AGENDA
Ordinary meeting of the
Governance Committee
Thursday 1 October 2015
Commencing at 9.00am
Council Chamber
Civic House
110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
Membership: Councillor Ian Barker (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor Rachel Reese, Councillors Luke Acland (Deputy Chairperson), Eric Davy, Kate Fulton, Paul Matheson, Brian McGurk, Gaile Noonan, and Pete Rainey, Mr John Murray and Mr John Peters
Guidelines for councillors attending the meeting, who are not members of the Committee, as set out in Standing Orders:
· All councillors, whether or not they are members of the Committee, may attend Committee meetings (SO 2.12.2)
· At the discretion of the Chair, councillors who are not Committee members may speak, or ask questions about a matter.
· Only Committee members may vote on any matter before the Committee (SO 3.14.1)
It is good practice for both Committee members and non-Committee members to declare any interests in items on the agenda. They should withdraw from the table for discussion and voting on any of these items.
Governance Committee
1 October 2015
1.1 An apology has been received from Mr John Murray
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
3.1 Updates to the Interests Register
3.2 Identify any conflicts of interest in the agenda
Document number M1409
Recommendation
THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Governance Committee, held on 20 August 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record.
Governance
7. Sister Cities Update October 2015 14 - 18
Document number R4930
Recommendation
THAT the report Sister Cities Update October 2015 (R4930) and its attachment (A1433825) be received.
8. Service Level Reviews Under Section 17A Local Government Act 19 - 23
Document number R4443
Recommendation
THAT the report Service Level Reviews Under Section 17A Local Government Act (R4443) be received.
Recommendation to Council
THAT approval is given for the proposed approach to review all applicable services (as detailed in R4443) in order to comply with the requirements of Section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002.
9. Economic Development Services Contract with Tasman District Council 24 - 33
Document number R4588
Recommendation
THAT the report Economic Development Services Contract with Tasman District Council (R4588) and its attachment (A1407424) be received.
Recommendation to Council
THAT the Economic Development Services Contract with Tasman District Council (A1407424) be approved for signing.
10. Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee - 10 September 2015 34 - 39
Document number M1459
Recommendation
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee, held on 10 September 2015, be received.
10.1 Carry Forwards from 2014/15
Recommendation to Governance Committee and Council
THAT $4,233,000 of unspent capital budget from 2014/15 be carried forward for use in 2015/16;
AND THAT $403,000 of capital spent in 2014/15 be offset against 2015/16 budgets;
AND THAT an amount of $107,000 operating budget be carried forward for use in 2015/16.
10.2 Draft Internal Audit Charter
Recommendation to Governance Committee and Council
THAT the Draft Internal Audit Charter (A1395134) as amended as per the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee minutes 10 September 2015 be approved.
Note: The amended Draft Internal Audit Charter can be found on Google Drive for Councillors and is available on request to an Administration Adviser.
11. Commercial Subcommittee - 10 September 2015 40 - 42
Document number M1460
Recommendation
THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Commercial Subcommittee, held on 10 September 2015, be received.
Public Excluded Business
Recommendation
THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:
|
Item |
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interests protected (where applicable) |
|
1 |
Governance Committee Meeting Minutes - Public Excluded - 20 August 2015 |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7. |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations). · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person. · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. |
|
2 |
Status Report - Governance Committee - October 2015
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities |
|
3 |
Akersten Street Land Purchase
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
|
|
4 |
City of Nelson Civic Trust - New Trustee
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person |
|
5 |
Bishop Suter Trust - Trustee rotation and remuneration
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person |
|
6 |
Commercial Subcommittee Meeting - Public Excluded - 10 September 2015 These minutes contain a recommendation regarding: · Property Asset Review – 3 Precincts Workshop – terms of reference |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7. |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities. |
13. Re-admittance of the public
Recommendation
THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting.
Minutes of a meeting of the Governance Committee
Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Thursday 20 August 2015, commencing at 9.01am
Present: Councillors I Barker (Chairperson), L Acland (Deputy Chairperson), E Davy, K Fulton, P Matheson, B McGurk, G Noonan, and P Rainey, Mr J Murray and Mr J Peters
In Attendance: Chief Executive (C Hadley), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Community Services (C Ward), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Manager Communications (P Shattock), Administration Adviser (G Brown), and Youth Councillors (R Griffith and K Phipps)
Apology: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese
1. Apology
|
Resolved GOV/2015/024 THAT an apology be received and accepted from Her Worship the Mayor. Barker/Acland Carried |
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
There was no change to the order of business.
3. Interests
There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no interests with items on the agenda were declared.
4. Public Forum
4.1 Raymond Siatkowski - Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA)
Mr Siatkowski spoke to a tabled document A1403250.
In response to a question, Mr Siatkowski advised there were TPPA free municipalities in America.
In response to a further question, Mr Siatkowski said local government should continue to correspond with central government with regards to objectives to be considered when negotiating terms of the TPPA.
|
Attachments 1 A1403181 - Tabled Document - Ken Siatkowski Trans - Pacific Partnership and Free Trade Agreements |
5. Confirmation of Minutes
5.1 9 July 2015
Document number M1338, agenda pages 8 - 17 refer.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/026 THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Governance Committee, held on 9 July 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record. Acland/Noonan Carried |
6. Chairperson's Report
The Chairperson provided a brief verbal report and advised the Committee of the Policy and Planning resolution in July 2013 with regards to the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).
He highlighted that the New Zealand Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade had the TPPA process set out on their website.
Governance
7. Tourism Nelson Tasman Limited Statement of Intent 2015/16
Document number R4580, agenda pages 18 - 43 refer.
Tourism Nelson Tasman Limited, Chief Executive, Lynda Keene, and Director, Sharon McGuire, joined the meeting.
Group Manager Community Services, Chris Ward, presented the report.
In response to a question, Mr Ward advised the budgetary constraints referred to in the draft Statement of Intent 2015-2018 would mean that Tourism Nelson Tasman would need to prioritise its activities.
Ms McGuire added that the reduced funding would limit the ability of Tourism Nelson Tasman to market the region.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/027 THAT the report Tourism Nelson Tasman Limited Statement of Intent 2015/16 (R4580) and its attachments (A1389793 and A1389798) be received. Acland/Davy Carried |
In response to a further question, Mr Ward advised that the activities identified in the Statement of Intent were not under negotiation with Tasman District Council.
|
Recommendation to Council GOV/2015/028 THAT the Tourism Nelson Tasman Limited Statement of Intent 2015/16 (A1389798) be approved for signing. Acland/Davy Carried |
REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES
8. Commercial Subcommittee - 9 July 2015
Document number M1337, agenda pages 44 - 45 refer.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/029 THAT the unconfirmed minutes of an extraordinary meeting of the Commercial Subcommittee, held on 9 July 2015, be received. Acland/Murray Carried |
9. Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee - 30 July 2015
Document number M1385, agenda pages 46 - 53 refer.
|
Resolved GOV/2015/030 THAT the unconfirmed minutes of a meeting of the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee, held on 30 July 2015, be received. Peters/McGurk Carried |
9.1 Update on charging interest on general debtors
|
Recommendation to Council GOV/2015/031 THAT the Draft Debt Management Policy (A1353429) be approved. Peters/McGurk Carried |
9.2 Capital Projects 2014/15
|
Recommendation to Council GOV/2015/032 THAT Council approves continuing work on 2014/15 capital projects within the 2014/15 approved budgets, noting a report on carry forwards will come to the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee meeting on 10 September 2015. Peters/McGurk Carried |
|
Resolved GOV/2015/033 THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows: Murray/Rainey Carried |
|
Item |
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interests protected (where applicable) |
|
1 |
Governance Committee Meeting Minutes - Public Excluded - 9 July 2015 |
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.
|
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person. |
|
2 |
Status Report - Governance Committee - 20 August 2015
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
3 |
Burrell Park Building Purchase
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
4 |
Nelmac Directors' Fees 2015
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person |
|
5 |
Review of Economic Development Services - next steps
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) |
|
6 |
Recycling contract
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities |
The meeting went into public excluded session at 9.24am and resumed in public session at 11.45am.
11. Re-admittance of the Public
|
Resolved GOV/2015/034 THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting. Rainey/Davy Carried |
There being no further business the meeting ended at 11.45am.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
Chairperson
Date
|
|
Governance Committee 1 October 2015 |
REPORT R4930
Sister Cities Update October 2015
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To receive the report from the Volunteer Sister Cities Coordinator.
2. Delegations
2.1 Sister Cities relationships are an area of responsibility of the Governance Committee.
3. Recommendation
|
THAT the report Sister Cities Update October 2015 (R4930) and its attachment (A1433825) be received. |
4. Background
4.1 Nelson has four Sister City relationships:
· Miyazu, Japan
· Huangshi, Hubei, People's Republic of China
· Yangjiang, People’s Republic of China
· Eureka, California, United States.
4.2 Council has appointed a Volunteer Sister City Co-ordinator to oversee community activity in relation to Sister Cities.
5. Discussion
5.1 Sister Cities relationships can deliver social, cultural and economic outcomes. It is important that Councillors are aware of these relationships and of opportunities to further enhance them.
5.2 The Sister Cities co-ordinator reports to the Governance Committee twice each year. The attached report (A1433825) covers the last six months worth of activities.
6. Alignment with relevant Council policy
6.1 Provision has been made in the Long Term Plan for Sister Cities activities and these are consistent with the Council outcome of Our communities are healthy, safe, inclusive and resilient.
7. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy
7.1 This is not a significant decision.
8. Consultation
8.1 No consultation has been carried out in preparing this report.
9. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process
9.1 Maori have not been consulted on this report.
Chris Ward
Group Manager Community Services
Attachments
Attachment 1: A1433825 - Sister City Coordinators Report to Governance Committee October 2015
|
|
Governance Committee 1 October 2015 |
REPORT R4443
Service Level Reviews Under Section 17A Local Government Act
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To consider a process for the review of Council services to meet the requirements outlined under section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002.
2. Delegations
2.1 The Governance Committee has delegated responsibility for a number of matters relating to the review of Council services, including powers to recommend decisions on the financial and service performance of Council and reviews of specific activity areas within Council.
3. Recommendation
|
THAT the report Service Level Reviews Under Section 17A Local Government Act (R4443) be received. |
Recommendation to Council
|
THAT approval is given for the proposed approach to review all applicable services (as detailed in R4443) in order to comply with the requirements of Section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002. |
4. Background
4.1 This report discusses the requirement, as outlined under section 17A of the Local Government Act 2002 (the LGA), to review all services delivered by Council. The new requirement is for local authorities to:
...review the cost-effectiveness of current arrangements for meeting the needs of communities within its district or region for good-quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions.
4.2 The Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill No 3 (Clause 1A, Schedule 1AA) contains transitional provisions requiring local authorities to review all applicable services, including contracts by 07 August 2017. Services will thereafter need to be reviewed at least every 6 years, or earlier if triggered by a proposed significant change to a level of service.
4.3 Contracts are required to be reviewed within two years before expiration.
4.4 The LGA contains limited guidance as to which services are covered, or on how reviews should be carried out. It is only prescriptive in that it requires that as part of any review, a number of alternative delivery methods are specifically considered including:
1. Responsibility for governance, funding and delivery exercised by Council
2. Responsibility for governance and funding exercised by Council, but delivery is by:
a. A council controlled organisation either wholly or partly owned by Council
b. Another local authority
c. Another person or agency
3. Responsibility for governance and funding delegated to a joint committee or other shared governance arrangement, and responsibility for delivery is exercised by an entity or a person (listed in i. to iii. above).
4.5 The advice that has been provided by the Society of Local Government Managers (SOLGM) is that it considers the requirement covers all services Council delivers, and that this could extend to back-office services such as debt collection. It also advises that reviews should be pitched at a high level, for example to the maintenance of the roading network as a whole, not the contract covering a specific piece of road.
4.6 Although all services will need an initial review, SOLGM expects that most councils will find that somewhere in the region of 70-80% of their services do not require further analysis either because the cost of review would not be offset by the potential benefits (an exclusion allowed in the legislation covered under paragraph 5.2) or because there is no reasonable alternative to council delivery.
4.7 The legislation encourages authorities to work together to review services, and to consider how they might jointly deliver a service more efficiently. Officers plan to hold discussions with Tasman District Council to identify what opportunities there could be to collaborate on reviews.
4.8 Council’s Consultation Document for the Long Term Plan 2015-25 advised the community that it would review all levels of service over the period 2015/16 to 2017/18. The “review of services” that is required under the LGA and the “review of levels of service” indicated through the Long Term Plan are two separate processes. However the work on these two projects will be organised to take advantage of any opportunities to share analysis.
5. Discussion
5.1 Council divides the work that it undertakes into ten activity areas and within each, there are a number of services delivered. To achieve the deadline of August 2017 for completing the review of all these services, guidelines need to be developed for the principles and processes to be used.
5.2 A determination will be made as to which Council services and contracts will be reviewed. This will take into account the following two clauses under section 17A(3) where a local authority is not required to undertake a review of a service:
a) To the extent that the delivery of that infrastructure, service, or regulatory function is governed by legislation, contract, or other binding agreement such that it cannot reasonably be altered within the following 2 years; or
b) If the local authority is satisfied that the potential benefits of undertaking a review in relation to that infrastructure, service, or regulatory function do not justify the costs of undertaking the review.
5.3 It is recommended that a number of factors are taken into account when determining whether the potential benefits of undertaking a review justify the costs of doing so.
5.4 SOLGM recommends that councils set a limit on a contract value where any potential savings are deemed to be outweighed by the cost of doing a service level review and give an example of a medium sized council that has set that limit at $250,000. Consideration was given to whether setting a monetary limit would be useful but officers are of the view that there are other factors which equally impact on the decision and that managers should determine which contracts and services require review on a case by case basis.
5.5 It is proposed that the following factors be considered:
a) The value of the contract and how this relates to the service being delivered.
b) Whether a contract has been “rolled over” previously without testing the market.
c) Whether the service has a major impact on sections or all of the community.
d) Whether there is a history of the service generating wide and intense public interest and a reasonable expectation that this will again be so.
e) Any other matter directing staff to consider a review would be worthwhile.
5.6 Where a decision is made to not undertake a review, the justification for that decision will need to be very clearly articulated. The decision will be made by the Chief Executive.
5.7 It is noted that if a change to the way the service is delivered is proposed, or a decision is made to not undertake a review, that decision in itself will need to take account of the Policy on Significance and Engagement and any requirement for public engagement.
5.8 Officers will report back to the Governance Committee on the progress and outcome of service reviews.
5.9 In addition to the requirement to undertake service reviews, section 17A(5) sets out what must be contained in contracts with agencies delivering services on behalf of Council. The requirements relate to such things as levels of service to be delivered, performance measures, and penalties for not meeting these. Council contracts of any size should contain these requirements already, but officers will be guided by the Act for future contracts.
6. Options
6.1 There are three options available for the review of Council services. The first is to not establish a formalised process for reviewing all Council services. This option is not recommended as although some services will be reviewed as part of “business as usual”, there will be an inevitable shortfall in the extent of reviews undertaken as required by the Act.
6.2 To not fully comply with the requirements set out under section 17(A) leaves Council open to legal challenge in service delivery decisions.
6.3 The recommended option is to agree to the process outlined in Section 5 of this paper. A third option is to seek changes to the recommended process.
7. Alignment with relevant Council policy
7.1 As part of the wider contract management responsibilities of Council there is a due diligence obligation that effectively requires a frequent review of contract performance. This decision also aligns with Council’s community outcomes.
8. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy
8.1 This decision is not considered significant in terms of Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
9. Consultation
9.1 There is no consultation required in making this decision.
10. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process
10.1 Maori have not been consulted.
11. Conclusion
11.1 It is recommended that the described process for the review of all Council services prior to August 2017 is approved noting that refinements will be made as the reviews are progressed.
Susan Moore-Lavo
Policy Adviser
Attachments
|
|
Governance Committee 1 October 2015 |
REPORT R4588
Economic Development Services Contract with Tasman District Council
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To approve the Economic Development Services Contract with Tasman District Council.
2. Delegations
2.1 Business, economic development and tourism in Nelson fall within the area of responsibility of the Governance Committee.
3. Recommendation
|
THAT the report Economic Development Services Contract with Tasman District Council (R4588) and its attachment (A1407424) be received. |
Recommendation to Council
|
THAT the Economic Development Services Contract with Tasman District Council (A1407424) be approved for signing. |
4. Background
4.1 Tasman District Council has made a provision of $400,000 per annum (excuding GST) for three years in its LTP to procure economic development services from Nelson City Council. Previously it had been a shareholder in Tourism Nelson Tasman Limited (NTT) and had provided a grant to it and to the Nelson Regional Economic Development Agency (EDA) directly.
4.2 TDC decide to procure the services directly from Council in order to allow Council to conduct its review of the agencies concerned.
4.3 A Council workshop held on 30 April 2015 considered a first draft of the high level outcomes identified by Tasman District Council. There was broad support for the high level outcomes and a request for more information on how these aligned with the SOI’s of both the EDA and NTT.
4.4 Subsequently officers have met with officers of TDC in order to reach agreement on how the contract for service should be shaped.
4.5 It was agreed that a focus on high level objectives, process and reporting was desirable and that the detail should be left with the delivery organisations concerned.
4.6 As a result a contract was prepared. Council’s legal advisor reviewed the draft. All her comments were incorporated into the final wording.
4.7 TDC considered the draft funding agreement on 10 September 2015. It approved the contract for signing, as drafted (attachment 1).
5. Discussion
5.1 Officers have been working with counterparts in TDC since June to develop this agreement. The contract balances the need to have defined outcomes from the contract with the need to empower the delivery agencies with decisions about regional priorities. The key components in the contract are:
· Funding obligations – TDC agree to pay $400,000 per annum (plus any cpi) for the duration of the contract.
· Accountability obligations – NCC agrees to consult with TDC on letters of expectation and draft Statements of Intent. NCC will monitor delivery against outcomes of the providers. NCC agrees to provide 6-monthly reports to TDC.
· Use of funds – funds will only be used for regional economic development and regional tourism development. Funds not to be used to fund local i-Sites or local events.
5.2 Nelson City Council ultimately has control over the two Council Controlled Organisations through the Statements of Intent. The contract provides for TDC to have input into the letter of expectation. However, final decisions will be made solely by this Council.
5.3 Approval of the contract for signing will enable the first contract payments to be drawn down and the corresponding payments to be made to the Economic Development Agency and Nelson Tasman Tourism.
6. Options
6.1 Council can either enter into this agreement or request changes to the contract.
6.2 Requesting changes will require further approval process through TDC. This will potentially impact negatively on cash flows of the EDA and NTT.
6.3 It is recommended that Council approves the attached agreement without change.
7. Alignment with relevant Council policy
7.1 Economic development services contribute to the outcomes ‘Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy’ and ‘Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and community engagement’
8. Assessment of Significance against the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy
8.1 This is not a significant decision under Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.
9. Consultation
9.1 Consultation has only taken place with Tasman District Council.
10. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process
10.1 Maori have not been specifically consulted as part of this process.
11. Conclusion
11.1 The Economic Development Services Contract sets out the high level outcomes that TDC expect to be delivered by NCC through its agencies. It is recommended that it is approved for signing.
Chris Ward
Group Manager Community Services
Attachments
Attachment 1: A1407424 - Economic Development Services Contract with Tasman District Council
Minutes of a meeting of the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee
Held in Ruma Mārama, Level 2A, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Thursday 10 September 2015, commencing at 1.03pm
Present: Mr J Murray (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors I Barker, and B McGurk
In Attendance: Councillors P Matheson, G Noonan and T Skinner, Chief Executive (C Hadley), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Senior Accountant (T Hughes), Senior Strategic Adviser (N McDonald), Administration Adviser (G Brown), and Audit New Zealand (B Kearney)
Apology: Mr J Peters
1. Apologies
|
Resolved AUD/2015/033 THAT an apology be received and accepted from Mr Peters. Barker/Her Worship the Mayor Carried |
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
The Chairperson advised that item 8, Draft Annual Report 30 June 2015, would be considered first on the agenda.
3. Interests
There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no interests with items on the agenda were declared.
4. Draft Annual Report 30 June 2015
Document number R4210, agenda pages 15 - 83 refer.
Group Manager Corporate Services, Nikki Harrison, presented the report.
In response to a question, the Chief Executive, Clare Hadley clarified that the draft Annual Report was in two sections, written text and financials as different officers compiled these sections.
It was discussed that comments needed to be requested from Councillors in relation to the draft Annual Report. Mrs Hadley advised that she would advise all Councillors of today’s discussion and ask for feedback while clarifying the document split.
It was highlighted that there were some good stories to be told in relation to the draft Annual Report rates and debt levels.
In response to a question, Ms Harrison clarified that water was measured by consumption and not classified as rates. Audit New Zealand, Auditor, Bede Kearney added that clearer classification for water consumption would be published next year from a change in local government regulations.
It was discussed that the status of receivables for 2014 illustrated in attachment 1 included the Everyman and Marina bad debts.
In response to a question, Ms Hughes said that Port Nelson and Tasman Bays Heritage Trust Land were all showing as zero on page 48 of the agenda as this illustrated only Council results and not group results.
It was discussed that the wording on page 50 in the Port Nelson section in relation to the ‘title to this area of seabed’ should be reworded if possible.
There was a discussion regarding Related party transactions on page 52 of the agenda in that it should include external appointees, however it was advised that external appointees would be included under key management personnel.
With regards to Working with Maori in attachment 2, it was highlighted that there was no reference to engagement with councillors.
In response to a question, Mrs Hadley advised that documentation was still being prepared in relation to an agreed process with iwi to tender for cultural impact assessments work for infrastructure resource consents.
It was highlighted that there was no commentary around inner city parking and it was questioned whether this topic formed part of the Residents Survey.
In addition it was noted that motor camps, the Trafalgar Centre, and Waahi Taakaro Golf Club needed commentary under Recreation and Leisure.
It was noted that the New Zealand Transport Agency R Funding in relation to Rocks Road would be worthwhile mentioning also in the commentary.
It was suggested that it should be highlighted that the shift in focus to improve footpaths was not only for mobility scooters but for the elderly and sight impaired.
In response to a question, Ms Hughes said that infrastructure revaluations were on a two yearly cycle. She said last year was a full revaluation and this year was an off year. She added the actual revaluation amounts for 2014 and 2015 in the Statement of Comprehensive Revenue and Expense represented the increase in each respective year.
Mr Kearney advised the Committee that the audit was progressing well. He highlighted that there would be changes to auditing standards next year but brought emphasis into these focus areas this year.
In response to a question, Mr Kearney said that it was good practice to adopt a business case approach.
|
Resolved AUD/2015/034 THAT the report Draft Annual Report 30 June 2015 (R4210) and its attachments (A1417003 and A1396738) be received. Barker/McGurk Carried |
5. Public Forum
There was no public forum.
6. Confirmation of Minutes
6.1 30 July 2015
Document number M1385, agenda pages 5 - 12 refer.
|
Resolved AUD/2015/035 THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee, held on 30 July 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record. Barker/McGurk Carried |
7. Status Report - Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee - 10 September 2015
Document number R4799, agenda pages 13 - 14 refer.
Group Manager Corporate Services, Nikki Harrison, presented the report.
|
Resolved AUD/2015/036 THAT the Status Report Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee 10 September 2015 (R4799) and its attachment (A1324298) be received. Her Worship the Mayor/McGurk Carried |
8. Chairperson's Report
There was no Chairperson’s Report.
9. Carry Forwards from 2014/15
Document number R4211, agenda pages 84 - 88 refer.
Group Manager Corporate Services, Nikki Harrison, presented the report.
In response to a question, Group Manager Infrastructure, Alec Louverdis, advised that subject to no major changes to the work programme he believed Nelson City Council was adequately resourced for the capital programme of $55.3 million. It was noted that the programme included large projects such as the Trafalgar Centre strengthening, Rutherford Park, the Suter and Nelson School of Music developments.
Mrs Hadley highlighted that part of the organisational restructure was to provide more support in the capital projects area however, at times resource consents, New Zealand Transport Agency approval, engagement with landowners and easements could hold projects up.
|
Resolved AUD/2015/037 THAT the report Carry Forwards from 2014/15 (R4211) be received. Barker/McGurk Carried |
|
Recommendation to Governance Committee and Council AUD/2015/038 THAT $4,233,000 of unspent capital budget from 2014/15 be carried forward for use in 2015/16; AND THAT $403,000 of capital spent in 2014/15 be offset against 2015/16 budgets; AND THAT an amount of $107,000 operating budget be carried forward for use in 2015/16. McGurk/Barker Carried |
10. Draft Internal Audit Charter
Document number R4777, agenda pages 89 - 95 refer.
Group Manager Corporate Services, Nikki Harrison, presented the report.
There was a discussion regarding the work programme. Ms Harrison advised that a Standard Operating Procedures Manual would be compiled and that the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee would review this document.
It was requested that the following changes be made to the draft Internal Audit Charter:
· Add the word ‘directly’ to section 5.1 in relation to interaction with the Chair
· Change the wording ‘if required’ to ‘as required’ in section 5.3
· Add the words to the fifth bullet point in section 7.1 at the end ‘and integrated, and their contribution to council outcomes’
· Add the words ‘and testing’ to the second and subsequent bullet points in section 7.1 so it reads ‘Evaluating and testing the reliability...’
· Section 8.2, recommended changes to be reviewed by Group Manager Corporate Services and Manager Organisational Assurance
· Remove additional wording in section 10.2
There was a discussion regarding a whistle blower mechanism. The Chief Executive, Clare Hadley advised the Committee that Nelson City Council had a ‘Report it Now’ system to report any unethical behaviour. She added that this function was the responsibility of Human Resources.
It was suggested that contractors should also be made aware of the ‘Report it Now’ system.
It was noted that the Fraud Policy was included in the work programme for the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee.
There was a discussion regarding expectations in relation to internal audit reporting and it was agreed that progress against the work programme would be adequate showing high level findings such as areas being worked on, findings and work going forward at each meeting, as well as more structured reporting on a six monthly basis.
|
Resolved AUD/2015/039 THAT the report Draft Internal Audit Charter (R4777) and its attachment (A1395134) be received. Barker/McGurk Carried |
|
Recommendation to Governance Committee and Council AUD/2015/040 THAT the Draft Internal Audit Charter (A1395134) as amended as per the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee minutes 10 September 2015 be approved. Her Worship the Mayor/McGurk Carried
|
There being no further business the meeting ended at 2.44pm.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
Chairperson
Date
Minutes of a meeting of the Commercial Subcommittee
Held in Ruma Mārama, Level 2A, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Thursday 10 September 2015, commencing at 2.52pm
Present: Mr J Murray (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, and Councillor G Noonan
In Attendance: Councillors P Matheson, I Barker, B McGurk, and T Skinner, Chief Executive (C Hadley), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), and Administration Adviser (G Brown)
Apologies: Mr J Peters and Councillor L Acland
1. Apologies
|
Resolved COM/2015/012 THAT apologies be received and accepted from Councillor Acland and Mr Peters. Noonan/Her Worship the Mayor Carried |
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
There was no change to the order of business.
3. Interests
There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no interests with items on the agenda were declared.
4. Public Forum
There was no public forum.
5. Confirmation of Minutes
5.1 18 June 2015
Document number M1288, agenda pages 6 - 10 refer.
|
Resolved COM/2015/013 THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Commercial Subcommittee, held on 18 June 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record. Her Worship the Mayor/Murray Carried |
5.2 9 July 2015 - Extraordinary Meeting
Document number M1337, agenda pages 11 - 12 refer.
|
Resolved COM/2015/014 THAT the minutes of the extraordinary meeting of the Commercial Subcommittee, held on 9 July 2015, be confirmed as a true and correct record. Noonan/Murray Carried |
6. Status Report - Commercial Subcommittee - 10 September 2015
Document number R4798, agenda pages 13 - 14 refer.
|
Resolved COM/2015/015 THAT the Status Report Commercial Subcommittee 10 September 2015 (R4798) and its attachment (A1417025) be received. Her Worship the Mayor/Noonan Carried |
7. Chairperson's Report
There was no Chairperson’s report.
8. Exclusion of the Public
|
Resolved COM/2015/016 THAT the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting. The general subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter and the specific grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows: Noonan/Her Worship the Mayor Carried |
|
Item |
General subject of each matter to be considered |
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter |
Particular interests protected (where applicable) |
|
1 |
Property Asset Review - 3 Precincts Workshop
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities |
|
2 |
Review of the Council Forestry Estate
|
Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7 |
The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities |
The meeting went into public excluded session at 2.56pm and resumed in public session at 4.26pm.
9. Re-admittance of the Public
|
Resolved COM/2015/017 THAT the public be re-admitted to the meeting. Her Worship the Mayor/Murray Carried |
There being no further business the meeting ended at 4.26pm.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
