage the FNDC’s relationship with the other stakeholders involved in the process. Beyond this, external stakeholders, such as central government, would likely view our decision negatively, given their public support for region economic coordination.

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

As part of WDC’s LTP deliberation decision, WDC agreed to provide an annual funding contribution into the IGR for the first two years of LTP 2024-2034: $475,000 in 2024/25 and $587,000 in 2025/26. This will be on top of the annual funding contribution made by NRC, KDC and FNDC, and represents a 19% increase in 2024/25 and 23% in 2025/26.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Attachment 1 Share Sale and Purchase Agreement - A4807078 ⇩

2. Attachment 2 - Share Transfer Form - FNDC to WDC - A4807079 ⇩

3. Attachment 3 - Northland Inc Shareholders' Agreement - A4807080 ⇩

4. Attachment 4 - Joint Regional Economic Development Committee Terms of Reference - A4807081 ⇩

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 decision in this report is of low significance as there is no change to level of service.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The community outcome of a “Prosperous communities supported by a sustainable economy” applies to the decision in this report as WDC joining Northland Inc · provides additional funding into the IGR, allowing for a greater level of enabling investment across the region. · enables JREDC to serve as a demonstration of regional unity, on economic development issues, to stakeholders inside and outside the region. · enables a greater level of regional coordination in conversations with central government and private firms about investment and development opportunities. · enhances Northland Inc’s ability to advocate for the region and secure funding for economic development projects.
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 proposal in this report as district wide relevance and so the Community Boards views have not been sort.
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. State the possible implications and how this report aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi.	The decision in this report is not significant and does not relate to any body of water or land. There are no known particular impacts on Māori that are different from general community views that need to be considered.
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).	The persons most likely to be affected are the Whangārei community. WDC have consulted on becoming a shareholder in Northland Inc and providing funding to the IGR as part of their LTP 2024-2034 consultation process.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	There are no financial implications for FNDC.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 August 2024

6.4 Acceleration of the FOSAL Programme

File Number: A4777530

Author: Esther Powell, Manager - Climate & Action Resilience

Authoriser: Roger Ackers, Group Manager - Planning & Policy

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To accelerate the Future of Severely Affected Land (FOSAL) Programme's completion to two years instead of three and reallocate funding accordingly.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· On 6June 2024, Council resolved to fund a FOSAL Programme to the amount of $700,000 over three years.

· The Cyclone Recovery Unit has indicated the need for a prompt resolution on Category 3 land to provide certainty for affected iwi, hapū, and communities.

· Council staff have designed a categorisation programme to deliver a decision on Category 3 land on 12 December 2024 and to conclude the FOSAL Programme within two years.

· Funding needs to be reallocated over two years instead of three years to facilitate the new timeline.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council approve the reallocation of funds approved under Resolution 2024/73 to $350,000 in 2024/25 and $350,000 in the 2025/26 financial year.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

On 6June 2024, Council resolved through the Long-Term Plan 2024-27 Deliberations (Resolution 2024/73) to approve an additional $700,000 to opt into the FOSAL Programme. Funding was allocated $300,000 in 2024/25, $200,000 in 2025/26 and $200,000 in the 2026/27 financial years.

Staff subsequently informed the Minister for Emergency Management and Recovery through the Cyclone Recovery Unit (CRU) that the Council would be undertaking investigations to determine whether there is land within the district that meets the criteria for voluntary buyouts (Category 3).

Subsequently the CRU has indicated to Council staff that Minister Mitchell requires a prompt resolution to determining whether there is Category 3 land and is seeking to bring the process to a conclusion to provide certainty for those affected communities and properties. In response Council staff have designed an ambitious categorisation programme with the intent of providing a decision item to Elected Members on 12 December 2024 to conclusively state whether there are Category 3 properties in the district and to decide whether an ongoing funding agreement with the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC) is required. If Category 3 land is identified, negotiations with affected communities and properties are expected to continue over 2024/25 and 2025/26 financial years with the intent to have concluded the Programme in two years.

To facilitate this timeline, the funding is required to be reallocated over two years instead of three years.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

Council staff have commenced the investigation to determine what land was affected by the North Island Weather Events of 2023 (NIWE). Following the identification of potentially affected land ground truthing using crowd sourcing, community engagement and field studies will be required. Once affected properties are identified as meeting the NIWE criteria, further simulations, modelling, analysis, and peer review will be required to determine if there is an ongoing intolerable risk to human life from future severe weather events. Following this process Council staff will be able to categorically state whether land meets the criteria within the FOSAL Programme. This is intended to be completed by December 2024.

To complete this work to meet the December deadline, multiple actions must occur simultaneously over the 2024-25 financial year that previously were scheduled to occur over a much slower three-year process. As indicated above exposure modelling has already commenced. Council is in the process of going to market to employ a two-year fixed term project lead and a Kaupapa Māori project lead, and a part-time project coordinator. These positions will be responsible for developing the Programme methodology, policy settings, engaging with iwi, hapū, and communities, undertaking negotiations and contract management.

To further support this work additional professional services will be required including engineering assessments, legal support, and natural hazard risk assessment. Council staff are also working closely with the Northland Regional Council in the development of the FOSAL Programme.

By bringing this work forward the approved budget also needs to be brought forward to facilitate the work programme.

Recommendations

Option One.

Status quo. Continue to undertake the FOSAL Programme over three years.

Option Two.

Reallocate the approved funding for the FOSAL Programme over two years. Allocate $350,000 in the 2024/25 financial year and $350,000 in the 2025/26 financial year to accelerate the programme.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

Option Two is recommended because it will:

1. Meet the expectations of the Cyclone Recovery Unit and the Minister, and

2. Expediate the FOSAL Programme, and

3. Provide certainty for iwi, hapū, and communities.

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

The Council has previously approved the total sum of $700,000 to be spent on funding the FOSAL Programme in the 2024-27 Long-Term Plan. The total amount was initially budgeted over a three-year project timeframe. Reducing the project to two years will have an implication of $200,000 not being spent in the third year of the project (2026/27) and reallocate those funds $50,000 additional in 2024/25 and $150,000 in 2025/26.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

Nil

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	The funding has previously been approved by Council. The reallocation of funds to a two-year project timeline from a three year project has a low degree of significance.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The reallocation of funds has no impact on Council policies or legislation. It will improve community outcomes and the process will be accelerated providing certainty for iwi, hapū, and communities.
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 reallocation of funds and reduction of project timeline has a positive impact on communities. The views of the Community Board were not considered necessary to this decision.
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. State the possible implications and how this report aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi.	The acceleration of the project has a positive effect on Māori as it will provide certainty and enable iwi and hapū to access the Whenua Māori Pathway within a shorter period.
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).	No person is considered affected by the decision to accelerate the FOSAL Programme.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	The budget has previously been approved by the Council. The reallocation of budget within the two year project timeframe has been discussed with the CFO.
Chief Financial Officer review.	Th Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 August 2024

6.5 Amendments to RMA Delegations

File Number: A4726788

Author: Rebecca Rowsell, Senior Solicitor

Authoriser: Roger Ackers, Group Manager - Planning & Policy

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To seek approval to update Council’s delegations to staff and Hearings Commissioners under the Resource Management Act 1991.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

Changes to the structure and role titles within several Council’s Departments necessitate changes to Council’s delegations to staff under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA).

In addition, in the context of the current Proposed District Plan process, RMA delegations have been reviewed and revised with a view to providing greater clarity around the scope of current delegations to Hearings Commissioners.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That the Council:

1) adopt the updated Register of Delegations: Part 1 Delegations from council to staff - Resource Management Act 1991 (Attachment 1); and

2) adopt the updated Register of Delegations: Delegations from Council to Approved Hearings Commissioners- Resource Management Act 1991 (Attachment 2).

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

Under section 34A of the Resource Management Act 1991, Council is authorised to delegate its powers under the Act, except for the power to approve a proposed policy statement or plan under clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the Act, to staff or hearings commissioners appointed by Council. The power to sub-delegate is prohibited by section 34A(1)(b) with the result that all delegations under the RMA must be made by Council to staff and others direct.

Council has previously approved a range of delegations to staff under the RMA based on role titles. While those delegations remain relevant, following changes to the structure of various Departments within Council, not all role titles remain current, and it is necessary to update the delegations to ensure they accurately reflect the current structure.

By resolution dated 5 September 2022, Council resolved to appoint Hearings Commissioners with ‘Making good decisions’ accreditation and delegate a range of decision-making powers to those Hearings Commissioners under the RMA. The powers delegated in 2022 were expressed at a relatively high level and an operational review of those delegations in the context of the current Proposed District Plan process, suggests that there would be some merit in revising and updating current delegations to ensure that there is sufficient clarity around the scope of powers delegated to Hearings Commissioners in the interests of decreasing any risk of challenge to the exercise of delegated authority.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

Option One: Te Kaunihera o Te Hiku o te Ika Far North District Council does not adopt revised delegations to staff and Hearings Commissioners under the Resource Management Act 1991.

Advantages

Nil

Disadvantages

Council delegations to staff under the RMA do not accurately reflect the current operational roles within Council and staff ability to conduct their roles in an effective, efficient manner is impeded. Council delegations to Hearings Commissioners are expressed at a high level and do not provide sufficient clarity around the scope of powers delegated. The risk of challenge to exercise of delegated authority is increased.

Option Two (recommended option): Te Kaunihera o Te Hiku o te Ika Far North District Council adopts revised delegations to staff and Hearings Commissioners under the Resource Management Act 1991.

Advantages

Council delegations to staff under the RMA accurately reflect the current operational roles within Council and staff ability to conduct their roles in an effective, efficient manner is maximised. The scope of Council delegations to Hearings Commissioners are clarified and the risk of challenge to exercise of delegated authority is decreased.

Disadvantages

Nil.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

To align RMA delegations with new role titles across Council and to clarify the scope of RMA delegations to Hearings Commissioners.

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

There are no financial implications resulting from the recommendations made under this report.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Attachment 1 - Delegations to Staff - A4821094 ⇩

2. Attachment 2 - Delegations to Hearings Commissioners - A4813898 ⇩

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	As per the Council’s Significant and Engagement Policy the recommendations made in this report are 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.	The proposed adoption of delegations under this report are in accordance with statutory provision for delegation of powers to staff and others under the Resource Management Act 1991 and Local Government Act 2002.
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 recommendations made in this document have District wide relevance.
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. State the possible implications and how this report aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi.	The proposed adoption of delegations under this report are in accordance with statutory provision for delegation of powers to staff and others under the Resource Management Act 1991 and Local Government Act 2002 and intended to ensure the efficient operation of Council. The exercise of delegated powers, in accordance with statutory requirements apply equally to all parts of the community.
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).	The proposed adoption of revised delegations to staff and Hearings Commissioner is made in accordance with statutory provision for the delegation of powers to staff and other persons to ensure the effective and efficient operation of Council. There is no requirement to seek out the specific views of any individual groups or persons on the recommendations being made.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	· There are no new financial implications associated with the recommendation being made in this report.
Chief Financial Officer review.	· There is no necessity for the Chief Financial Officer to review this report. ·

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 August 2024

6.6 New Ground Lease to Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated over Rarawa Memorial Domain Recreation Reserve

File Number: A4799176

Author: Michelle Rockell, Team Leader - Property Management

Authoriser: Tania Steen, Manager – Property & Facilities Management

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To seek Council resolution on the granting of a new ground lease over recreation reserve, under Section 54 Reserves Act 1977 being Section 151 Block IV Ahipara SD and Lot 4 DP 366836 to Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated have been established at the Rarawa Memorial Domain Recreation Reserve since 1st December 1985.

· In September 2023 Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated formally and requested a new lease.

· There is no existing Reserve Management Plan for Rarawa Memorial Domain Recreation Reserve.

· The Reserves Act 1977 requires public consultation on the issuing of a lease over a Recreation Reserve when no Reserve Management Plan is in place.

· A report was presented to the Te Hiku Community Board on 12th December 2023 who resolved to recommend the initiation of public consultation. Resolution 2023/119.

· Council approved public consultation on 8^th February 2024, which ran from 2^nd to 30^th April 2024.

· A total of 100 submissions were received. 99 were in support of the proposal and 1 was against the proposal. One person was heard at the 21st June 2024 Te Hiku Community Board meeting to voice their support of the lease.

· On 16 July 2024 a report was presented to the Te Hiku Community Board for recommendation to Council on the granting of the lease.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council:

a) approve a new ground lease to Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated over part of the Rarawa Memorial Domain Recreation Reserve being Section 151 Block IV Ahipara SD, approximately 40,468 square metres, held in New Zealand Gazette 1979, page 1202 and Recreation Reserve held in Record of Title 308444, being of Lot 4 DP 366836, approximately 6010 square metres.

The terms of the proposed lease shall be:

· Term: 30 Years (15+15);

· Rental: As per FNDC Fees and Charges Schedule for a Community Lease;

· $118 plus GST for 2023/24 and reviewed annually in conjunction with the FNDC Fees and Charges Schedule;

b) with further conditions negotiated and agreed upon by the Group Manager Delivery and Operations, and Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

On 16 July 2024, Te Hiku Community Board passed the following resolution:

Rarawa Memorial Domain Recreation Reserve is vested in Council and has been occupied by Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated, since 1985.

Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated occupy the site in conjunction with Te Rarawa Football Club.

In September 2023, Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated approached Council formally seeking a new ground lease.

Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated is a well-established group with 38 years of service to the local community. Their main objective is to provide sport (primarily rugby but not limited) to the Community of Ahipara and surrounding areas.

Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated currently has 4 Junior Rugby Teams, 1 Young Adult team and a Senior Mens & Senior Women’s Team. Their total membership is approximately 180 with the expectation of growth in 2024 with the addition of another Young Adult team.

With 2 playing fields, Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated provide the option of year-round training. Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated are seeking funding to upgrade and add new lights over the fields and courts.

Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated provide a Touch module over the summer period hosting 8-10 teams comprised mainly of local Whanau of all ages. Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated also care for and maintain the two courts (netball/tennis and basketball) as well as the cricket pitch located between the second field & the Te Rarawa Football Club grounds.

Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated club is the unofficial Community Hall of Ahipara. It is used by the Ahipara School as an indoor venue for major events, presentations, and Kapa Haka trainings. The field and lights are essential for Emergency Services (such as safe landing of helicopters) and the venue is utilised by the community as a Civil Defence hub.

Other local groups and organisations, including Te Hiku Community Board, also utilise the space to provide activities for the community. These activities range from Te Rarawa’s Relay for Life, Ahipara Aroha’s Matariki Festival and Inter-School sports events.

Aerial view of proposed leased area in red.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

The 2013 Minister of Conservation Reserves Act Delegations provide for Local Authorities to wear the hat of the Minister for delegated actions over vested recreation reserves.

Section 54(1) of the Reserves Act 1977 (“the Act”) provides for Council, with the prior consent of the Minister, to grant leases over recreation reserves. From 2013, prior consent of the Minister is delegated to Council.

Section 54(2) Reserves Act 1977 requires public notification of the proposed lease action where no current reserve management plan is in place for the vested recreation reserve. There is no current reserve management plan for the Rarawa Memorial Domain Recreation Reserve.

Council resolution to commence public consultation satisfies the prior consent of the Minister and the public notice requirements.

Public Notification

Public Notice was advertised in the Northern Advocate and ran from 1st April – 30th April 2024 as required under the Reserve Act.

A total of 100 submissions were received. 99 submissions were in support of the proposal, one was against the proposal and one was heard to voice their support of the lease at the 21^st June 2024 Te Hiku Community Board meeting.

Section 54 of the Act (Leasing powers in respect of recreation reserves) delegates to Council the granting of the lease.

The options available for this site are:

Option 1: Recommended

That Council:

a) approves a new ground lease to Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated over part of the Rarawa Memorial Domain Recreation Reserve being Section 151 Block IV Ahipara SD, approximately 40,468 square metres, held in New Zealand Gazette 1979, page 1202 and Section 151 Block IV Ahipara SD, held in Record of Title 308444, being of Lot 4 DP 366836, approximately 6010 square metres.

The terms of the proposed lease shall be:

· Term: 30 Years (15+15)

· Rental: As per FNDC Fees and Charges Schedule for a Community Lease.

· $118 plus GST for 2023/24 and reviewed annually in conjunction with the FNDC Fees and Charges Schedule.

b) with further conditions negotiated and agreed upon by the Group Manager Delivery and Operations, and Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated

Option 1 will allow Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated to continue providing their service to the community.

Option 2:

a. Decline Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated request for a new ground lease

b. Ask Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated to remove any existing building(s) and associated assets from the reserve and reinstate the recreation reserve at their cost.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated provide a beneficial service to the community and requiring them to vacate the land will be detrimental to the Community, Whānau and Tamariki of the area.

Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated require certainty of a long-term lease for funding purposes to carry out development projects over the Domain.

As per the FNDC Parks and Reserves Policy 2022, Council can grant exclusive leases to part or all of a reserve for a maximum term of 15 years with a further right of renewal for 15 years if it deems such terms to be appropriate.

Public consultation enabled Te Hiku Community Board to assess the community’s engagement with the Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated proposal and to determine if the granting of this lease is the best option for the community.

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

The lease will provide for the lessee to continue to be responsible for all ongoing maintenance of the associated green space.

The lease will provide for the lessee to be responsible for the payment of all utility charges, rates and insurances.

Should a lease not be provided to Te Rarawa Rugby Club Incorporated, and the land reinstated to reserve, Council will become responsible for any ongoing maintenance of the site, placing more pressure on the Reserve’s maintenance budget.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

Nil

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	Medium
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	FNDC Reserves Policy: The Policy supports a long-term lease being offered to community orientated groups wanting a permanent base. The Reserves Act 1977: Section 119 and 120 require that public consultation be initiated prior to the granting of a lease
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	This does not have District wide relevance. Delegation to the relevant Community Board to provide recommendations to the Council in respect of applications for the use and/or lease of reserves not contemplated by an existing reserve management plan.
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. State the possible implications and how this report aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi.	Far North District Council recognises the significant role of tangata whenua as set out in the Working with Māori chapter in the Long-Term Plan 2021-2031. It is important to notify tangata whenua in the Ahipara locality of the lease proposal prior to the public consultation. Te Hono was approached to provide advice on who the main contacts were in the first instance. A letter was sent via email to Te Runanga o Te Rarawa Chief Executive and Personal Assistant to inform the public consultation process. Their Personal Assistant confirmed the receipt of this letter.
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).	Public consultation and Iwi consultation was progressed as per the Reserves Act 1977 and the FNDC Engagement Policy. This allowed us to identify any people or groups who may be affected or have interest in the matter.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	All upgrade and maintenance costs fall to the lessee. The appropriate community rent for the land is set by the FNDC Fees Charges Schedule.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

8 August 2024

6.7 2024 Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting Remits

File Number: A4803382

Author: Aisha Huriwai, Manager - Democracy Services

Authoriser: Jacine Warmington, Group Manager - Strategic Relationships

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To confirm the Council’s position on proposed remits for the 2024 Local Government New Zealand Annual General Meeting (AGM).

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· 8 remits are listed on the 2024 Local Government New Zealand AGM agenda.

· This report includes advice from staff with subject matter expertise in relation to each remit.

· Kahika-Mayor Tepania will be attending the LGNZ AGM with voting rights on behalf of the Far North District Council.

· Adopted Remits will be further discussed at National Council to determine resourcing to further remits.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council support the following remits, in order of priority:

a) Representation Reviews

b) Entrenchment of Māori Ward seats for local government

c) Local government constituencies and wards should not be subject to referendum

d) Good and services tax (GST) revenue sharing with local government

e) Appropriate funding models for central government initiatives

f) Community Services Card

g) Proactive lever to mitigate the deterioration of unoccupied buildings

h) Graduate driver licensing system

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

EachLocal Government New Zealand is the local government association founded in 1988. They represent the interests of regional city and district councils who pay to be members.

The association holds an annual process called remits as part of their work.

There are four criteria for remits:

1. The remit is relevant to local government as a whole, not just a single zone, sector or council.

2. The remit relates to significant matters, including constitutional and substantive policy, rather than matters that can be dealt with administratively.

3. The remit concerns matters that can’t be addressed through channels other than the AGM.

4. The remit does not deal with issues already being actioned by LGNZ work programmes or Strategy.

Remits can be submitted by zones or individual councils - with endorsement from other councils.

Remits then go to a Remit Screening Committee. Once approved by the Screening Committee remits form part of the LGNZ AGM agenda. Voting at the AGM determines which remits will continue and the order of priority. Following the AGM remits will go to National Council to assign resourcing as part of the LGNZ work programme.

The Far North District Council is a member of the association and Kahika-Mayor Tepania will attend the AGM that occurs alongside the Annual LGNZ Conference.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

This report is to present the confirmed remits and with advice from technical staff or subject matter experts, seeks an FNDC position to inform the vote of the Mayor as the FNDC representative at the LGNZ AGM.

Remit title

Asking:

Staff advice

Representation Reviews

That LGNZ advocate for changes that support the provision of timely and accurate regional

and sub-regional population data to councils for use in council representation reviews.

Support.

The delivery of timely and accurate information is always beneficial. Representation reviews are often conducted with out of date information on population figures.

Community Services Card

That LGNZ advocate to Central Government to amend the Health Entitlement Cards

Regulations 1993 so that the cardholder can use the Community Services Card as evidence for the

purposes of accessing Council services which would otherwise rely on a form of means testing.

Support.

Staff suggest supporting this however there are no fee structures within FNDC fees and charges that would be able to accept a Community Services Card alone for discounted rates.

Local Government Constituencies and wards should not be subject to referendum

That LGNZ lobbies central government to ensure that Māori wards and constituencies are

treated the same as all other wards in that they should not be subject to a referendum. We oppose the idea that Māori wards should be singled out and forced to suffer a public referendum.

Support.

This remit and Entrenchment of Māori ward seats for local government which was supported by FNDC via Zone 1.

Entrenchment of Māori wards seats for local government

That LGNZ proactively promote and lobby to entrench the Māori Wards and Constituencies for the 64 councils which currently have these, to require the support of a supermajority of parliament should either parliament or councils seek their removal.

Support.

This remit was submitted by Northland Regional Council following approval from Zone 1.

Graduated Driver Licensing System

That LGNZ advocate for changes to the fee structure for driver licensing, better preparing young people for driver license testing, and greater testing capacity in key locations throughout New

Zealand, in order to relieve pressure on the driver licensing system and ensure testing can be conducted in a quick and efficient manner.

Support.

There are a number of initiatives and programmes in place across the Far North to support youth become licensed drivers. It is agreed that the current fee structure is unaffordable for low socio-economic areas such as the mid/far north.

Proactive lever to mitigate the deterioration of unoccupied buildings

That LGNZ advocate to Government:

• For legislative change enabling local authorities to compel building owners to remediate

unoccupied derelict buildings and sites that have deteriorated to a state where they

negatively impact the amenity of the surrounding area.

• To incentivise repurposing vacant buildings to meet region-specific needs, for example,

accommodation conversion.

Support.

Staff support mechanisms that require commercial property owners to maintain properties to a standard. We would need more detail to understand the impact it could have on the Far North and Māori landowners.

Appropriate funding models for central government initiatives

That LGNZ proactively promote and lobby for the development of a more equitable and

appropriate funding model for central government initiatives.

Support.

This remit was submitted by Northland Regional Council following approval from Zone 1.

Goods and Services Tax (GST) revenue sharing with local government

That LGNZ be proactive in lobbying central government on sharing GST revenue with local

government, derived from local government rates and service fees related to flood protection

mitigation, roading, and three waters, for investment in these areas.

Support.

This remit was submitted by Northland Regional Council following approval from Zone 1.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

Reasons for recommendation for each remit are included in the table above.

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

There are no financial implications or need for budgetary provision in supporting, or otherwise any of the proposed remits.

Should the remits continue to be pursued by LGNZ it could save Council funding in the long term by pursuing policies nationally rather than by region or district.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. 2024_AGM_remit_papers - A4806655 ⇩

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 is considered to be a matter of low significance. While some of the proposed remits touch on matters that could be of high significance this paper looks at whether further conversations should be had nationally rather than specific outcomes for our specific communities. There is also insufficient time to consult locally.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	This report seeks the views of Council to feed into a national process.
State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.	The views of the Community Board have not been sought due to time constraints.
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. State the possible implications and how this report aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi.	While some of the proposed remits touch on matters that could be of high significance to Māori this paper looks at whether further conversations should be had nationally rather than specific outcomes for our specific communities.
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).	While some of the proposed remits touch on matters that could be of high significance to Māori this paper looks at whether further conversations should be had nationally rather than specific outcomes for our specific communities.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	There are no financial implications or need for budgetary provision.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has not reviewed this report.