Te Kaunihera o Tai Tokerau ki te Raki

 

 

AGENDA

 

Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting

 

Tuesday, 7 September 2021

Time:

1.00 pm

Location:

Held Electronically via Microsoft Teams

 

 

Membership:

Chairperson Kelly Stratford

Cr Dave Collard

Mayor John Carter

Cr David Clendon

Deputy Mayor Ann Court

Cr Rachel Smith

Cr John Vujcich

Member Belinda Ward

 

 


Authorising Body

Mayor/Council

Status

Standing Committee

 

 

COUNCIL COMMITTEE

 

Title

Regulatory Compliance Committee Terms of Reference

Approval Date

19 December 2019

Responsible Officer

Chief Executive

Purpose

The purpose of the Regulatory Compliance Committee (the Committee) is to implement and monitor regulatory compliance and statutory matters on behalf of the Governing Body.  The Committee will conduct hearings (except those under the Resource Management Act 1991) and undertake any functions as requested or delegated by Council from time to time provided the functions conform to the Local Government Act 2002.

The Committee will have functional responsibility for the following aspects:

·         Hearings (excluding RMA and DLC)

·         Regulatory activities

·         Regulatory policies and bylaws

·         Regulatory compliance

·         Mana Whakahono


To perform his or her role effectively, each Committee member must develop and maintain his or her skills and knowledge, including an understanding of the Committee’s responsibilities and key legislation.

Delegations

The Regulatory Compliance Committee shall have the following delegated powers and be accountable to Council for the exercising of these powers. In exercising the delegated powers, the Regulatory Compliance Committee will operate within:

·         policies, plans, standards or guidelines that have been established and approved by Council;

·         the overall priorities of Council;

·         the needs of the local communities; and

·         the approved budgets for the activity.

Power to Delegate

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

Membership

The Council will determine the membership of the Regulatory Compliance Committee. 

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

When the Regulatory Compliance Committee is meeting as a Hearing Committee, the Chairperson and a majority of the Committee members must be accredited commissioners under the relevant Act.

When the Regulatory Compliance Committee is meeting as a Hearing Committee, the Chairperson shall hold the ‘chair certification' as per the Act.

The Committee membership for each hearing shall be appointed by the Chairperson of the

Regulatory Compliance Committee together with the Chief Executive and will normally comprise the core Regulatory Compliance Committee members.

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

Mayor Carter

Kelly Stratford – Chairperson

Dave Collard – Deputy Chairperson

John Vujcich

Rachel Smith

David Clendon

Ann Court

Belinda Ward – Bay of Islands-Whangaroa Community Board Chair

Adele Gardner – Te Hiku Community Board Chair

Non-appointed councillors may attend Regulatory Compliance Committee (but not Hearings) with speaking rights, but not voting rights.

Quorum - Committee

The quorum at a meeting of the Regulatory Compliance Committee is 4 members. 

Frequency of Meetings

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

Committees Responsibilities

The Committees responsibilities are described below:

Hearings, Objections and Appeals

·         Conduct hearings, as delegated by Council, in accordance with the relevant legislative and policy requirements (excluding Resource Management Act and District Licensing)

·         Approve and monitor Council’s list of hearing Commissioners for Resource Management Act and District Licensing hearings.

Regulatory Activities

·         Assess and provide advice to Council on level of service and policy issues relating to:

o   regulatory matters; and

o   provision of services

·         Reviewing and making recommendations to the Chief Executive in respect to functions and activities within the purpose of the Committee regarding codes of practice.

Policies and Bylaws

·         Recommend the development and review of Council’s regulatory policies and district bylaws

·         Make a recommendation where in a bylaw the Council has specified that a matter be regulated, controlled or prohibited by the Council by resolution (eg dog areas under the dog control bylaw, speed limits)

Compliance

·         Ensure that Council’s planning and regulatory functions comply with legislative requirements and Council policy and processes

·         Monitor operational functions comply with legislative requirements and Council policy

o   BCA (building consents)

o   RMA (resource consents)

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

·         Receive traffic light reports on regulatory compliance (policy, plans, functions and bylaws) such as:

o   District Plan (when proposed)

o   Building Act

o   Resource Management Act

o   Licences (various acts)

o   Animal management

Mana Whakahono-ā-Rohe (Mana Whakahono)

·         Monitor regulatory matters arising from Mana Whakahono under the Resource Management Act 1991.

The committee seeks to foster and encourage participation and engagement with constituents.

 

HEARINGS, OBJECTIONS AND APPEALS

Regulatory Compliance Committee, meeting as a Hearing Committee

The Regulatory Committee, when meeting as a Hearing Committee, shall be delegated authority to hear and determine matters as follows:

Public Works Act 1981

Public work requirements.

Local Government Act 2002

Objections against the construction of public works on private land.

Local Government Act 1974

Objections and appeals to road stopping proposals.

Fencing of Swimming Pools Act 1987

Applications for exemption, waiver or compliance.

Delegated decisions

·         Requests for review or objections to delegated decisions by the Committee and/or delegated officers.

·         Appeals against decisions made by officials acting under delegated authority in accordance with approved Council Policy.

Dog Control Act 1996

Objections.

Gambling Act 2003, Health Act 1956 and Building Act 2004

Hearings, objections and related matters.

And any other such matters as required under the legislation (but not Resource Management Act or the Supply and Sale of Alcohol Act for matters outside the district licensing committee).

Rules and Procedures

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

Annual reporting

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

 


 

REGULATORY COMPLIANCE COMMITTEE - MEMBERS REGISTER OF INTERESTS

Name

Responsibility (i.e. Chairperson etc)

Declaration of Interests

Nature of Potential Interest

Member's Proposed Management Plan

Hon John Carter QSO

Board Member of the Local Government Protection Programme

Board Member of the Local Government Protection Program

 

 

Carter Family Trust

 

 

 

Kelly Stratford (Chair)

KS Bookkeeping and Administration

Business Owner, provides book keeping, administration and development of environmental management plans

None perceived

Step aside from decisions that arise, that may have conflicts

Waikare Marae Trustees

Trustee

Maybe perceived conflicts

Case by case basis

Bay of Islands College

Parent Elected Trustee

None perceived

If there was a conflict, I will step aside from decision making

Karetu School

Parent Elected Trustee

None perceived

If there was a conflict, I will step aside from decision making

Māori title land – Moerewa and Waikare

Beneficiary and husband is a shareholder

None perceived

If there was a conflict, I will step aside from decision making

Sister is employed by Far North District Council

 

 

Will not discuss work/governance mattes that are confidential

Gifts - food and beverages

Residents and ratepayers may ‘shout’ food and beverage

Perceived bias or predetermination

Case by case basis

Taumarere Counselling Services

Advisory Board Member

May be perceived conflicts

Should conflict arise, step aside from voting

Sport Northland

Board Member

May be perceived conflicts

Should conflict arise, step aside from voting

He Puna Aroha Putea Whakapapa

Trustee

May be perceived conflicts

Should conflict arise, step aside from voting should they apply for funds

Kawakawa Returned Services Association

Member

May be perceived conflicts

Should conflict arise, step aside from voting should they apply for funds

Whangaroa Returned Services Association

Member

May be perceived conflicts

Should conflict arise, step aside from voting should they apply for funds

National Emergency Management Advisor Committee

Member

 

Case by case basis

Te Rūnanga ā Iwi o Ngāpuhi

Tribal affiliate member

As a descendent of  Te Rūnanga ā Iwi o Ngāpuhi I could have a perceived  conflict of interest  in Te Rūnanga ā Iwi o Ngāpuhi  Council relations

Declare a perceived  conflict should there appear to be one

Te Rūnanga ā Iwi o Ngāti Hine

Tribal affiliate member

Could have a perceived conflict of interest

Declare a  perceived  conflict should  I determine there is a conflict

Kawakawa Business and Community Association

Member

 

Will declare a perceived conflict should there appear to be one

Kelly Stratford - Partner

Chef and Barista

Opua Store

None perceived

 

Māori title land – Moerewa

Shareholder

None perceived

If there was a conflict of interest, I would step aside from decision making

David Collard (Deputy Chair)

Snapper Bonanza 2011 Limited

45% Shareholder and Director

 

 

Trustee of Te Ahu Charitable Trust

Council delegate to this board

 

 

David Clendon

Chairperson – He Waka Eke Noa Charitable Trust

None

 

Declare if any issue arises

Member of Vision Kerikeri

None

 

Declare if any issue arises

Joint owner of family home in Kerikeri

Hall Road, Kerikeri

 

 

David Clendon – Partner

Resident Shareholder on Kerikeri Irrigation

 

 

 

Deputy Mayor Ann Court

Waipapa Business Association

Member

 

Case by case

Warren Pattinson Limited

Shareholder

Building company. FNDC is a regulator and enforcer

Case by case

Kerikeri Irrigation

Supplies my water

 

No

District Licensing

N/A

N/A

N/A

Ann Court Trust

Private

Private

N/A

Waipapa Rotary

Honorary member

Potential community funding submitter

Declare interest and abstain from voting.

Properties on Onekura Road, Waipapa

Owner Shareholder

Any proposed FNDC Capital works or policy change which may have a direct impact (positive/adverse)

Declare interest and abstain from voting.

Property on Daroux Dr, Waipapa

Financial interest

Any proposed FNDC Capital works or policy change which may have a direct impact (positive/adverse)

Declare interest and abstain from voting.

Flowers and gifts

Ratepayer 'Thankyou'

Bias/ Pre-determination?

Declare to Governance

Coffee and food

Ratepayers sometimes 'shout' food and beverage

Bias or pre-determination

Case by case

Staff

N/A

Suggestion of not being impartial or pre-determined!

Be professional, due diligence, weigh the evidence. Be thorough, thoughtful, considered impartial and balanced. Be fair.

Warren Pattinson

My husband is a builder and may do work for Council staff

 

Case by case

Ann Court - Partner

Warren Pattinson Limited

Director

Building Company. FNDC is a regulator

Remain at arm’s length

Air NZ

Shareholder

None

None

Warren Pattinson Limited

Builder

FNDC is the consent authority, regulator and enforcer.

Apply arm’s length rules

Property on Onekura Road, Waipapa

Owner

Any proposed FNDC capital work in the vicinity or rural plan change. Maybe a link to policy development.

Would not submit.                                                                               Rest on a case by case basis.

Rachel Smith

Friends of Rolands Wood Charitable Trust

Trustee

 

 

Mid North Family Support

Trustee

 

 

Property Owner

Kerikeri

 

 

Friends who work at Far North District Council

 

 

 

Kerikeri Cruising Club

Subscription Member

 

 

Vision Kerikeri

Financial Member

 

 

Rachel Smith (Partner)

Property Owner

Kerikeri

 

 

Friends who work at Far North District Council

 

 

 

Kerikeri Cruising Club

Subscription Member and Treasurer

 

 

Vision Kerikeri

Financial Member

 

 

Town and General Groundcare Limited

Director, Shareholder

 

 

John Vujcich

Board Member

Pioneer Village

Matters relating to funding and assets

Declare interest and abstain

Director

Waitukupata Forest Ltd

Potential for council activity to directly affect its assets

Declare interest and abstain

Director

Rural Service Solutions Ltd

Matters where council regulatory function impact of company services

Declare interest and abstain

Director

Kaikohe (Rau Marama) Community Trust

Potential funder

Declare interest and abstain

Partner

MJ & EMJ Vujcich

Matters where council regulatory function impacts on partnership owned assets

Declare interest and abstain

Member

Kaikohe Rotary Club

Potential funder, or impact on Rotary projects

Declare interest and abstain

Member

New Zealand Institute of Directors

Potential provider of training to Council

Declare a Conflict of Interest

Member

Institute of IT Professionals

Unlikely, but possible provider of services to Council

Declare a Conflict of Interest

Belinda Ward

Ward Jarvis Family Trust

Trustee

 

 

Kenneth Jarvis Family Trust

Trustee

 

 

Residence in Watea

 

 

 

Belinda Ward (Partner)

Ward Jarvis Family Trust

Trustee and beneficiary

 

 

Kenneth Jarvis Family Trust

Trustee and beneficiary

 

 

Residence in Watea

Trustee

 

 

Adele Gardner

N/A - FNDC Honorarium

 

 

 

Te Hiku Education Trust

Trustee

 

 

Te Ahu Charitable Trust

Trustee

 

 

ST Johns Kaitaia Branch

Trustee/ Committee Member

 

 

Te Hiku Sports Hub Committee

 

 

 

I know many FNDC staff members as I was an FNDC staff member from 1994-2008.

 

 

 

Partner of Adele Gardner

N/A as Retired

 

 

 

 

 

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

Far North District Council

Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting

will be held in the Held Electronically via Microsoft Teams on:

Tuesday 7 September 2021 at 1.00 pm

Te Paeroa Mahi / Order of Business

1          Karakia Timatanga – Opening Prayer. 13

2          Nga Whakapāha Me Ngā Pānga Mema / Apologies and Declarations of Interest 13

3          Te Tono Kōrero / Deputation. 13

4          Confirmation of Previous Minutes. 14

4.1            Confirmation of Previous Minutes. 14

5          Information Reports. 19

5.1            Annual Report on Dog Control Policy and Practices 2020/2021. 19

5.2            Significant Flora and Fauna Assessment under the Operative District Plan and Draft Proposed District Plan. 35

5.3            Resource Consent Update. 47

5.4            District Services Monthly Business Report for July 2021. 56

5.5            Regulatory Compliance Committee Action Sheet Update September 2021. 96

6          Karakia Whakamutunga – Closing Prayer. 98

7          Te Kapinga Hui / Meeting Close. 98

 

 


1            Karakia Timatanga – Opening Prayer

2            Nga Whakapāha Me Ngā Pānga Mema / Apologies and Declarations of Interest

Members need to stand aside from decision-making when a conflict arises between their role as a Member of the Committee and any private or other external interest they might have. This note is provided as a reminder to Members to review the matters on the agenda and assess and identify where they may have a pecuniary or other conflict of interest, or where there may be a perception of a conflict of interest.

If a Member feels they do have a conflict of interest, they should publicly declare that at the start of the meeting or of the relevant item of business and refrain from participating in the discussion or voting on that item. If a Member thinks they may have a conflict of interest, they can seek advice from the Chief Executive Officer or the Team Leader Democracy Support (preferably before the meeting).

It is noted that while members can seek advice the final decision as to whether a conflict exists rests with the member.

3            Te Tono Kōrero / Deputation

No requests for deputations were received at the time of the Agenda going to print.


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

4            Confirmation of Previous Minutes

4.1         Confirmation of Previous Minutes

File Number:           A3052646

Author:                    Marlema Baker, Meetings Administrator

Authoriser:             Aisha Huriwai, Team Leader Democracy Services

 

Purpose of the Report

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

Recommendation

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee confirms that the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held 20 July 2021 are a true and correct record.

 

1) Background

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

2) Discussion and Options

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

Reason for the recommendation

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

3) Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

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

Attachments

1.       2021-07-20 Regulatory Compliance Committee Minutes - A3286692  


 

Compliance schedule:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Compliance requirement

Staff assessment

State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy

This is a matter of low significance.

State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.

This report complies with the Local Government Act 2002 Schedule 7 Section 28.

State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.

It is the responsibility of each meeting to confirm their minutes therefore the views of another meeting are not relevant.

State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.

There are no implications on Māori in confirming minutes from a previous meeting. Any implications on Māori arising from matters included in meeting minutes should be considered as part of the relevant report.

Identify persons likely to be affected by or have an interest in the matter, and how you have given consideration to their views or preferences.

This report is asking for the minutes to be confirmed as true and correct record, any interests that affect other people should be considered as part of the individual reports.

State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.

There are no financial implications or the need for budgetary provision arising from this report.

Chief Financial Officer review.

The Chief Financial Officer has not reviewed this report.

 

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

   MINUTES OF Far North District Council
Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting
HELD AT THE
Council Chamber, Memorial Avenue, Kaikohe
ON
Tuesday, 20 July 2021 AT 1.00 pm

PRESENT:              Chairperson Kelly Stratford, Deputy Chairperson Dave Collard, Deputy Mayor Ann Court, Cr Rachel Smith, Cr John Vujcich, Member Adele Gardner, Member Belinda Ward

STAFF PRESENT: Shaun Clarke (Chief Executive Officer), William J Taylor, MBE (General Manager Corporate Services), Dean Myburgh (General Manager Districts Services), Andy Finch (General Manager Infrastructure and Asset Management), Darren Edwards (General Manager Strategic Planning and Policy), Richard Edmondson (Manager – Communications), Rochelle Deane (Manager – Environmental Services), Trent Blakeman (Manager – Building Services, Minnie Fox (Intermediate Resource Planner) Marlema Baker (Meeting Administrator)

1            Karakia TimatAnga – Opening Prayer

Chairperson Kelly Stratford commenced the meeting with a karakia.

2            NGā WHAKAPāHA ME NGā PāNGA MEMA / Apologies and Declarations of Interest

Apology

Resolution  2021/17

Moved:       Deputy Chairperson Dave Collard

Seconded:  Cr John Vujcich

That the apologies received from His Worship the Mayor and Cr David Clendon be accepted and leave of absence granted.

Carried

3            NGā tONO kŌRERO / Deputation

Leonie Exel – Community Animal Advocate speaking to the Significant Flora and Fauna Assessment.

1.   What is the extent of the bounds and limitations of the assessment?

2.   What is the legal cost to Council from all challenges from the public on dog bans, and what is it likely to be in the future?

3.   Has there been a review of the supporting information for banning dogs?

4.   What are the intended and unintended consequences of banning pets from the district?

5.   Where does the current practices of the Far North District Council clash with it’s own  documentation and with Legislation?

6.   What alternatives are there to what is in place now?

Ngahau Davis – He Iwi Kotahi Tatou Trust, speaking to Council’s implementation of ticketing people for not having Warrants of Fitness and Registrations

1.   Represents an area of the demographics of “Haves” and “Have Nots”

2.   Feels the implementation of ticketing for no warrants and/or registrations has the potential to make criminals out of people who are good people.

3.   Rural isolation, high unemployment etc are real issues in our lower socio-economics areas. We need to listen to the voice of the most vulnerable.

4.   Wants to help to find a solution to help people to help meet compliance.

4            Confirmation of Previous Minutes

4.1         Confirmation of Previous Minutes

Agenda item 4.1 document number A3052620, pages 14 - 18 refers

Resolution  2021/18

Moved:       Deputy Mayor Ann Court

Seconded:  Cr Dave Collard

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee confirms that the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held 4 May 2021 are a true and correct record.

Carried

5            Information Reports

5.1         District Services Monthly Business Report for May 2021

Agenda item 5.1 document number A3265651, pages 19 - 59 refers

Resolution  2021/19

Moved:       Deputy Mayor Ann Court

Seconded:  Deputy Chairperson Dave Collard

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report District Services Monthly Business Report for May 2021.

Carried

 

5.2         Significant Flora and Fauna Assessment

Agenda item 5.2 document number A3267393, pages 60 - 102 refers

Resolution  2021/20

Moved:       Cr Rachel Smith

Seconded:  Chairperson Kelly Stratford

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee:

a)   receive the report Significant Flora and Fauna Assessment; and

Carried

b)   that a joint report be presented to address both the operative and draft proposed district plan provisions as they are applied as part of resource consent considerations and practices.

In Favour:       Chairperson Kelly Stratford, Deputy Chairperson Dave Collard, Crs Rachel Smith and John Vujcich

Against:           Deputy Mayor Ann Court and Member Belinda Ward

Carried

Meeting adjourned 2:09 pm – 2:15 pm

Cr Rachel Smith left the meeting 2:38 pm

 

5.3         BCA Compliance Update

Agenda item 5.3 document number A3263832, pages 103 - 104 refers

Resolution  2021/21

Moved:       Chairperson Kelly Stratford

Seconded:  Deputy Mayor Ann Court

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report BCA Compliance Update.

Carried

 

5.4         Regulatory Compliance Committee Action Sheet Update July 2021

Agenda item 5.4 document number A3280040, pages 105 - 107 refers

Resolution  2021/22

Moved:       Member Belinda Ward

Seconded:  Cr John Vujcich

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report Action Sheet Update July 2021.

Carried

5            Karakia Whakamutunga – Closing Prayer

Chairperson Stratford closed the meeting with a karakia.

6            tE kAPINGA hUI / Meeting Close

The meeting closed at 2:46 pm.

 

The minutes of this meeting will be confirmed at the Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting held on 7 September 2021.

 

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

CHAIRPERSON

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

5            Information Reports

5.1         Annual Report on Dog Control Policy and Practices 2020/2021

File Number:           A3336354

Author:                    Rochelle Deane, Manager - Environmental Services

Authoriser:             Dean Myburgh, General Manager - District Services

 

TAKE PŪRONGO / Purpose of the Report

That the Committee receives the Annual Report on Dog Control Policy and Practices 2020/2021

WHAKARĀPOPOTO MATUA / Executive SummarY

Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 requires each territorial authority to report on its dog control policy and practices and provide specific statistical information.

This report acts as a medium for this information and is an update on the progress and processes of the Far North District Council Animal Management services.

The attached report will be submitted to the Department of Internal Affairs and a link to the document will be made publicly available on the FNDC website (Attachment 1).

 

 TŪTOHUNGA / Recommendation

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report Annual Report on Dog Control Policy and Practices 2020/2021.

 

 

tĀHUHU KŌRERO / Background

The Dog Control Act 1996 requires all territorial authorities to report annually to the Department of Internal Affairs on their dog control activity. The information assists central government to assess national trends and developments. This requirement below came into place through the Dog Control Amendment Act 2003, which came into force on 1 December 2003:

10A Territorial authority must report on dog control policy and practices

(1) A territorial authority must, in respect of each financial year, report on the administration of—

a)   its dog control policy adopted under section 10; and

b)   its dog control practices.

(2) The report must include, in respect of each financial year, information relating to—

a)   the number of registered dogs in the territorial authority district:

b)   the number of probationary owners and disqualified owners in the territorial authority district:

c)   the number of dogs in the territorial authority district classified as dangerous under section 31 and the relevant provision under which the classification is made:

d)   the number of dogs in the territorial authority district classified as menacing under section 33A or section 33C and the relevant provision under which the classification is made:

e)   the number of infringement notices issued by the territorial authority:

f)    the number of dog related complaints received by the territorial authority in the previous year and the nature of those complaints:

g)   the number of prosecutions taken by the territorial authority under this Act.

(3) The territorial authority must give public notice of the report—

a)   by means of a notice published in—

i.     1 or more daily newspapers circulating in the territorial authority district; or

ii.     1 or more other newspapers that have at least an equivalent circulation in that district to the daily newspapers circulating in that district; and

b)   by any means that the territorial authority thinks desirable in the circumstances.

(4) The territorial authority must also, within 1 month after adopting the report, send a copy of it to the Secretary for Local Government.

 

MATAPAKI ME NGĀ KŌWHIRINGA / Discussion and Next Steps

·                All Dog Control functions in the district are carried out in-house which includes the administration, field and shelter services. FNDC have a total of ten Animal Management Officers across the district, which includes a Team Leader and Senior Officers.

This team is responsible for the reactive response to complaints about dogs at large or causing nuisance, ensuring compliance with the Dog Control Act 1996 and the Far North District Council Dog Management Policy and Bylaw, encouraging responsible dog ownership, the registration of dogs as well as community education.

The report in summary:

Responding to complaints (RFS)

There has been a total of 2809 dog control customer requests for service received over the 2020/2021 period. This is over 900 more individual requests for service than the previous year.

Dog Registration

The number of known dogs in the district remains steady at 11,069. Of these 8,949 were registered for 2020/2021 period. This is an increase of 665 registered dogs from the previous year and gives 81% compliancy with registration up from 75% in 2019/2020.

A social media campaign (AROHA) promoting dog registration and responsible dog ownership was launched in May 2021. This campaign was continued with an information insert ‘Kuri Kārere Doggo Digest’ included with dog registration reminder notices (Attachment 2).

 

    

 

Probationary and Disqualified Owners

There are five Disqualified owners in the district and no Probationary owners.

Enforcement

There has been a total of 231 infringements issued for offences under the Dog Control Act 1996. This is an increase of 65 from 2019/2020 and is reflective of proactive work in the unregistered dog area (179 infringements).

There was only one prosecution for dog attacks over the year compared to four the previous year. 

Menacing and Dangerous Dogs

There is a total of 191 menacing dogs in the district; 159 of these dogs were menacing dogs under section 33C of the Dog Control Act 1996. These dogs were of American Pitbull Terrier type. There are two classified dangerous dogs in the district.

Impounded Dogs

There was a total of 423 dogs impounded at the council animal shelter. Over 30% of impounded dogs were rehomed to Rescue Groups or adopted via the Council website.

73% of impounded dogs were either returned to their owners or rehomed.

112 (27%) of dogs impounded at the shelter were euthanised due to not being claimed by an owner and not being suitable for rehoming.

PĀNGA PŪTEA ME NGĀ WĀHANGA TAHUA / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial or resource implications associated with this report.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1.       Annual Report on Dog Control Policy and Practice 20202021 - A3344710

2.       Dog Registration News Kuri K_rere Doggo Digest - A3344719  

 


 

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

 Low Significance – this matter does not meet the criteria/threshold for a matter of significance.

State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.

Dog Control Act 1996

FNDC Dog Management Bylaw 2018

FNDC Dog Management Policy 2018

LTP Community Outcome: Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable.

State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.

District Wide Significance.

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.

No specific implications.

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.

Department of Internal Affairs must receive a link to the report to assess national trends and developments.

Public notification of the report that will be published on the FNDC website.

State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.

There are no financial implications.

Chief Financial Officer review.

The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

 

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

5.2         Significant Flora and Fauna Assessment under the Operative District Plan and Draft Proposed District Plan

File Number:           A3346399

Author:                    Rochelle Deane, Manager - Environmental Services

Authoriser:             Dean Myburgh, General Manager - District Services

 

TAKE PŪRONGO / Purpose of the Report

The purpose of this report is to address both the Operative and Draft Proposed District Plan Provisions as they are applied as part of the resource consent process with regards to Significant Flora and Fauna. 

WHAKARĀPOPOTO MATUA / Executive SummarY

There are several considerations that need to be taken into account when processing land use and subdivision activity applications when making a decision on whether there may be an effect on the indigenous flora and fauna.

A consent and any conditions issued by the Resource Consents team needs to be consistent with all relevant documentation under the RMA, and this is reflected in the decisions issued.

 

 TŪTOHUNGA / Recommendation

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report Significant Flora and Fauna Assessment under the Operative District Plan and Draft Proposed District Plan.

 

 

tĀHUHU KŌRERO / Background

At the July 2021 Regulatory Compliance Committee, a report (A3267393 attached), was provided to address the Committee’s previous queries regarding the significant flora and fauna provisions, within the Operative District Plan and those proposed in the Draft Proposed District Plan.

The Committee requested a further report on how resource consent applications are assessed in light of the significant flora and fauna provisions, under the Operative District Plan and if the Draft Proposed District Plan proposes any changes to the existing provisions.

MATAPAKI ME NGĀ KŌWHIRINGA / Discussion and Next Steps

There are two main types of resource consent applications processed by the Council.  These are application for activities carried out on existing sites which are called land use applications, or an application to carry out a subdivision creating property rights through the creation of new titles.

When a land use consent is assessed the main considerations for significant flora and fauna are usually the adverse effects from the activity relating to vegetation clearance or the potential clearing of vegetation. When a subdivision consent is assessed the main considerations are adverse effects on vegetation that is significant as well as adverse effects on indigenous fauna and their habitats.

Vegetation Clearance in the Operative District Plan

The provisions in Chapter 12.2 place a heavy reliance on non-regulatory mechanisms such as “Other Methods”, however a number of these methods have not been actively implemented throughout the life of the plan including,

A key example of this is the formation of a Significant Natural Areas (SNA) Committee with the purpose of developing voluntary methods of protecting, maintaining, and enhancing indigenous biodiversity throughout the District, as well as forming relationships between key organisations to assist in these objectives. The SNA Committee was subsequently defunded and has been disbanded for over ten years.

There has been limited analysis on the amount of vegetation clearance undertaken in the District. This is in part because vegetation clearance is allowed as a permitted activity and does not require the landowner to notify council of the intent to remove vegetation.

In terms of consented activities however, an assessment of resource consents granted between 2007 to 2015 indicates that very little vegetation clearance has been consented under the Operative District Plan. Over that period, a total of 24 resource consents were issued that allowed for indigenous vegetation clearance. Most of those consents were for ancillary activities for property developments; that is, very few applications were for indigenous vegetation clearance only. The total area of vegetation clearance authorised by these resource consents is 8 hectares.

In more recent years, in the period between 2016 and 2020, Council data suggests that only 29 resource consents for vegetation clearance have been applied for. Detailed analysis on how much vegetation clearance this has resulted in has not been undertaken. It is also noted that by the time a resource consent application has been lodged vegetation clearance may have already occurred despite the District Plan rules. In these cases, retrospective resource consent is required and mitigation usually by way of requiring replacement planting through conditions of consent is usually required.  It is however noted that illegal vegetation clearance is usually only identified through the resource consent process, community concern or by the Council’s Compliance team.

Vegetation Clearance in the Draft Proposed District Plan

The rules for vegetation clearance in the Draft Proposed District Plan, released earlier this year, are based on thresholds of vegetation clearance for areas identified as a Significant Natural Areas within the coastal environment, areas within a SNA but outside of the coastal environment, and clearance thresholds based on zoning.

The draft SNA rules follow policy direction from the Regional Policy Statement for Northland (RPS) and the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement (NZCPS), while the zoning thresholds for vegetation clearance are based on the amounts currently permitted in the Operative District Plan. However, since Council’s decision to not use the SNA maps as a part of the Proposed District Plan, the rules for vegetation clearance will be redrafted in the coming months before notification of the Draft Proposed District Plan at the end of this year.

Significant Natural Areas and Subdivision in the Draft Proposed District Plan

The current regime of using consent notice conditions for the protection of indigenous vegetation through the subdivision process currently relies on the Department of Conservation’s Protected Natural Areas (PNA) mapping. This mapping was undertaken in the late 1990’s, to provide information about where natural areas are located and what the area is comprised of in terms of flora and fauna species, PNAs are subject to the Conservation Act 1987.

PNAs were resurveyed between 2007 and 2012 and maps updated, however not all areas of the Far North were completed, and the mapping currently relied on for the Far North ecological districts dates between 1998 to 2009.

To add a level of specificity to the location of SNAs within the District, these areas were remapped as a part of the recent SNA mapping project.

It was originally intended that these maps be used in the resource consent assessment process when the new District Plan came into effect in order to determine where a SNA was located, what ecology exists within the SNA, and whether the subdivision had any effect on this area. This could then be used in decision making around whether a consent notice condition would be required to mitigate an adverse effect of the proposal on significant flora and fauna.

The Draft Proposed District Plan also included a rule making the subdivision of SNAs non-complying to avoid adverse effects on these areas. However, given the decision made to omit the SNA maps from the Draft Proposed District Plan, these rules will be re-evaluated and redrafted in the coming months before notification of the Plan in December.

 

Significant Fauna and their habitats in the Operative District Plan

There is limited data available on cat/dog restrictions through the land use or subdivision consenting process, however through changing processes of reporting methods and a consistent application of the internal Practice Note, the resource consents team has been able to analyse statistics for the period between January 2021 to July 2021 relating to subdivisions.

A total of 96 consents were issued in this 6-month timeframe, of which 30 had cat/dog restrictions associated with the decision to grant the consent. Of the 30 consents only 7 consents were within an area of High Kiwi Density mapping, while 23 were within a Kiwi Present area.

All applications were sent to the Department of Conservation (DOC) as an interested Party, and comments received from DOC were consistent with the Practice Note.

Kiwi protection in the Draft Proposed District Plan

It is proposed that in terms of fauna habitat protection, the Proposed District Plan will follow the status quo of the Operative District Plan in terms of cat and dog restrictions. This would involve placing cat and dog restrictions on properties in areas of high kiwi density through a subdivision process. It is proposed that the current practice note will continue to be applied in relation to the assessment of whether a cat and dog restriction are required on a property.

This is supported by the statistics indicating that the current practice is fair, reasonable, and consistent.  This process has also been tested through an Independent Hearing Commissioner.

The recent SNA mapping has no direct effect on the kiwi conservation regime, as the current restrictions are based on DOC kiwi distribution maps rather than SNA maps.

 

Responses to Deputation Questions raised at July 2021 Committee Meeting:

1.       What are the extents of the cat and dog bans and limitations?

As identified earlier in this report statistics show the restrictions were only imposed on 38% of subdivision consents within the 6-month timeframe. Only 2% were a full ban without a grandfather clause being imposed to allow existing dogs and cat to be retained on site till end of life.

All restrictions were placed on sites within areas known to have kiwi present or kiwi high only, according to DOC’s kiwi mapping. These restrictions were applied in accordance with the internal practice note, and continued monitoring of how the practice note and restrictions are imposed is carried out with every subdivision in the District.

While a small statistical pool, it highlights the balanced assessment carried out by the resource consent planners and their consistency. Council intends on carrying out the continued monitoring of applications and any restrictions imposed to ensure the practice note is applied consistently.

2.       Cost of legal battle so far?

Cases heard by Independent Commissioners in objection to cat and dog restrictions are covered by the Objector where a Commissioner has upheld the Council’s decision. In the 13 years of the current District Plan being operative, no objection against cat and dog restrictions has been supported and therefore no costs have been passed onto the rate payer.

3.       Rates remission cost?

For 2020/2021 the total remissions for conservation of both Northland Regional Council and the Far North District Council rates is $674,030.84 in total. Broken down it is

·        $79,684.88 – Northland Regional Council

·        $594,345.96 - Far North District Council

4.       How reliable is DOC info?

The kiwi maps provided by DOC are public information and are only one tool utilised by the consent team when considering what adverse effects there may be from a subdivision on the vegetation and habitat within or in proximity to the subject site. Other mapping tools utilised are PNA mapping, Mudfish locations, pest control and Landcare maps. All these maps are public and can be accessed through the Far North Maps system.

5.       Impact/Consequences of the ban?

All activities and subdivision on a piece of land will have an impact, the role of the planner under the RMA 1991 is to determine what the effects are, and to what extent do the effects identified adversely affect the environment as defined in the RMA:

Environment includes –

(a)     ecosystems and their constituent parts, including people and communities; and

(b)     all natural and physical resources; and

(c)     amenity values; and

(d)     the social, economic, aesthetic, and cultural conditions which affect the matters stated in paragraphs (a) to (c) or which are affected by those matters

Restrictions are only imposed in certain subdivision where the adverse effect on flora and fauna from the introduction of a new cat or dog to the environment will be detrimental to the flora, fauna, and their habitats.

6.       Where does the practice note clash with other council practice?

There are no clashes with other Council bylaws, or practices. The Dog Control Bylaw is made under the Dog Control Act 1996, and its purpose is to ensure dogs within the District are under control of an owner.  It is important to note that the bylaw supplements rather than duplicates or contradicts other legislation, including the RMA 1991 and the Far North District Plan.

The cat and dog restrictions may be imposed as a method of avoiding, mitigating or remedying an adverse effect under the RMA through the District Plan by determination of what the land is being used for, and if the land can accommodate a dog, cat or working dogs.

7.       What are other options we can consider?

Other methods of avoiding, mitigating, or remedying adverse effects on flora and fauna are through fencing, pest management and protection of vegetation by way of consent notice or covenant.

These are all options considered along with the cat and dog restriction and are not independent from each other. However, the cat and dog restrictions are only placed on sites within areas identified as having kiwi present, whereas consent notice conditions requiring protection of vegetation may occur outside of kiwi areas due to the ecological values of the site.

Restricting cat and dog ownership through consent notice conditions is considered as the most effective and efficient way to achieve the protection of kiwi under the RMA and the District Plan, as other methods may be less consistent or overly onerous on landowners.

Other option considerations:

•        to require physical barrier methods such as cat fences and dog proof fences, however these are costly and upkeep by owners cannot be guaranteed. Mobile species such as skinks, geckos and kiwi can also enter dog proof fenced areas and can inadvertently create a risk to the indigenous flora due to the dog and cats on the site.

•        other methods such as kiwi aversion training for dogs is only effective if the dogs are trained regularly, have sufficient obedience training prior to the kiwi aversion to register the smell aversion tactic utilised by the trainer. There are several misconceptions associated with this training that do not allow it to be used as an effective method of control.

As the restrictions are imposed through the subdivision process under the District Plan, if restrictions were paused, the resource consent team would no longer be processing subdivision in a fair and equitable manner. Additionally, it would mean the processing of consents would no longer meet the requirements of the RMA 1991 and we would not be meeting our statutory obligations under the District Plan, the Regional Policy Statement for Northland, and the RMA.

 

PĀNGA PŪTEA ME NGĀ WĀHANGA TAHUA / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial implications associated with the report.

 

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1.       Copy of Report - 2021-07-20 Regulatory Compliance Committee Report 5.2 [A3267393] - A3373026  


 

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.

Compliance requirement

Staff assessment

State the level of significance (high or low) of the issue or proposal as determined by the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy

Low Significance – this matter does not meet the criteria/threshold for a matter of significance.

State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.

Resource Management Act 1991.

FNDC District Plan.

LTP Community Outcomes:

·      Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable.

·      Prosperous communities supported by a sustainable economy.

·      A wisely managed and treasured environment that recognises the special role of tangata whenua as kaitiaki.

State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.

District Wide Significance.

State the possible implications for Māori and how Māori have been provided with an opportunity to contribute to decision making if this decision is significant and relates to land and/or any body of water.

No specific implications.

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.

FNDC Community.

Ministry for the Environment.

Department of Conservation.

State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.

There are no financial implications associated to this report.

Chief Financial Officer review.

The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

 

 

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

5.3         Resource Consent Update

File Number:           A3346401

Author:                    Rochelle Deane, Manager - Environmental Services

Authoriser:             Dean Myburgh, General Manager - District Services

 

TAKE PŪRONGO / Purpose of the Report

To provide an update to the committee on Resource Consents.

The report covers:

·        The number of Resource Consent Applications received

·        Environmental Court Issues

·        The number of s92 (requests for further information)

·        The number of s37 (extensions of time)

·        The number of s88 (applications rejected)

·        Status of discounts

·        Vision 20/20 update

·        Report on implementation of regulatory matters arising from Mana Whakahono-ā-rohe under RMA Management

WHAKARĀPOPOTO MATUA / Executive SummarY

There has been a significant increase in the number of consents processed within the statutory timeframes by the Resource Consent team in 2020/21 under the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA or the Act), despite the high volume of applications continuing to be received in the second half of the year.

This has been achieved by a combination of process improvements, and increased use of external consultants, but most of all, by the commitment within the team to ensure that the statutory requirements are met.

The Resource Consent Team has achieved a compliance rate of 89% for the 2022/2021 year. This is an improvement of over 23% on the previous year. 

Planners each process between 10 and 25 consent applications at any one time. These can be at various stages of the processing cycle i.e. some are newly allocated, some are active, others are on s92 of the Act (request for further information) or s37 of the Act (power of waiver and extension of time limits) while others are being reviewed for sign off.

Some Consent applications are allocated to consultant planners in order for Council to meet statutory processing time frames and in cases where there is a Council conflict of interest with the applicant. At any one time there may be between 20-40 consents being processed by consultant planners.

 

 TŪTOHUNGA / Recommendation

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report Resource Consent Update.

 

 

tĀHUHU KŌRERO / Background

Processing an application within the statutory time frames set by the RMA is compulsory. The onus is on councils to ensure statutory time limits are met, which is particularly important to Council to avoid having to apply discounts under the Act discount regulations. In addition, there is also a requirement to ensure that any process is timely, efficient, consistent, and cost effective, and to 'avoid unreasonable delay'.

 

MATAPAKI ME NGĀ KŌWHIRINGA / Discussion and Next Steps

Number of Resource Applications Received

A total of 867 resource consent applications were received during the 2020 - 2021 financial year. This is 89 more application received than in 2019/2020 and 12 less than in 2018/2019 where there were 879 applications received.

The figure of 867 applications is the volume of consents Council has processed that Council are obliged to report to MFE on meeting the statutory timeframes. The total number of applications Council has received including those that are not subject to statutory timeframes is 1,356.

 

The number of s92 (requests for further information)

Section 92 of the RMA allows Councils to request further information from an applicant before making the decision to refuse or grant consent. It can also be used to commission a specialist’s report. A s92 request is made when Council’s planner doesn’t have adequate information to make a decision on the proposal; they need further information to fully understand what is proposed and how the proposal fits with planning rules, objectives, and policies.

There were 199 s92 requests made in 2020/202, compared with 244 the year prior. This reduction is reflective of higher quality applications being received initially due to the tougher line taken on rejecting applications under s88.

The number of s37’s (extensions of time)

Section 37 allows council to extend a time period specified in the RMA.

Under s37(a)(4), a council can extend a time limit (relating to the stated matters) for up to double the maximum period specified in the Act when:

•        special circumstances apply (including special circumstances existing by the scale and complexity of the matter); or

•        the applicant agrees to the extension.

There were 253 applications placed on s37 during 2020/2021, compared with 258 the previous year. The high number of applications on s37 hold during the months of March and April 2020 reflects the Covid-19 lock down period where many applications could not be further processed or completed due to planners and/or engineers unable to conduct site visits, however the similar numbers would be in response to the higher number of applications received in 2020/21.

 

The number of s88 (applications rejected)

Section 88 and Schedule 4 of the RMA state what information an application and supporting Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) must contain to be considered complete and therefore acceptable to be processed. The RMA provides a 10-working day timeframe to assess the application under s88 to determine whether it is complete or return it as “incomplete”.

If a Council determines that the application is incomplete, the applicant is advised within 10 working days of lodgement with written reasons for the decision. Then, if the applicant decides to lodge the application again, it is treated as a completely new application - with a new, and later, lodgement date.

In 2020/2021 there were 46 applications rejected under section 88, compared with 16 the previous year. This increase is due to taking a stronger line on applications being received that were not meeting Schedule 4 of the RMA (the required criteria). This was creating an increased workload on processing planners to chase, that should have been completed prior to being lodged. This is also reflective of the s88 check being undertaken on day 1-3, whereas in previous years applications often were not subjected to a s88 assessment until after the statutory 10-day period had expired.  Substandard applications not rejected under s88 create additional work for the planners and engineers, which in turn increases the cost of processing the application for the applicant.

The quality of applications also has implications on meeting statutory timeframes and how often s92 or s37 is applied.  Time delays and cost are the biggest complaints received from applicants.  By ensuring that s88 assessment are efficiently undertaken early in the process the Team can increase the quality and timeliness of their decisions while meeting the expectations of the applicants.  There has been resistance from some agents to the efficient application of s88, these in general are those agents who consistently lodge incomplete or substandard applications.  However, it is anticipated that over time the consistent application of s88 will become the accepted standard by these agents and positive gains in quality and cost will be reflected to the applicant.

 

Status of Discounts

The Resource Management (Discount on Administrative Charges) Regulations 2010 require local authorities to provide a discount for resource consent applications not processed within the statutory timeframes set out in the RMA. The discount set out by the regulations is 1% per day, up to a maximum of 50 working days.

Discounts applied to consent processing for 2020/2021 was $44,090.58. For the same period last year there had been $184,927.90 applied. This result is reflective of the team meeting statutory timeframes.

*Consultant firm provided a 50% discount on these fees for processing over time, although this is not reflected in the discounts it is reflected elsewhere in revenue.

Environment Court Issues

Appeals

Only one appeal was lodged during the year and this related to an objection to additional processing costs of a resource consent.

The appeal was resolved after negotiation with the appellant without the need for an Environment Court hearing.

Hearing

There were four hearings undertaken over 20/21 with all being determined by independent hearings commissioners.

1.Hearing for Kerikeri Land Ltd (Arvida) for Stage 2 of a retirement complex at the end of Hall Road. This was a two-day hearing held on 9th and 10th September 2020.

2.Hearing for P. Lane Estate being a 5-lot subdivision at Totara North held on 19th October 2020.

3.Hearing for Far North Holdings Ltd being for a reclamation at Opua for a hardstand area. This was a joint hearing with Northland Regional Council held on 7th December 2020.

4.Hearing of an objection by Lineta Ltd to determine whether Council had sufficient information to process an application.

The applications were all approved subject to conditions and there were no resultant appeals.

The objection was upheld with the commissioner ruling that the applicant did not need to provide details of subsequent development proposals for the site.

Mana Whakahono ā Rohe

The purpose of a Mana Whakahono ā Rohe is—

(a) to provide a mechanism for iwi authorities and local authorities to discuss, agree, and record ways in which tangata whenua may, through their iwi authorities, participate in resource management and decision-making processes under this Act; and

(b) to assist local authorities to comply with their statutory duties under this Act, including through the implementation of sections 6(e), 7(a), and 8.

Whakahono ā Rohe came in the amendments to the Resource Management Act in 2017.

Initiating a Mana Whakahono agreement is up to the individual Iwi Authority. However, to date there have been no agreements initiated in the Far North.

When an Iwi Authority starts this process, they go through the Te Hono Team. Once any agreements are reached under this section the Resource Consents Team then have a function as the team that processes consents.

Vision 2020 Update

The Vision 20/20 process renovation project commenced in November 2019, however the dual crises of the drought in January and the Covid-19 pandemic put this project largely on hold until July 2020.

The project objectives were to improve efficiency of resource consent processing by improving systems efficiency and implementing new technology solutions to enable better processing times and customer service. There were 7 key project milestones to be delivered. (Project Kick off, re-engineered workflow, reporting, electronic document delivery, processing clocks, consultant processing and online lodgement).

Six milestones have now been completed.

The remaining milestone - Consultant Processing, has been placed on hold indefinitely due to concerns regarding data security and conflicts of interest by providing Consultants access to Council’s document management systems. This presented potential legal and ethical issues with consultants acting as applicants and regulatory planners.

The delivered milestones continue to be embedded within the team and the delivery is beginning to benefit the processing planners. The new reporting BI gives a clearer indication of application processing and more accurate reporting.

The uptake for Online Lodgement has been slow with only around 80 application received by this channel since 1 October 2020. Practitioners continue to be reminded of the new process and encourage to use this method for their next application.

 

PĀNGA PŪTEA ME NGĀ WĀHANGA TAHUA / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial implications associated with this report.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

Nil


 

Hōtaka Take Ōkawa / Compliance Schedule:

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

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

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

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

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

Low Significance – this matter does not meet the criteria/threshold for a matter of significance.

State the relevant Council policies (external or internal), legislation, and/or community outcomes (as stated in the LTP) that relate to this decision.

Resource Management Act 1991

Resource Management Amendment Act 2020

FNDC District Plan

LTP Community Outcomes:

·      Communities that are healthy, safe, connected and sustainable.

·      Prosperous communities supported by a sustainable economy

·      A wisely managed and treasured environment that recognises the special role of tangata whenua as kaitiaki

State whether this issue or proposal has a District wide relevance and, if not, the ways in which the appropriate Community Board’s views have been sought.

District Wide Significance.

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.

No specific implications.

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.

FNDC Community .

Ministry for the Environment.

 

State the financial implications and where budgetary provisions have been made to support this decision.

No Financial Implications.

Chief Financial Officer review.

The Chief Financial Officer has reviewed this report.

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

5.4         District Services Monthly Business Report for July 2021

File Number:           A3349642

Author:                    Dean Myburgh, General Manager - District Services

Authoriser:             Dean Myburgh, General Manager - District Services

 

TAKE PŪRONGO / Purpose of the Report

To present a summary of District Services activity and information items.

WHAKARĀPOPOTO MATUA / Executive SummarY

This District Services Monthly Business Report provides a summary of progress and highlights for the month of July 2021.

TŪTOHUNGA / Recommendation

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report District Services Monthly Business Report for July 2021.

 

 

tĀHUHU KŌRERO / Background

The District Services group provides many services for the benefit of our communities to make it a great place to work, live and visit. The group is made up of three departments:

 

Community & Customer Services: This includes Customer Care – Service Centres and Contact Centre, Libraries and Museum, i-SITE Information Centres, Tenancy services for Housing for the Elderly and burial processing for Cemeteries.

Building Services: This includes processing and inspecting Building Consents and Building Compliance related matters.

Environmental Services: This includes Animal Management, Environmental Health (Food, Alcohol and Health licensing and monitoring), Compliance Monitoring (Legislation and Bylaw monitoring and enforcement) and Resource Consents processing.

MATAPAKI ME NGĀ KŌWHIRINGA / Discussion and Next Steps

The information is attached in the form of a report.

PĀNGA PŪTEA ME NGĀ WĀHANGA TAHUA / Financial Implications and Budgetary Provision

There are no financial or budgetary provision associated with this report.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1.       District Services Monthly Business Report - July 2021 - A3349638  

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

PDF Creator

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

5.5         Regulatory Compliance Committee Action Sheet Update September 2021

File Number:           A3352204

Author:                    Kim Hammond, Meetings Administrator

Authoriser:             Aisha Huriwai, Team Leader Democracy Services

 

Take Pūrongo / Purpose of the Report

To provide the Regulatory Compliance Committee with an overview of outstanding decisions from 1 January 2020.

WhakarĀpopoto matua / Executive Summary

·        Council staff have reintroduced action sheets as a mechanism to communicate progress against decisions/resolutions and confirm when decisions have been implemented.

·        The focus of this paper is on Regulatory Compliance Committee decisions.

·        Action sheets are also in place for Council and Community Boards.

 

tŪtohunga / Recommendation

That the Regulatory Compliance Committee receive the report Action Sheet Update September 2021.

 

1) TĀhuhu kŌrero / Background

The Democracy Services Team have been working on a solution to ensure that elected members can receive regular updates on progress against decisions made at meetings, in alignment with a Chief Executive Officer key performance indicator.

Action sheets have been designed as a way to close the loop and communicate with elected members on the decisions made by way of resolution at formal meetings.

Action sheets are not intended to be public information but will provide updates to elected members, who, when appropriate can report back to their communities and constituents.

2) matapaki me NgĀ KŌwhiringa / Discussion and Options

The outstanding tasks are multi-facet projects that take longer to fully complete.

The Democracy Services staff are working with staff to ensure that the project completion times are updated so that action sheets provided to members differentiate between work outstanding and work in progress.

Take Tūtohunga / Reason for the recommendation

To provide the Regulatory Compliance Committee with an overview of outstanding committee decisions from 1 January 2020.

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

There are no financial implications or need for budgetary provision in receiving this report.

Āpitihanga / Attachments

1.       REG Outstanding Actions Report 20200101 - 20210824 - A3352211  

 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

PDF Creator 


Regulatory Compliance Committee Meeting Agenda

7 September 2021

 

6            Karakia Whakamutunga – Closing Prayer

7            Te Kapinga Hui / Meeting Close