Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting - Thursday, December 11, 2025

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

11 December 2025

7 Ngā Pūrongo / Reports

7.1 Revenue and Financing Policy Amendment

File Number: A5448566

Author: Virginia Smith, Policy Advisor

Authoriser: Roger Ackers, Group Manager - Planning & Policy

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To seek endorsement of procedural amendments to the Revenue and Financing Policy 2024, to enable implementation of the Utu Whakawhanake Development Contributions Policy 2025 and seek Council adoption of the Consultation Document to undertake public consultation on the proposed amendments to the Revenue and Financing Policy 2024.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· On 7 October 2025 (2025/136 refers), Council formally adopted the Utu Whakawhanake Development Contributions Policy 2025, solidifying its decision to use development contributions as a funding tool for capital expenditure.^{^[1]}

· Implementation of the Utu Whakawhanake Development Contributions Policy 2025 is scheduled for 29 May 2026, ahead of the new District Plan’s adoption.

· Legal advice confirms the Council must amend the Revenue and Financing Policy to enable lawful collection of development contributions.

· If proposed amendments are not endorsed, the Council will not be able to lawfully collect development contributions, risking loss of growth-related infrastructure funding.

· Council must also resolve to adopt the Consultation document in which the amendments are proposed for public consultation using a section 82 public consultation process.

· This report and attachments provide information to support Council’s decision-making processes, legislative, policy, and strategic context for the proposed amendment to the Revenue and Finance Policy as well as the proposed consultation document for consideration and determination.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council:

a) Endorse the proposed amendments to the Revenue and Finance Policy found in Attachment 2.

b) Adopt the Proposal in Attachment 4 to be released for public consultation to meet the requirements of section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002.

c) Approves the period for making written submissions on the proposal will be a minimum of 4 weeks.

d) Delegates authority to the Mayor to decide on the date of any oral presentation/s of submissions.

e) Authorises the Chief Executive to make any necessary minor drafting or presentation amendments to the attached supporting documents to correct errors or omissions, or to reflect the decisions made by the Council prior to final publication and public release.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

Timeline of Relevant Decisions

Far North District Council – Revenue and Financing Policy timeline
Date	Event
2012 -2015	The Revenue and Financing Policy (RFP) was maintained and updated for clarity and funding changes as part of the 2012 – 2022 Long Term Plan.
2015	At the review of the 2015 LTP cycle, the Council suspended the charging of new development contributions, maintaining them only for consents already granted. The RFP text was amended to reflect this suspension.^{^[2]}
2018	Council reviewed the RFP as part of the 2018 Long Term Plan update. Changes were made but only to realign it to legislative requirements.
12 March 2024	Draft changes were presented to Council addressing the evolving funding principles and public feedback in anticipation of the 2024 Long Term Plan.^{^[3]} The RFP amendments were endorsed as part of Te Pae Tata Long Term Plan 2024-2027.^{^[4]}
26 June 2024	The RFP was adopted^{^[5]} as part of the Te Pae Tata Long Term Plan 2024 - 2027^{^[6]}. It continued the suspension of development contributions for new consents but updated its provisions in anticipation of statutory reforms.
14 November 2024	Council undertook a review^{^[7]} of its Development Contributions Policy to consider collection reactivation. At that same meeting Council determined to draft a new development contributions policy and reinstate the collection of development contributions to help fund its Capital expenses.^{^[8]}
July 2025	The Draft Utu Whakawhanake Development Contributions Policy (UWDCP) was adopted by Council for statutory public consultation process.^{^[9]}
7 October 2025	Council adopted the UWDCP 2025 with Council resolving a May 2026 commencement date.^{^[10]}
October 2025	Staff commenced work on the procedural RFP amendments required to enable lawful collection of development contributions from 29 May 2026.
Current	Preparation and presentation of proposed amendments to the RFP to enable a public consultation process.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

Legal and Policy Framework

The LGA mandates that all statutory funding mechanisms, including development contributions, be clearly identified in the Council’s RFP (section 103(2)(g) LGA). The current RFP, adopted in June 2024, outlines various funding sources but currently suspends the collection of development contributions, except for legacy consents and development contributions collected through development agreements.

To implement the new UWDCP in May 2026, an amendment to the RFP is legally necessary. Failure to amend the RFP exposes the Council to potential legal risks and growth-related capital works infrastructure funding shortfalls.

The proposed amendment is a procedural change that would allow for the collection of development contributions. The proposed amendment to the RFP aligns with legislative requirements and helps maintain the integrity of the Council’s financial framework.

Infrastructure and Growth Management

The UWDCP supports funding for growth-related capital works infrastructure such as water, wastewater, stormwater, roading and community facilities. By targeting contributions from developers, rather than existing ratepayers, this ensures a fair distribution of growth costs.

This approach aligns with the Far North 2100 vision, which prioritises infrastructure readiness and intergenerational fairness. The Council’s Te Pae Tata Three-Year Long-Term Plan (2024-2027) also highlights infrastructure resilience, affordability, and growth funding as key objectives.

The proposed RFP amendments support Council’s strategic goals, community outcomes, and ensures a more sustainable and equitable way to fund and support growth.

Community outcomes

The proposed amendment to the RFP ensures that Council is aligned with its strategic outcomes of fostering ‘Proud, vibrant communities,’ ‘Resilient communities,’ and ‘Prosperous communities.’ Funding growth-related infrastructure through targeted development contributions achieves fairness and intergenerational equity, directly supporting strategic and community outcomes.

Policy consistency and Financial Sustainability

The proposed amendment to the RFP aligns with existing policies and other statutory plans, including Te Pae Tata Three-Year Long-Term Plan (2024-2027) and Far North 2100. It ensures the lawful, transparent collection of development contributions, through the UWDCP. Without this amendment, the Council faces growth-related revenue shortfalls, reduced infrastructure investment, and an unfair burden on existing ratepayers.

Consultation Requirements

Section 102(4)(b) of the LGA allows Council to amend the RFP at any time, provided public consultation is undertaken in accordance with section 82 LGA.

While it was initially considered to align this consultation with the Annual Plan consultation process, Council’s decision to advance the UWDCP commencement date to May 2026 means this is no longer feasible. Therefore, a separate public consultation is needed to ensure the amended RFP aligns with the new UWDCP start date of 29 May 2026.

To mitigate public consultation fatigue, staff are proposing to undertake a public consultation process to satisfy Council’s obligations under section 82 LGA between February and March 2026.

Section 82 of the Local Government Act 2002 does not stipulate a minimum length of time for consultation but requires the Council, to give people “a reasonable opportunity” to present their views on the proposed policy. A consultation period of at least four weeks is considered best practice. Therefore, Council staff recommend consultation to open on 19^th January 2026 and close on15th February 2026 which is a period of four weeks.

Council staff recommend people be encouraged to present their views by making comments or submissions via the Council’s website. A submission form will be provided for download on the website for people to print and use to make written submissions either by post or delivery to Council offices. A small number of printed copies of the proposal document and submission form will be made available at Council offices for people to use if they are not able to print the documents themselves. A link to the webpage for making submissions will be emailed to the Council’s “subscribers” database and publicised on the Council’s social media pages.

The proposed amended policy may be of interest to the public and Council staff expect that there may be requests to present submissions orally to elected members. Staff therefore recommend the Council delegates to the Mayor the power to set the date for any oral submissions.

Risk, Analysis and Mitigation

It is acknowledged that endorsing the proposed amendments to the RFP to enable the collection of development contributions involves both actual and perceived risks. To support transparency and informed decision-making, the risks associated with making this amendment decision are identified and assessed in the table below.

Risk Identification

Risk Analysis

Risk Mitigation

Statutory / Legal

Failure to follow the correct legal process to make the amendment to the RFP, and consultation requirements could invalidate the amendment to the RFP, and the collection of development contributions from 29 May 2026.

Failure to satisfy its legal obligation could expose Council to legal challenge.

High risk of:

· judicial review if Council collects development contributions through the UWDCP;

· refunding any development contributions collected under the UWDCP; and

· reputational and legal costs.

Strictly adhere to statutory processes, document all steps.

Policy integration:

Inconsistency or misalignment between the RFP, and UWDCP.

High risk of:

· administrative confusion; and

· challenges policy validity.

· Reputational risk

Integrate all policies. Regularly review, assign internal responsibility for policy coherence.

Reputational:

Council’s adoption of the UWDCP without amending the RFP creates a conflicting policy signals and procedural inconsistencies.

High risk of:

· Stakeholders viewing Council as inconsistent or lacking credibility in policy and legal compliance

· Inability to deliver on infrastructure projects

· Raises equity issues and rates increases to cover the inability to collect development contributions

Agree to progress the proposed RFP amendment provide clear public explanations to maintain transparency and evidence of procedural integrity.

Options

Staff recommend option 1.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

1. Endorse proposed amendment to the RFP (Attachment 2) and agree to consult on the draft RFP (Attachment 4) using the section 82 LGA public consultation process.

· Aligns with the LTP and Far North 2100 strategic goals

· Enables the lawful collection and sustainable funding for capital works growth-related projects.

· Aligns with previous Council direction and decisions

· Ensures policy and legislative compliance and alignment

None identified

2. Status quo. Do not endorse the proposed amendment to the RFP.

· None identified

· Will not enable the lawful collection of development contributions to provide a more sustainable funding mechanism for capital works growth-related projects.

· Does not align with previous Council direction and decisions – reputational risk

· Does not reflect prudent use of Council resources.

· Council’s Policy, and strategic directions are misaligned and contradictory.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommend option 1.- Endorse proposed amendment to the RFP (Attachment 2) and agree to consult on the draft RFP (Attachment 3) using a section 82 LGA public consultation process. This option:

· Ensures Council meets its legal obligations under the LGA.

· Provides for the sustainable and equitable funding of new or increased capacity of infrastructure required to support growth, and aligns with Councils community outcomes, and strategic direction.

· Protects the interests of all ratepayers by ensuring growth contributes fairly to the costs it generates.

· Avoids the substantial revenue loss and adverse financial impact associated with non-collection of development contributions.

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

The operational cost of consultation on the proposed amendments for the Revenue and Financing Policy is expected to be minimal (less than $1000 plus staff time and resources) and will be covered through existing operational costs and staff resourcing.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Att 1 Supporting Report Revenue and Financing Policy proposed amendment 2025 - A5469061 ⇩

2. Att 2 Proposed amendment tracked changes Revenue and Financing Policy 2024 - A5469060 ⇩

3. Att 3 Clean version of amended Revenue and Financing Policy 2024 - A5469062 ⇩

4. Att 4 Proposal to amend the Revenue and Finance Policy 2024 - A5472920 ⇩

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	In line with the Significance and Engagement Policy, the recommendation to amend the Revenue and Finance Policy will have little effect on the financial thresholds, or levels of service. The recommendation is consistent with existing plans and policies. The amendment is procedural; however, it does shift funding for growth to developers. The significance has been lowered due to public and stakeholder feedback received through the public consultation process of the Utu Whakawhanake Development Contributions Policy and submission analysis that showed high public support to reinstate development contribution charges. Therefore, the level of significance is low to moderate.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	· Te Pae Tata Three Year Long Term Plan 2024-2027 – Community Outcomes · The Far North 2100 strategy – Vision and goals · Te Pae o Uta – recognition of intergenerational equity, and respects · Treaty of Waitangi principles and Principles of the Preamble to the Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 - the UWDC Policy’s exemptions to housing developments on Māori land and recognition of regulation barriers faced by developers of Māori land · Utu Whakawhanake Development Contributions Policy
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 has District wide relevance and is outside Community Board delegations.
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 does not relate to land and / or body of water. Māori will be given an opportunity to present their views and preferences as part of the consultation 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).	All interested parties will be given an opportunity to share their views and preferences including Developers and ratepayers. The opportunity through the public consultation process for the Utu Whakawhanake Development Contributions Policy 2025 was provided for these stakeholders to contribute to the final Council adopted Policy. Staff are available to the public to answer any questions and concerns that any member of the public or internal staff may have.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	The operational cost of consultation on the proposed amendments for the Revenue and Financing Policy is expected to be minimal (less than $1000 plus staff time and resources) and will be covered through existing operational costs and staff resourcing.
Chief Financial Officer review.	Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

11 December 2025

7.2 Adoption of Committee Terms of Reference

File Number: A5449114

Author: Aisha Huriwai, Manager - Democracy Services

Authoriser: Jacine Warmington, Group Manager - Strategic Relationships

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To finalise the establishment of Council Committees by seeking Council’s adoption of the Terms of Reference.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· At the inaugural Council meeting on 29 October 2025, Kahika-Mayor Tepania confirmed the establishment of seven council committees.

· Staff have sought feedback from Kahika-Mayor Tepania and Councillors to form draft Terms of Reference documents.

· Feedback from elected members is incorporated in this report for Council consideration.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council adopt the attached Terms of References for the following Committees:

1. Te Kuaka Committee for Māori Strategic Relationships

2. Te Miromiro Committee for Assurance, Risk and Finance

3. Te Koekoeā Committee for Council Controlled Organisations

4. Te Koukou Committee for Transport and Infrastructure

5. Te Huia Committee for Chief Executive Performance

6. Te Kūkupa Committee for Strategy, Policy and Regulation

7. Te Pīpīwharauroa Committee for External Appointments

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

Under section 41A(3) of the Local Government Act 2002, the Kahika-Mayor Tepania has the power to establish committees and appoint membership including the chairperson of each committee.

At the 29 October 2025 Inaugural Council meeting the Kahika-Mayor Tepania established the Committees and appointed the Chairperson and Deputy Chairpersons as follows:

Committee	Chairperson	Deputy Chairperson
Te Kuaka Committee for Māori Strategic Relationships	Cr Rākena	External to be appointed
Te Miromiro Committee for Assurance, Risk and Finance	External to be appointed	Cr Vujcich
Te Koekoeā Committee for Council Controlled Organisations	Cr Vujcich	External to be appointed
Te Koukou Committee for Transport and Infrastructure	Cr Foy	External to be appointed
Te Huia Committee for Chief Executive Performance	External to be appointed	Kohepu-Deputy Mayor Rudkin
Te Kūkupa Committee for Strategy, Policy and Regulation	Cr Stratford	Cr Court
Te Pīpīwharauroa Committee for External Appointments	Kohepu-Deputy Mayor Rudkin	Kahika-Mayor Tepania

The Far North District Council recognises that Committees are a key part of enabling good governance. Terms of Reference should be adopted for each Committee to clarify its role, responsibilities and membership.

While the Local Government Act gives the Kahika-Mayor Tepania powers to establish a committee structure and its membership, Council is responsible for confirming the Terms of Reference for those Committees.

While there has been discussion on potential membership for Committees, each Terms of Reference seeks Council’s confirmation of membership.

Section 32, Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 prevents Council from delegating the following responsibilities:

(a) the power to make a rate; or

(b) the power to make a bylaw; or

(d) the power to adopt a long-term plan, annual plan, or annual report; or

(e) the power to appoint a chief executive; or

(f) the power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under this Act in association with the long-term plan or developed for the purpose of the local governance statement; or

(g) repealed

(h) the power to adopt a remuneration and employment policy.

It’s important to note that the adoption of the long-term or annual plan is where Council sets its strategic direction,

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

Kahika-Mayor Tepania established Committees in accordance with section 41A(3) of the Local Government Act 2002.

This report seeks the adoption of the Terms of Reference to confirm the purpose, membership, quorum, frequency, power to delegate, and responsibilities.

A standard approach has been applied for consistency in the following areas:

1. The quorum for all Committees is proposed as 4 members (noting a minimum of 2 under Local Government Act 2002).

2. While the frequency of Committee meetings varies, the frequency is based on a four weekly meeting cycle to enable alignment with the Maramataka.

3. Kahika-Mayor Tepania is a member of all Committees, as stated in section 41A of the Local Government Act 2002.

4. All Committees will operate in accordance with Council’s Standing Orders.

5. The Code of Conduct applies to all Committee meetings (including any external appointments).

6. Terms of References suggest no Committee can delegate any of its responsibilities, duties or powers.

7. Each Committee has a review section that states:

In December of each year, the Responsible Officer alongside Democracy Services will submit a report to Council. The report will summarise the activities of the Committee and how it has contributed to the Council’s governance and strategic objectives. This will also look at whether the Council are meeting the full requirements of the Committee Terms of Reference and whether any amendments are required to the Committees Terms of Reference to increase efficient and effective decision making.

Committee terms of reference can be amended by Council at any point throughout the term.

Option 1: Adoption without changes

Council could agree to adopt the terms of references as attached to this report.

Option 2: Agree amendments

Council could agree amendments to adopt the terms of references.

Option 3: Council could defer deciding

If, during the meeting there are sections in the Terms of Reference that members cannot agree on, that Terms of Reference can be deferred for a decision at a later stage. However, that particular Committee cannot convene its first meeting until an agreed Terms of Reference is adopted.

Further delegations should be considered in the new year in discussion with Community Boards in accordance with section 32(6) of Schedule 7 - A territorial authority must consider whether to delegate to a community board if the delegation would enable the community board to best achieve its role.

A range of meetings were held with senior staff to develop Terms of Reference with the elected members in their capacity as Chair or Deputy Chairperson. Where meetings were unable to take place a copy of the proposed terms of reference was circulated to the member for review.

Feedback that was not included in the Terms of Reference has been provided in the table below with staff commentary on the reasons why, for Council consideration.

Committee	Proposed amendment	Rationale	Staff response
Te Kuaka Committee for Māori Strategic Relationships	The Committee provides advisory recommendations only. All authority for decision-making, financial commitment, and strategic policy approval remains with full Council in accordance with the LGA 2002.” Add requirements for annual budget reporting, transparent iwi nomination process, and explicit statement that Te Kuaka is not a co-governance committee.	Prevents scope creep beyond statutory engagement requirements; ensures accountability and transparency; protects against shadow policy-setting and unbudgeted spend.	Staff understand that Council intend for this Committee to act in more than an advisory capacity, and that decision-making responsibilities help add value to the relationships. Budget setting and reporting are required to come through Council for transparency and adoption.
Te Koukou Committee for Transport and Infrastructure	The Committee must consider affordability and rating impacts as primary decision criteria for capital planning.	Strengthens fiscal discipline; ensures infrastructure spend aligns with affordability and ratepayer impact.	Affordability is a strong risk consideration across Council and should be considered alongside any decision. The setting of the annual capital works delivery will be approved, alongside rating impact by Council when setting the long-term plan or annual plan. Recommend this not be stated in this Committee ToR.
Te Miromiro Committee for Assurance, Risk and Finance	The Committee will review the organisation’s capability to meet capital delivery targets and recommend cost reduction strategies where delivery risk is identified.	Enhances oversight of capital delivery; integrates affordability and risk management into finance governance.	This is currently worded in the terms of reference that the Committee review the Council’s financial and non-financial performance against the Long-Term Plan and Annual Plan.
Te Koekoeā Committee for Council Controlled Organisations	All CCOs must publish measurable financial return objectives to Council and report against them quarterly.	Protects against opacity (e.g., FNHL issues); enforces accountability and measurable performance expectations.	A Council Controlled Organisation must, in accordance with legislation, prepare a Statement of Intent and Annual Report. The proposed delegations state that these will be reviewed by this Committee. Agendas for all Committee meetings will be publicly available unless the Committee confirm reasonable grounds for exclusion under the Local Government Official Information and Meeting Act applies.
Te Kūkupa Committee for Strategy, Policy and Regulation	Replace activist climate tone with compliance wording;		This has been reworded to ‘Considering and recommending to Council on matters relating to: • Climate change adaptation and mitigation policy’.
Te Huia Committee for Chief Executive Performance	The Committee may recommend performance KPIs for the Chief Executive that reflect achievement of affordability targets in the Long Term and Annual Plans.	Strengthens CE accountability; links executive performance to affordability and ratepayer outcomes.	The Committee has a broad delegation that states ‘Consider any issues regarding the employment of the chief executive’. Setting of the Chief Executive Officers Key Performance Indicators and receiving progress reports has been a work programme item under this portion of delegation.
Te Koukou Committee for Transport and Infrastructure	Increase delegation to the value of xxx for Committee approval		Value amounts have been removed. If it is in the LTP and beyond CE delegation – this committee has authority to approve contract award.
Te Koukou Committee for Transport and Infrastructure	Bundling of projects over 3-year timeframe		Terms of reference should focus on what can be considered at Committee. This is a suggestion of how the Committee could consider it’s work that might be more suitable for consideration in a procurement policy review.
Te Koukou Committee for Transport and Infrastructure	Scoping and milestones of projects xxx before the construction season – repeat only if can’t be delivered		Terms of reference should focus on what can be considered at Committee. This is a suggestion of how the Committee could consider it’s work that might be more suitable for consideration in a procurement policy review.
Te Koukou Committee for Transport and Infrastructure	Panel of contractors for direct award. Maybe split between north and south – e.g. 3 painters, 3 builders		Terms of reference should focus on what can be considered at Committee. This is a suggestion of how the Committee could consider it’s work that might be more suitable for consideration in a procurement policy review.
Te Koukou Committee for Transport and Infrastructure	Can direct award to these approved contractors up to xx just like the roading panel.		Terms of reference should focus on what can be considered at Committee. This is a suggestion of how the Committee could consider it’s work that might be more suitable for consideration in a procurement policy review.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

To confirm the Terms of Reference for each Council Committee.

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

There is a financial impact on ratepayers in supporting formal meetings such as staff resourcing in the preparation of papers, travel reimbursement for elected members, printing of agendas, staff time in attending meetings, consumables such as stationery and catering at meetings.

Staff resourcing will be covered more in the adoption of the 2026 formal meeting calendar as frequency has a greater impact on resourcing than structure.

An effective and efficient governance structure helps reduce operational resourcing. Providing delegations to the lowest possible level helps to increase efficiencies and allow Councils governing body to focus on making strategic decisions for the district.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Terms of Reference - Te Kuaka Committee for Māori Strategic Relationships - A5443633 ⇩

2. Terms of Reference - Te Miromiro Committee for Assurance, Risk & Finance - A5443598 ⇩

3. Terms of Reference - Te Koekoeā Committee for Council Controlled Organisations - A5443648 ⇩

4. Terms of Reference - Te Koukou Committee for Transport, Delivery - A5443634 ⇩

5. Terms of Reference - Te Huia Committee for Chief Executive Performance - A5443632 ⇩

6. Terms of Reference - Te Kūkupa Committee for Strategy, Policy and Regulation - A5443635 ⇩

7. Terms of Reference - Te Pīpīwharauroa Committee - A5482529 ⇩

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 a matter of low significance.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The relevant Local Government Act 2002 references are provided throughout this report. Council has a policy on non-elected members appointed to Committees which will be applied where appropriate. It should also be noted that decisions of Committees will take into consideration existing strategies, and direction articulated through the Long-Term Plan 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.	This is a district wide matter for the governing body to decide. As mentioned in the report, Council should consider in the new year – appropriate delegations to the Community Boards.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water. State the possible implications and how this report aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi.	The views of Māori have not been sought specifically to inform this work. Work was completed in the 2022-2025 term to seek the views of Māori around the then Te Kuaka – Te Ao Māori Committee. Views shared at Te Kuaka hui and as part of developing agreements with various Iwi and Hapū have been incorporated into the proposed Te Kuaka Committee for Māori Strategic Relationships.
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 identified persons in legislation.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	Staff annually budget to hold provision for external appointments to Committees. Further budget is also allocated based on prior year expenditure and legislative increases for elected member expense and reimbursements in attending meetings.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The CFO has not reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

11 December 2025

7.3 Establishment of Portfolios and Adoption of Terms of Reference

File Number: A5486045

Author: Aisha Huriwai, Manager - Democracy Services

Authoriser: Jacine Warmington, Group Manager - Strategic Relationships

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To enable Council to formally establish portfolios and adopt the supporting terms of references.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· Portfolios can be a useful addition to a governance structure.

· Portfolios provide an opportunity for elected members to gain greater governance oversight of operational activities.

· Staff were directed to work with suggested portfolio leads to develop terms of references.

· This report seeks the formal establishment of portfolios and provides a terms of reference for each for Council adoption.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council adopt the attached terms of references and establish:

a) Community Trust, Participation and Engagement Portfolio

b) Youth Education and Leadership Pathways Portfolio

c) Housing Delivery & Partnerships Portfolio

d) Affordability & Value for Communities Portfolio

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

The Far North District Council has appointed portfolios over the past two terms as a governance tool to help elected members specialise in key areas of responsibility. Portfolios are non-decision-making roles that allow councillors to deepen their understanding of council operations, champion issues, engage with communities, and shape policy in areas such as infrastructure, environment, Māori development, finance, and community well-being. They provide oversight alongside senior management and staff, ensuring balanced representation, strategic focus, and stronger links between council priorities and community needs.

To supplement the Committee structure Kahika-Mayor Tepania has proposed establishing 4 portfolios:

1. Community Trust, Participation and Engagement Portfolio with Mayor and Chairs

2. Youth Education and Leadership Pathways Portfolio with Councillors Allen and Baucke

3. Housing Delivery & Partnerships Portfolio with Councillors Foy and Stratford

4. Affordability & Value for Communities Portfolio with Councillors Baucke and Vujcich.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

Option 1: Adoption without changes

Council could agree to adopt the terms of references as attached to this report.

Option 2: Agree amendments

Council could agree amendments to adopt the terms of references.

Option 3: Council could defer deciding

If there are sections that members cannot agree on within the meeting, that terms of reference could be deferred for a decision at a later stage. If a portfolio terms of reference is not adopted, adoption would need to take place before the portfolio convenes its first meeting.

Some portfolio members have provided feedback directly to their operational lead for inclusion. Elected Members that don’t hold a portfolio were encouraged to provide feedback to staff on any recommended changes.

The following suggestions were received, which Council should consider.

OBJECTIVES

REMOVE:

The Portfolio Group (PG) is a non-decision-making body that is designed to inform the Portfolio Holder. The strength of having bespoke portfolios is that they provide a mechanism for an elected member with a specific interest in a matter of high importance to Council to have a more intimate relationship on the subject matter and, importantly, be able to articulate the collective views of elected members and speak with some authority on the subject matter before Council.

REPLACE WITH:

The Portfolio Group (PG) is a strictly non-decision-making information forum that supports elected members by providing briefings only. Its purpose is limited to sharing information that helps elected members understand Council work within the Council’s statutory functions under Section 10 of the Local Government Act 2002. A portfolio holder may report the collective views of elected members back to Council but may not provide direction or form policy outside a decision of full Council.

REMOVE:

The PG provides a forum for an elected member having portfolio oversight responsibility, along with senior management and selected staff, to better understand the priorities, resourcing and funding of the portfolio activity. It also provides a forum for a discussion of “hot topics” along with enabling better communication and insight around political and operational imperatives.

REPLACE WITH:

The PG may provide briefings with staff and elected members to support understanding of priorities and resourcing. All discussions are advisory only. PG activities may not influence operational decisions, staff prioritisation, policy development, or Council direction without a specific resolution of full Council.

REMOVE:

The PG Chair maintains an intimate overview of operations but does not involve themselves in decisions of an operational nature, nor do they hold a decision-making role.

REPLACE WITH:

All PG members are strictly prohibited from directing staff or influencing operational decisions. PG activity is restricted to receiving information and reporting to Council. PG members hold no authority to make decisions, recommend operational priorities, or represent the Council without formal approval.

PURPOSE

REMOVE:

To take a strategic and policy leadership role in their activity. The Portfolio holders will work in a collaborative manner with other key stakeholders, and council officers, to achieve the portfolio objectives outlined above.

REPLACE WITH:

To receive high-level information to support Council decision-making. Portfolio holders may not direct staff, engage in operational input, or represent Council externally without the written authorisation of the Mayor or a resolution of full Council. Their role is informational and reporting only.

FREQUENCY OF MEETINGS

AMENDMENT:
Meetings may only occur as required to support Council priorities and must minimise staff time and cost. Meetings are restricted to statutory purposes only (Section 10, LGA 2002).

QUORUM

AMENDMENT:
Quorum consists of the Portfolio Holder and the supporting Group Manager or Manager. Online attendance may satisfy quorum.

AGENDA

REMOVE:

Other Business (open)

REPLACE WITH:

Other Business (restricted to matters consistent with Section 10 LGA 2002 and Council’s adopted priorities).

RESPONSIBLE SENIOR LEADER (CHAIR)

REMOVE:

Provide political guidance to the PG.

REPLACE WITH:

Provide organisational and statutory clarity only. The Chair must ensure PG discussions do not stray into political direction, operational influence or policy formation.

ELECTED MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES

REMOVE:

Under the direction of the Mayor, act as the Council’s spokesperson and point of contact for those activities within their portfolio responsibility.

REPLACE WITH:

May only speak on portfolio matters with written instruction of the Mayor or by Council resolution. PG members may not imply Council endorsement or advocacy.

REMOVE:

Enhance relationships with key stakeholders.

REPLACE WITH:

Maintain communication with elected members, not external advocacy groups, unless authorised by the Mayor or full Council.

MEDIA AND PUBLICITY

REMOVE:

The Portfolio holders will, at the direction of the Mayor and in conjunction with FNDC guidelines around publicity, undertake media duties as appropriate.

REPLACE WITH:

Portfolio holders may undertake media duties only with written Mayoral approval and subject to FNDC media policy. PG members must not imply policy direction or operational influence.

INTERFACE WITH COUNCIL

REMOVE:

reporting in their members report.

REPLACE WITH:

quarterly written reports to full Council summarising information received, without interpretation, recommendation, advocacy or direction.

CONFIDENTIALITY

AMENDMENT:
Confidentiality applies to all PG material and cannot be shared internally or externally without Chief Executive approval to avoid misrepresentation or loss of context.

TERM OF PORTFOLIO

AMENDMENT:
Portfolio terms cease upon Council resolution, Annual Plan adoption, or change in governance structure.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

To confirm the establishment of portfolios and ensure clarity of roles, accountability, and consistent, transparent governance

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

Supporting portfolios will have a cost on staff resourcing and time however if run efficient and effectively can deliver long term financial efficiencies by improving decision making and reducing duplication. Portfolios also improve transparency and accountability which helps Council reduce operational resources in other areas.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Community Trust, Participation and Engagement Portfolio Terms of Reference - A5479791 ⇩

2. Youth Education and Leadership Pathways Portfolio Terms of Reference - A5484723 ⇩

3. Housing Delivery and Partnerships Portfolio Terms of Reference - A5490064 ⇩

4. Affordability and Value for Communities Portfolio Terms of Reference - A5490065 ⇩

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 a matter of low significance.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The relevant Local Government Act 2002 references are provided throughout this report. Council has a policy on non-elected members appointed to Committees which will be applied where appropriate. It should also be noted that decisions of Committees will take into consideration existing strategies, and direction articulated through the Long-Term Plan 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.	This is a district wide matter for the governing body to decide. As mentioned in the report, Council should consider in the new year – appropriate delegations to the Community Boards.
State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water. State the possible implications and how this report aligns with Te Tiriti o Waitangi / The Treaty of Waitangi.	The views of Māori have not been sought specifically to inform this work.
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 identified persons in legislation.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	Staff annually budget to hold provision for external appointments to Committees. Further budget is also allocated based on prior year expenditure and legislative increases for elected member expense and reimbursements in attending meetings.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The CFO has not reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

11 December 2025

7.5 Adoption of Formal Meeting Calendar for 2026

File Number: A5485579

Author: Aisha Huriwai, Manager - Democracy Services

Authoriser: Jacine Warmington, Group Manager - Strategic Relationships

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To adopt the 2026 Formal meeting schedule.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· The proposed calendar schedule incorporates formal Council and Committee meetings for the 2026 calendar year.

· Reserve dates have been set aside for other Council business as required (workshops, briefings, training sessions and extraordinary meetings).

· Council and Committee formal meetings have been aligned with the Maramataka to support good decision-making.

· Meetings have been scheduled in consideration of regional and national local government events.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council adopt the 2026 formal meeting schedule.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

It is good practice across New Zealand for a Council to set its Formal Meeting Calendar in advance. In scheduling meetings and the frequency, Councillors should be mindful of the following principles:

· Meetings should be necessary for the good governance of its region or district.

· Meetings should promote the open and public transaction of business at meetings.

· Councillors are in a part-time role of which attendance at formal meetings is only a small portion of the role. Consideration needs to be given to balancing workloads and non-Council commitments.

The proposed schedule includes ‘reserve’ dates for additional Council commitments such as verbal submissions, workshops, training, extraordinary meetings or briefings to enable elected members to plan their varying commitments and in recognition that workshops are a beneficial tool to engage on technical or complex issues where staff require some indication or direction.

Council resolved in December 2019 not to conduct meetings on 28 October each year in recognition of He Whakaputanga o te Rangatiratanga o Nu Tireni – Declaration of Independence of the United Tribes of New Zealand.

Council also had a wānanga (workshop) on 23 November 2022 with esteemed Maramataka tohunga Rereata Makiha who explained the benefits of following the moon cycles. Meeting dates have been proposed to take place in alignment with the Maramataka for better decision-making.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

The attached calendar includes the LGNZ Regional and National events, Local Waters Done Well (LWDW) Steering Group and Mayoral Forum meetings. In addition, the Regional committees, previously administered by Northland Regional Council; Te Oneroa a Tōhe Beach Board and Joint Climate Change Adaptation Committee, will now be administered by Far North District Council.

This report recommends that meetings in the schedule be held at Far North District Council headquarters, Council Chamber in Kaikohe. While it is possible, hosting meetings elsewhere comes with an increase in cost and cannot be supported to the same level that is possible at headquarters (i.e. live streaming). The exception being Te Oneroa a Tōhe Beach Board which will be held at Te Ahu in Kaitāia.

If there is a desire to hold meetings elsewhere consideration needs to be given to what value this would add to the decision-making process. Constituents are encouraged to attend Community Board meetings in their area as a local option for engagement.

Staff will look for opportunities to hold workshops where appropriate in Te Hiku.

Additional time may be required outside of this schedule for extraordinary and/or urgent matters. Staff are committed to providing as much notice as possible and that business, where possible, is restricted to the days adopted as part of this schedule. The total number of reserve dates proposed is 19, this is less than in previous years to ensure that conflicts are avoided and provide elected members with non-Council business days as well.

Staff will engage with Te Kahu o Taonui and Hapū with signed MOU agreements with Council, to consider holding Te Kuaka Committee for Māori Strategic Relationships meetings at alternative sites as an opportunity to increase engagement and participation with Hapū and Iwi.

It is recommended that Council business occur on Tuesdays, Wednesdays and Thursdays. National and Regional business is often scheduled on a Friday.

Meetings are generally scheduled as follows:

Council Thursday every 4 weeks in Kaikohe

Te Kuaka Tuesday every 8 weeks in Kaikohe

Te Miromiro Tuesday every 12 weeks in Kaikohe

Te Koekoeā Tuesday every 8 weeks in Kaikohe

Te Koukou Wednesday every 4 weeks in Kaikohe

Te Kūkupa Wednesday every 4 weeks in Kaikohe

Te Huia Tuesday every 12 weeks in Kaikohe

The deviations from this are:

- 18 February 2026 - Te Koukou – to avoid meeting clashes for Committee Chairs/Deputy Chairs.

- 25 February 2026 – Te Kūkupa - to avoid meeting clashes for Committee Chairs/Deputy Chairs.

- 1 April 2026 Council – to avoid convening a meeting adjacent to easter holidays.

- 12 May 2026 – Te Kuaka - to avoid meeting clashes for Committee Chairs/Deputy Chairs.

- 19 May 2026 – Te Kūkupa - to avoid meeting clashes for Committee Chairs/Deputy Chairs.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

Adopting a formal meeting calendar ahead of time is essential for effective planning and collaboration. It ensures that elected members and staff can prioritise their time, prepare adequately, and avoid scheduling conflicts reducing last-minute disruptions, and fosters accountability by setting clear expectations. It also enables the council to give advance notice to the public and increase engagement opportunities.

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

The cost of supporting meetings varies depending on the number of attendees, the location and the duration of the meeting. The costs are covered within operational budgets.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Final Version - 2026 Council Calendar - A5495652 ⇩

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 a matter of low significance under the Significance and Engagement Policy.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The Local Government Act 2002 and Local Government Official Information and Meetings act 1987 govern how Council’s meet.
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 Boards are responsible for setting their own meeting schedule. The dates shown on the attached schedule are the dates align with the Community Board’s preferred days of the week but
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.	This has report has low significance for Māori
Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences (for example – youth, the aged and those with disabilities).	This report does not have any implications on persons identified in legislation.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	Financial implications are covered within operational budgets.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The CFO has not reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

11 December 2025

7.6 Analysis of Public Consultation and Decision on the Housing for the Elderly Rent Setting Options

File Number: A5461364

Author: Michelle Rockell, Executive Projects Advisor

Authoriser: Emma Healy, Chief of Staff

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To provide Council with the analysis of the public consultation conducted on the review of the rent settings for the Housing for the Elderly portfolio and to seek decisions on future rent settings.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· The Housing for the Elderly Policies and Information 2010 (the Policy) requires that rents are adjusted annually based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Any changes to this method require a Council resolution.

· The Policy sets out that the Housing for the Elderly activity is to be funded from rents received. Council’s Revenue and Financing Policy 2024 also provides that the Housing for the Elderly portfolio is intended to be funded entirely through rents received, however recognises that at times this activity may not be self-funding.

· The forecasted operational shortfall based on the AP 25/26 was approximately $230,000 based on operational costs of $1,100,000. Potential operational costs may increase to $1,500,000 for the 26/27 due to deferred maintenance requirements.

· Staff reviewed whether the current CPI-based adjustment to review rents is still appropriate and explored alternative approaches that might be more suitable.

· As part of the review, staff obtained feedback from 60 tenants on potential approaches and how changes to the settings would impact them.

· On 31 July 2025, Council resolved to initiate public consultation to gather feedback on the following approaches:

§ continuing with CPI-based annual rent increases,

§ setting rents as a percentage of NZ Superannuation,

§ adjusting rents to cover actual operating costs,

§ benchmarking rents against a percentage of market rates,

§ adjusting rents based on unit features and household types.

· Public consultation ran from 1 September to 28 September 2025. The preferred option from that was for rents to be based on a percentage of NZ Superannuation. In addition, a number of submitters commented that the portfolio should meet its own costs from the rents received.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council:

a) adopt the following changes to the Housing for the Elderly Policies and Information 2010:

i) that the rent settings be changed from being based on annual Consumer Price Index fluctuations to market rates across all units, and apply a cap so that a maximum weekly rent payable by a tenant will be the lesser of the amount calculated as;

1) 60% market rate, or

2) 30% NZ Superannuation (net, after tax at the ‘M’ rate) plus the maximum amount of accommodation supplement applicable to the unit area as defined by Work and Income.

ii) couples to pay an additional $20 per week across all units on top of the maximum payable rent.

iii) annual rent reviews to occur yearly on 1 July as follows:

o market valuation rent reviews to occur every 2 years, with the next being for the year 2027/2028.

o apply CPI adjustment to rents in alternate years.

iv) implementation of 2 yearly reviews of the rent settings to ensure these continue to be fit for purpose and report the findings to Council.

b) approve that the changes to the Housing for the Elderly Policies and Information 2010 be implemented using the market rent figures in the valuations obtained December 2023:

i) from 12 December 2025 for new tenants.

ii) from 1 April 2026 for existing tenants, subject to any requirements under the Residential Tenancies Act 1986

c) approve the changes in the Housing for the Elderly Policies and Information 2010 as set out in Attachment D and authorise the Group Manager Delivery & Operations to make any necessary minor drafting or presentation amendments to correct errors or omissions, or to reflect the decisions made by Council.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

Background to review

Far North District Council owns a portfolio of 144 Housing for the Elderly units spread across 12 different locations. Of these 144, 15 require major renewal works that are not funded within the Long-Term Plan 2024-2027, which leaves 129 units available for tenancy.

Council resolved in May 2021 to explore the best option for divesting part or all the portfolio which requires ensuring that existing tenants rights were protected and the provision of units in the district remained the same or increased. Options explored led to a closer examination of the portfolio’s operational viability and future needs for financial sustainability. Part of this arose due to changes to Ministry of Housing and Urban Development policy requirements meaning existing units would not qualify for income related rent subsidies, reducing the ability for tenants to have rents covered and qualifying landlords to receive market rents. These changes also apply to Council owned housing transferred to a Community Housing Provider, which restricts the ability for the portfolio to access the income related rent subsidy.

These policy changes, combined with the current operational deficit and Council’s 2021 resolution (2021/17) to explore divestment of the housing portfolio, have contributed to Council considering the portfolios rent settings.

The original CPI approach was set by Council resolution, and any changes require a further Council resolution. Council approved a review of the rent settings in May 2025 with the purpose to confirm whether the current approach (measured against CPI) remains appropriate or if there are other settings that are better suited.

Staff identified that the Housing for the Elderly rent setting has not been reviewed since implementation of the Policy some 15 years ago. Forecasted 2025/2026 Annual Plan figures used for the initial review indicated a deficit of $230,000, although this shortfall is likely to increase due to maintenance needs. More granular analysis has been completed, including the impact on general rates if depreciation for capital expenditure was considered, with updated figures provided below and in Attachment B.

Feedback and input from tenants

The review and research report gathered tenant feedback through meetings and questionnaires, covering current rents, market comparisons, and alternative approaches. Tenants were asked about:

· Existing CPI-based method

· Linking rent to NZ Superannuation

· Higher rates for couples

· Accommodation supplement requirements

· Rent based on unit size, location, or condition

· Aligning rents with market rates

Tenants were also asked to comment on how a potential rent increase would affect them and to provide any additional feedback regarding the rent review process. Staff met with 54 tenants, and any unavailable tenants were provided with a copy of the questionnaire to complete and return to staff. A total of 60 questionnaires were completed.

This review also considered possible financial support that tenants could access, such as the accommodation supplement.

All tenants had the opportunity to meet with staff and were provided information. These face-to-face meetings allowed tenants to ask questions and seek clarifications, with results anonymously collated.

Public consultation

On 31 July 2025, Council resolved to commence public consultation on rent setting options:

A document with a proposal

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

The relevant report and supporting research is available here.^{^[11]}

Options consulted on

Public consultation ran from 1 September to 28 September 2025. Options consulted on were:

· Option 1: continuing with CPI-based annual rent increases

· Option 2: setting rents as a percentage of NZ Superannuation

· Option 3: adjusting rents to cover actual operating costs

· Option 4: benchmarking rents against market rates

Submitters were asked to rank the options in order of preference, and to include which percentage of NZ Superannuation and market rates they felt would be fair to charge.

Submitters were also asked to select overlays that they think should be considered when determining rental amounts (these included unit size, unit location, unit condition and household type, being single tenants and couples).

The public consultation website, including all supporting documents and consultation form, can be accessed through this link .^{^[12]}

All tenants were informed of the public consultation and that they could provide additional feedback through that. In addition, tenant feedback from the questionnaires is included in the analysis of options below.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

Public consultation feedback and analysis of options

Council received 203 submissions on the rent setting options during the public consultation period between 1 September and 28 September 2025. A summary of submissions is provided below with full analysis in Attachment A.

Summary of submissions received:

· Most preferred was Option 2: setting rents as a percentage of NZ Superannuation (51% ranked this as first).

· Least preferred was Option 4: setting rents as a percentage of market rate (9% ranked this as first).

· Preferred percentage for benchmarking rent against NZ Superannuation was at 25% (35.2% of submitters).

· Preferred percentage for benchmarking rent against market rent was at 50% market (33.8% of submitters).

· All overlays were chosen in similar proportions.

Each option has been considered in terms of its ease of implementation, financial impact on tenants, effect on general rates and financial sustainability, potential application of rent additional overlays, public feedback and reputational implications. An in-depth analysis is in Attachment B, with a summary and key advantages and disadvantages of each below.

Accommodation supplement

As part of considering the financial impact on tenants, the availability of possible financial support was reviewed, focusing primarily on the accommodation supplement. This is a weekly payment administered by Work and Income New Zealand (WINZ) which is to help people with the cost of rent, board or owning a home. In all options considered, tenants may meet the minimal threshold to apply for the accommodation supplement which could contribute to rental increases. It is important to note that while tenants may be able to access the supplement, it only covers up to 70% of the amount over the base rate of $135/week^{^[13]}.

The amount individuals can receive depends on their individual financial situation and the area they live in:

· Area 2: Kerikeri - maximum cap of $105 per week.

· Area 3: Kaikohe, Kaitāia and Kawakawa - maximum cap of $80 per week.

· Area 4: remaining properties – maximum cap of $70 per week.

It will not cover full rent increases, and it can reach a maximum amount. This supplement applies to all options, and is explored more in Attachment B.

Tenants were asked if they received the accommodation supplement, with 55 of them (over 90% of responses) saying no.

All options may mean tenants could qualify for the accommodation supplement; however, because individual circumstances determine eligibility for government support, this report does not outline the exact financial impact of a rent increase for each tenant. Attachment B provides some further detail, including the potential range of assistance available under each option.

Statistics NZ: uses a wellbeing guideline that rent/accommodation costs should be no more than 30% of a person’s net weekly income. This is considered for each option.

Revenue and Financing Policy 2024^{^[14]}: states that operational surpluses may be used to fund capital expenditure. This has been considered for each option.

Other Councils charge between $136 - $410 per week for their elderly or pensioner housing units. An in-depth breakdown is on page 11 of Attachment B.

Operational Costs

The financial implications for each option have been considered against estimated operational costs for 26/27 (including potential additional costs identified for deferred maintenance needs) of $1,500,000 annum.

Option 1. Keep things as they are – CPI adjustments

What this is:	Reviews rent annually based on the CPI for June of that year, from Quarter 2 of the previous year to Quarter 2 of the current year. This would be a 6.1% increase to cover Q2 2023 - Q2 2025, average weekly rent increase of about $8.
Includes overlays	Includes differences for unit size (bedsit, 1 bedroom, and larger), and couples pay a bit more.
Public consultation feedback	Ranked second (about 23% of submitters). Comments included that the option was fair and predictable and maintained affordability for tenants. Other comments were concerned about whether it would meet costs to operate the portfolio.
Tenant feedback	Preferred by tenants, with 86.7% of responses choosing this as a “good approach”, some comments about that rents should keep up with inflation and small rental increases are good.
Advantages:	Preferred by tenants and keeps rents low, with increases of about $8 per week for 2025/2026. Easy to administer, using Reserve Bank CPI data. Takes into consideration unit size and household type.
Disadvantages:	Continues reliance on general rates to cover operational shortfall. No ability to generate additional funds that can used to fund capital expenditure or unexpected operational maintenance. CPI changes create uncertainty and may not reflect local condition

Rating implications per $100k of land value

CPI adjusted to 6.1% total income (129 units)	Forecasted operational loss (129 units)	General differential	Commercial/ industrial differential	50% land differential
$963,604.20	$536,395.80	$3.22	$8.86	$1.61

Tenant implications

Weekly rent	Extra tenant would pay per week (if no accom supplement)	Max amount of accom supplement the tenant may receive^{^[15]}	Extra tenant would pay/week (if receives accom supplement)	Total tenant may pay/week (if receives accom supplement)
$143.65	$8.25	$6.05	$2.19	$137.60

Option 2. Link rents to a percentage of NZ Superannuation

What this is:	Links rent to a fixed percentage of the NZ Superannuation, with different percentages considered, including the option for Elected Members to decide.
Includes overlays	Does not include any variation to account for overlays and would require bespoke arrangement.
Public consultation feedback	Ranked first (about 51% of submitters). 35% supported setting rent at 25% of NZ Superannuation, while about 22% preferred 30%. Comments included that option 2 maintains tenant affordability and stability, however there is a concern that NZ Superannuation is already not high enough for elderly persons. Alternatives were suggested, such as 40% of NZ Super, or taking a base rate of 25% and adding on additional amounts for couples.
Tenant feedback	Mixed, with near equal feedback describing the approach as both “good” or “not good”. Feedback was most (about 80%) receive NZ Superannuation.^{^[16]}
Advantages:	Ensures affordability and fairness by keeping rent proportionate to income, reducing the reliance on rates. Transparent approach, simple to implement using annual WINZ updates.
Disadvantages:	Some tenants are aged under 60 and receive different incomes, however in this approach would be considered as receiving the equivalent of NZ Superannuation. No ability to generate additional funds that can be used to fund capital expenditure or unexpected operational maintenance. Using the gross amount for NZ Superannuation might not show the real impact on tenants. Using the net amount could give a more accurate picture of the financial effect on them.

Rating implications per $100k of land value

Percentage of NZ Superannuation (gross)	Operational shortfall (129 units)	General differential	Commercial/ industrial differential	50% land differential
Paying 25%	$448,252.68	$2.69	$7.40	$1.35
Paying 28%	$322,075	$2.08	$5.72	$1.04
Paying 30%	$237,956.88	$1.43	$3.93	$0.72

Tenant implications

Percentage of NZ Superannuation (gross)	Rent Amount per week	Extra tenant would pay per week (if no accom supplement)	Max amount of accom supplement the tenant may receive^{^[17]}	Extra tenant would pay/week (if receives accom supplement)	Total tenant may pay/week (if receives accom supplement)
Paying 25%	$156.79	$21.39	$15.25	$6.14	$141.54
Paying 28%	$175.60	$40.20	$28.42	$11.78	$147.18
Paying 30%	$188.14	$52.74	$37.20	$15.54	$150.94

Option 3. Align rent increases with actual operational costs.

What this is:	Calculates rent to cover actual operating and maintenance costs, without depreciation, to ensure financial sustainability for day to day operations.
Includes overlays	Does not include any variation to account for overlays and would require bespoke arrangements.
Public consultation feedback	Ranked third (about 20% of submitters). Comments included that the portfolio should cover its costs, that Council should not be losing money on rental properties, nor should they be a burden on the ratepayers
Tenant feedback	Tenants were not specifically asked about this approach but were informed that the portfolio was not covering operational costs, with general rates funding the shortfall. Some tenants commented that current rent amounts did not seem high enough to cover maintenance, and upgrades should be carried out before any rent increases.
Advantages:	Intended to confirm yearly costs are covered. Transparent link between rent and expenses. Eliminates or significantly reduces impact on general rates.
Disadvantages:	Variable costs create uncertainty, and rents may rise faster than income. This is already seen by forecast costs for 26/27 increasing which includes a potential need for additional funds for deferred maintenance works. Initial rise in rent of about $88/week across all units. Does not generate additional funds to be used towards capital expenditure, and is harder to administrate, with reputational risk if forecasts are incorrect.

Tenant implications (no general rates implications)

Rent Amount per unit per week	Extra tenant would pay per week (if no accom supplement)	Max amount of accom supplement the tenant may receive^{^[18]}	Extra tenant would pay/week (if receives accom supplement)	Total tenant may pay/week (if receives accom supplement)
$223.61	$88.21	$62.03	$26.18	$161.58

Option 4. Benchmark rents against market rates

What this is:	Bases rents on professional valuations at 50%, 75% or 100% of market rate including the option for Elected Members to decide.
Includes overlays	Considers unit location, size and overall property condition.
Public consultation feedback	Ranked fourth (about 9% of submitters). No comments in support, with 9 comments against option 4. Comments referred to limited income for elderly persons and unaffordable market rents which are too high for anyone on NZ Superannuation with no other income. Concerns were raised that tenants could end up homeless, with some submitters referring to this approach as “cruel” and “a death sentence”.
Tenant feedback	Tenant feedback was that 93% did not think it was “a good approach”, with comments describing the approach as too expensive and these units cannot be compared to private market rentals.
Advantages:	May generate additional funds and remove reliance on general rates that can be reinvested to fund capital expenditure or unexpected maintenance. Aligns rent with private market rates. Simple to administer (with lead time).
Disadvantages:	May require costly annual market valuations. Could be unaffordable for tenants relying only on NZ Superannuation, even with accommodation supplement. May exceed Stats NZ 30% income recommendation. Creates inequity (tenants in larger or more desirable units or locations will pay more, even though they my not have chosen their unit). Higher reputational risk and potential community backlash.

It is noted that the Policy requires tenants that do not meet Council’s age criteria (60 years or above) to pay market rents. While this is outside of the scope of this review, the Policy will be updated to reflect the most recent market rents for the properties.

Rating implications per $100k of land value

No rating implications for 75% and 100%.

% Market rate	Forecasted operational loss (129 units)	General differential	Commercial/industrial differential	50% land differential
50%	$302,362	$1.82	$5.01	$0.91

Tenant implications (based on areas with an $80 cap on accommodation supplement)

Market rent	Rent Amount per unit per week	Extra tenant would pay per week (if no accom supplement)	Max amount of accom supplement the tenant may receive^{^[19]}	Extra tenant would pay/week (if receive accom supplement)	Total tenant may pay/week (if receive accom supplement)
50%	$175	$39.60	$28	$11.60	$147
75%	$262.50	$127.10	$80(cap)	$47.10	$182.50
100%	$350	$214.60	$80(cap)	$134.60	$270

Additional overlays to account for different in unit features or household types

These include household type (single and couples), unit size (number of bedrooms), unit area (location of unit) and unit condition. Current rent settings consider different household type and unit size, and charges different amounts for these.

Submitters were asked to choose all overlays they thought should apply. All overlays were chosen in similar proportions, with unit location the least selected. Out of 600 responses for these overlays:

· 170 selected unit size

· 107 selected unit location

· 149 selected unit condition

· 144 selected household type

· 9 selected none of the above

· 21 selected other

Household type (singles and couples)

Seven submitters supported household type with one suggested grouping single tenants in shared flats. Tenants noted that larger households cause more wear and tear but also considered that couples face higher living costs despite potentially higher income.

There is no clear method to determine how much extra couples should pay, due to:

· Operational costs relate to the unit, not occupants (except water).

· Wear and tear may rise with more tenants but is hard to measure.

· Elderly couples often rely on joint NZ Superannuation, which is not double the single rate.

· Councils take varied approaches.

Unit size

This overlay ranked highest, though no comments were received. Tenants supported rent based on unit size. Unit size based rent promotes fairness and consistency across properties. Larger units offer more space and suit couples.

Unit location

Three submitters opposed unit location, stating that tenants deserve well-maintained homes regardless of location and should not be penalised. Others suggested units should prioritise residents with local ties.

Tenant feedback also did not favour this approach, noting equal income and higher living costs in some areas make rent differences unreasonable. Some requested units closer to essential amenities like banks, doctors, and shops.

Location-based rent could be seen as unfair since tenants did not always get to choose their units’ location, and most have similar incomes regardless of their location.

Unit condition

Three submitters commented that units should be well maintained and two recommended renovating empty units. Tenant feedback did not support unit condition, stating tenants should manage presentation, all receive the same income, and upgrades should occur regardless.

Most units are 50+ years old, many with original fittings. Upgrades have been inconsistent, and lack of a clear definition for “refurbished,” combined with unknown costs, makes this overlay less viable.

Themes from public consultation submissions

· Affordability: Some submitters highlighted that elderly tenants should not be burdened by increasing rental costs, and rising costs could impact on tenant’s ability to afford everyday essentials.

· Council’s role in Housing for the Elderly: Submitters expressed concerns for the wellbeing and security of tenants, emphasising that the units should not be treated as a profit-making venture but as a vital social service.

· General rates concerns: Submitters commented that while Housing for the Elderly is important, it should not come at the expense of general rates, and that it should be financially self-sustaining and covering its own costs.

RECOMMENDED OPTION

Based on the above, staff recommend an approach using a combination of Option 2 and Option 4 as follows:

· Rents to be set at a maximum weekly rent payable by the tenant calculated as the lesser of the following two amounts:

o 60% market rate, or

o 30% NZ Superannuation (net amount, calculated using the ‘M’ tax rate) plus the maximum weekly accommodation supplement available for the area the unit is located in.

For the remainder of 2025/2026, the amount payable per area (being the lesser of the two amounts) would be calculated as follows:

Area 2 (Kerikeri)

Area 3 (Kaikohe, Kaitāia, Kawakawa)

Area 4 (all other properties)

60% market rate (obtained in December 2023 - high/low range)

$210 - 240

$180 - $204

$210 - $300

30% net NZ Superannuation ($161.52) + accommodation supplement max

$266.52

$241.52

$231.52

· To include overlays for household types and do so by applying an additional $20/week on top of the maximum payable rent.

· Annual rent reviews:

o Conduct rent reviews based on market valuations every 2 years, with the next review to be in 2027.

o Apply CPI adjustments in alternate years.

· Require 2 yearly reviews to the rent settings.

Implementing this recommended option means for tenants an initial rise of about $50 - $100 per week if not receiving accommodation supplement, or $16 - $28 per week if receiving accommodation supplement.

IMPORTANT: if tenants cannot access the accommodation supplement, or if the amount they receive is different based on their individual circumstances, this means the tenant would be paying a higher amount from their own income sources.

Implementation and Transition

The new rent settings would take effect from 12 December 2025 for new tenants, with a transition period required for existing tenants to comply with the Residential Tenancies Act 1986. Key requirements under the Act are:

· Tenants must receive at least 60 days’ written notice before any rent increase.

· Rent cannot be increased within 12 months of the tenancy start date.

· Rent cannot be increased within 12 months of the last increase.

Existing tenants will require 60 days’ written notice before the new rent applies. For tenants who moved in between 1 July 2025 and 11 December 2025 rent reviews will be completed as per the Residential Tenancy Act requirements at the end of the initial 12-month period of tenancy.

Timing of Notice

As this decision falls close to the Christmas period, staff recommend issuing notices during the last two weeks of January 2026, with rent increases to start from 1 April 2026, for the following reasons:

· Allows staff time to meet with tenants, explain changes, answer questions, and provide information on possible financial assistance.

· Tenants will likely need time to go to WINZ or other support networks to help with applying for additional financial assistance.

· Avoids the Christmas and public holiday shut down periods when less WINZ and Council staff will be available.

Future rent reviews would occur annually on 1 July, starting from 1 July 2027, to align with NZ Superannuation adjustments announced by WINZ on 1 April.

Attachment D contains a marked-up version of the Policy showing how the changes would look. It is noted that the Policy also provides that market rents apply to tenants that do not meet Council’s age criteria, and those will be updated by the relevant Council group to reflect market valuations for the properties.

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

Reasons for the recommended approach are because:

· While using markets rents was the least preferred approach from both public consultation and tenants, 60% of market rate places the rent closer to what other Councils charge, bringing them from around the lowest, to a mid-tier rent range compared to 9 other Councils.

· In addition, aligning a maximum rent amount to a percentage of NZ Superannuation keeps rent proportional to the majority of tenants’ income and considers additional financial support which may be available to them (amount tenant may receive dependent on individual factors). This also takes into account how some properties may have a much higher market value than others.

· Incorporates differences in unit size, household type and location.

· Closes the gap in operational loss, reducing impact to general rates. Simple to manage using external data, and alternative year CPI rent reviews reduces costs to obtain market valuations.

· Couples place additional maintenance requirements on units and increase water consumption. Other Councils include an additional charge of $34 - $95.89 for couples versus single tenants.

· 2 yearly reviews of rent settings ensure alignment with Councils divestment milestones and ensure they remain appropriate.

A primary risk with the recommended approach is if tenants cannot access additional financial support such as the accommodation supplement, or if they receive income which is less than the NZ Superannuation. This means the individual tenant will need to rely more heavily on their own income sources to pay rental costs.

By way of comparison between the status quo approach and the recommended approach, for the remainder of 2025/2026 rents would be on average as follows:

Option

Weekly rent

(average)

Extra tenant may pay if currently paying $135.40/week & no accom supplement

Total weekly rent tenant may pay if receiving accom supplement (average)

% (rounded) of net NZ Superannuation taking into account if receiving accom supplement

Status Quo: CPI 6.1% adjusted

$143.65

$8.25

$137.60

25%

Recommended Option: 60% Market rate

$210

$74.60

$157.50

29%

The difference in rating implications per $100k of land value are as follows:

Option

Potential annual income

(129 units)

Deficit (covered by general rates)

General differential

Commercial/ Industrial differential

50% land differential

CPI 6.1% adjusted

$963,604

$536,395

$3.22

$8.86

$1.61

60% Market rate

$1,408,680

$91,320

$0.55

$1.51

$0.28

The above information is based on averages. Attachment C outlines rental amounts by location, the potential accommodation supplement available to tenants, how the maximum rent payable would apply, and the resulting amount each tenant would pay for different unit sizes and locations for 2025/2026.

CPI-based rent adjustments have failed to keep pace with actual property costs, such as building materials, compliance, maintenance, and rates which have risen faster than CPI. This approach has also led to rents falling out of sync with tenant incomes and the portfolio no longer covering its costs, increasing reliance on general rates. This shortfall means it is no longer fitting with the requirements of the Housing for the Elderly Policy and the Revenue and Financing Policy 2024 for the activity to be funded by rents.

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

Costs to implement would be met within existing budgets and does not require additional staff to implement. Market rates for 2025/2026 are based off December 2023 market valuations.

Updated market valuations will require additional budget of between $30,000 - $40,000 based off December 2023 costs (not required until the 2027 review).

Identified operational costs 2026/2027: $1,500,000 (approx.), creating a deficit of $91,320 (approx.). The rating implications per $100k land value for this option is as follows:

· General residential: $0.55

· Commercial/industrial: $1.51

· 50% land differential: $0.28

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Attachment A - Analysis of submissions - A5465508 - A5465508 ⇩

2. Attachment B - Analysis of options - A5465506 - A5465506 ⇩

3. Attachment C - Housing for the Elderly rental amounts 2025/2026 - A5475364 - A5475364 ⇩

4. Attachment D - Amended Housing for the Elderly Policies and Information 2010 - A5465510 - A5465510 ⇩

5. Attachment E - List of Public Submissions - A5495241 ⇩

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	High significance due to the potential impact on tenants, and medium significance for the community and general rates. Feedback gathered from public consultation was considered when analysing the options. Tenant feedback was obtained through face-to-face visits and return of questionnaire to staff. Wider community feedback has been obtained through public consultation.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	Council’s Housing for the Elderly Funding Policy requires the activity to be funded from rents received and endeavours to keep rents as low as possible while providing units that are well maintained and presented. This is reflected in the Council’s Revenue and Financing Policy 2024 which outline that the Housing for the Elderly portfolio is intended to be funded entirely through rents received, however recognises that at times this activity may not be self-funding.
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 is District Wide. Community Boards do not have delegation to make decisions over Housing for the Elderly related matters.
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.	This decision does not relate to land or a body of water. Iwi and hapū have not been specifically consulted. Iwi and hapū had the opportunity to provide feedback as part of public consultation.
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).	Tenants’ views were obtained for the research report and potential impacts on them has been included in the analysis of the approaches. Tenants were also able to provide feedback as part of public consultation.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	In depth financial implications are included in the analysis for each approach in Attachment B. Costs to implement would be met within existing budgets and does not require additional staff to implement. Market rates for 2025/2026 are based off December 2023 market valuations. Updated market valuations may require additional budget of between $30,000 - $40,000 based off December 2023 costs.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

11 December 2025

7.7 Appointment of Non-Elected Members (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy Review and Adoption of Amended Policy

File Number: A5464469

Author: Shayne Storey, Team Leader - Policy & Bylaws

Authoriser: Roger Ackers, Group Manager - Planning & Policy

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To seek agreement from Council that the Appointment of Non-Elected Members (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy has been reviewed and to seek adoption of the amended Policy.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

· Under Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA02), Council may appoint to a committee or subcommittee a person who is not an elected member if that person has the skills, attributes and knowledge that will assist the work of a committee or subcommittee.

· On 19 May 2022 (resolution 2022/38 refers) Council adopted the Appointment of Non-Elected (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy.

· The Policy was due for review at the end of the triennium

· Council Staff have completed the review and recommend amendments to the Policy (see tracked changes in Attachment 2)

· Attachment 1 is the proposed final amended Appointment of Non-Elected Members (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy for adoption.

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That Council:

a) agree the Appointment of Non-Elected (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy has been reviewed

b) adopt the amended Non-Elected (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy as in Attachment 1.

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

The Local Government Act 2002 (Schedule 7) provides that the Council may appoint to a committee or subcommittee, a person who is not an elected member if that person has the skills, attributes and knowledge that will assist the work of the committee or subcommittee.

On 19 May 2022 (resolution 2022/38 refers) Council adopted the Appointment of Non-Elected (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy.

The Policy was due for review at the end of the triennium.

The current objectives of Council’s Appointment of Non-Elected (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy are to ensure:

• that the process of appointing non-elected members to council committees is undertaken in an objective and transparent manner, while protecting individual privacy

• that committee appointments are made based on an assessment of skills, knowledge and experience, having regard to the nature of scope of the committee’s objectives and activities

• that consideration is given to the contribution that non-elected members can make to the committee as a whole and to the achievement of the committee’s objectives and activities

• that consideration is given to the context in which council, as a publicly accountable body, operates

• that there is recognition that decision-making is already supported by technical advice through officer reports, advisory groups, working parties, and contractors, as well as input via community advocacy and key relationships with external stakeholders.

It should be noted that the current appointments to the Joint Climate Change Adaptation Committee, which has its own Terms of Reference agreed to by all four Northland Councils, and appointments made via Te Koekoeā - Council Controlled (CCO) Committee, which is informed by the Appointment and Remuneration of Directors for Council Organisations Policy, sit outside the Appointment of Non-Elected (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy that is subject of this review.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

Council staff have completed the review of the Policy to ensure that it:

· is certain (clear)

· consistent with the objectives of the Policy

· aligns with relevant legislation, policy and guidance

Summary of Review Findings

Council staff recommend mostly minor amendments to the policy to provide clarity, consistency, links to additional guidelines, and alignment with other Council policy instruments. A copy of the current policy with recommended track changes can be found in Attachment 2.

Substantive recommended amendments are as follows:

Clause 8 Conflicts of Interest and Statutory Obligations

Staff recommended addition to clause 8:

The Elected Member Code of Conduct required to be adopted under Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 does not legally apply specifically to Appointed Members. However, Appointed Members are expected to comply with the behaviours and processes set out in the Council’s Code of Conduct. FNDC Code of Conduct

It is considered appropriate to include reference to the Code of Conduct as it is referenced in Clause 9 Removal of Appointed Members and this allows removal of an Appointed Member to be considered where there has been non-adherence with the principles of the Code.

Review

Staff recommend amending the date of review to align with the Appointed Members Allowances Policy review date at the beginning of each triennium, which will allow both policies to be reviewed collectively. Additionally, it is best practice to review policy instruments of this nature at the start of a new triennium to prevent an outgoing Council from binding an incoming Council.

Options

Option One: Adopt the amended Appointment of Non-Elected Members (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council (recommended option)

Adopting the amended Appointment of Non-Elected Members (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy will provide clarity, consistent language, and alignment with other Council policies.

Advantages

Disadvantages

Provides clear and consistent language

Follows best practice

Alignment with other Council policy instruments

None identified

Option Two: Continue without amendment

The Appointment of Non-Elected Members (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy will remain in place with no changes.

Advantages

Disadvantages

None identified

Existing policy is ambiguous

Additional information will not be included

Best practice will not be followed

TAKE TŪTOHUNGA / REASON FOR THE RECOMMENDATION

Council staff advise that the Appointment of Non-Elected (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy in Attachment 1 is an appropriate form of policy for the purposes of Part 6 and Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002.

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

There is no cost to adopt the amended Policy.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1. Appointment of Non-Elected Members Policy_FINAL REVISED - A5495313 ⇩

2. Members Policy with recommended track changes - A5495316 ⇩

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 Appointment of Non-Elected Members (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy does not have a high level of significance as: a) it does not involve the transfer of ownership or control of a strategic asset or other important asset; and b) it is consistent with current Council plans and policies.
State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.	The Policy aligns with the Allowances for Appointed Members Policy and Te Pae O Uta Te Ao Māori Framework. The Policy is in accordance with The Local Government Act 2002 (Schedule 7), which allows for appointments to committees of Council.
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 Appointment of Non-Elected Members (Appointed Members) to Committees of Council Policy has district-wide relevance and is not within the delegations of Community Boards to consider.
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 does not relate to land and/or and body of water. The Policy acknowledges that to inform good decision-making under our statutory requirements and in line with Te Tiriti o Waitangi/The Treaty of Waitangi, there may be a need to make appointments that provide a knowledge and holistic understanding of Te Ao Māori (Māori World View).
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 policy recognises that the appointment of external non-elected persons (Appointed Members) to Council committees and subcommittees can enhance the available skills and expertise around the decision-making table. All persons subject to appointment are parties of interest.
State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.	There is no cost to adopt the amended Policy.
Chief Financial Officer review.	The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

A blue and white document with text

AI-generated content may be incorrect.

[1] Far North District Council. (7 October 2025). Agenda report item 6.2 on Utu Whakawhanake Development Contributions Policy – Analysis of Submissions – Adoption of Policy. [Extraordinary Council Meeting minutes]. Far North District Council. Infocouncil.

[2] Far North District Council. (2015). Far North District Council Long Term Plan 2015 – 2015. [Council public website]. Far North District Council.

[3] Far North District Council. (12 March 2024). Agenda report item 5.1 on Adoption Long Term Plan 2024-2027 Information and Consultation Documents. [Council Meeting Agenda]. Far North District Council. Infocouncil

[4] Far North District Council. (11 April 2024). Confirmation of Meeting Minutes held on 12 March 2024. Resolution 2024/30 on the Adoption of the Revenue and Financing Policy. [Council Meeting minutes]. Far North District Council. Infocouncil.

[5] Far North District Council. (11 July 2024). Confirmation of Meeting Minutes held on 26 June 2024. Resolution 2024/97 on the Adoption of the Long Term Plan 2024- 2027. [Council Meeting minutes]. Far North District Council. Infocouncil.

[6] Far North District Council. (26 June 2024). Agenda report item 6.2 on Adoption of the Long Term Plan 2024 – 2027. [Council Meeting Agenda]. Far North District Council. Infocouncil.

[7] Far North District Council. (14 November 2024). Agenda report item 6.3 on Review of Development Contributions Policy. [Council Meeting Agenda]. Far North District Council. Infocouncil.

[8] Far North District Council. (12 December 2024)). Confirmation of Meeting Minutes held on 14 November 2024. Resolution 2024/158 on Review of Development Contributions Policy. [Council Meeting minutes]. Far North District Council. Infocouncil.

[9] Far North District Council. (28 August 2025)). Confirmation of Meeting Minutes held on 31 July 2025. Resolution 2025/94 on Development Contributions Policy - Statement of Proposal. [Council Meeting minutes]. Far North District Council. Infocouncil.

[10] Far North District Council. (7 October 2024). Agenda report item 6.2 on Utu Whakawhanake Development Contributions Policy – Analysis of Submissions – Adoption of Policy. [Council Meeting Agenda]. Far North District Council. Infocouncil.

[11]Housing for the Elderly review of rent setting and options for public consultation report 31 July 2025 infocouncil.fndc.govt.nz/Open/2025/07/CO_20250731_AGN_2880_AT.PDF

[14] FNDC Revenue and Financing Policy 2024, page 4 Revenue-and-Financing-Policy-2024.pdf

[15] Amount a tenant may receive will depend on individual financial and asset situation and area they live in. May pay up to 70% of rental amount over threshold.

[16] In reviewing all current tenant ages, 88% are aged over 65 as at July 2025.

[17] Amount a tenant may receive will depend on individual financial and asset situation and area they live in. May pay up to 70% of rental amount over threshold.

[18] Amount a tenant may receive will depend on individual financial and asset situation and area they live in. May pay up to 70% of rental amount over threshold.

[19] Amount a tenant may receive will depend on individual financial and asset situation and area they live in. May pay up to 70% of rental amount over threshold.