AGENDA
Ordinary meeting of the
Governance Committee
Thursday 7 September 2017
Commencing at 9.00am
Council Chamber
Civic House
110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
Membership: Councillor Ian Barker (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor Rachel Reese, Councillors Mel Courtney, Bill Dahlberg (Deputy Chairperson), Paul Matheson, Gaile Noonan, Mike Rutledge and Tim Skinner
Guidelines for councillors attending the meeting, who are not members of the Committee, as set out in Standing Order 12.1:
· All councillors, whether or not they are members of the Committee, may attend Committee meetings
· 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
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 room for discussion and voting on any of these items.
Governance Committee
7 September 2017
Nil
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 M2775
Recommendation
That the Committee
Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Governance Committee, held on 27 July 2017, as a true and correct record.
6. Status Report - Governance - 7 September 2017 11 - 13
Document number R8288
Recommendation
That the Committee
Receives the Status Report Governance Committee 7 September 2017 (R8288) and its attachment (A1160658).
Governance
8. Uniquely Nelson Memorandum of Understanding 2017/18 14 - 36
Document number R6488
Recommendation
That the Committee
Receives the report Uniquely Nelson Memorandum of Understanding 2017/18 (R6488) and its attachments (A1818573 and A1730720).
Recommendation to Council
That the Council
Approves the Uniquely Nelson Memorandum of Understanding 2017-18 (A1818573).
Note: Representatives of Uniquely Nelson will be in attendance at the meeting.
9. Significance and Engagement Policy 37 - 49
Document number R8100
Recommendation
That the Committee
Receives the report Significance and Engagement Policy (R8100) and its attachments (A1766622 and A1810631);
Recommendation to Council
That the Council
Adopts the amended Significance and Engagement Policy (A1766622); and
Approves the summary of the Significance and Engagement Policy (A1810631)
10. International Relationships Policy 50 - 67
Document number R8047
Recommendation
That the Committee
Receives the report International Relationships Policy (R8047) and its attachment (A1496780); and
Approves the Draft International Relationships Policy (A1496780) for consultation.
Finance
11. Rates remissions for the year ending 30 June 2017 68 - 81
Document number R8215
Recommendation
That
the Committee
Receives the report Rates remissions for the year ending 30 June 2017 (R8215) and its attachments (A1793175, A1383906 and A1483852).
Public Excluded Business
Recommendation
That the Committee
Excludes the public 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 - Public Excluded Minutes - 27 July 2017 |
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 |
Bishop Suter Trust - Appointment of 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 |
|
3 |
Nelmac Limited Director reappointments
|
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 |
|
4 |
Nelmac Limited Directors remuneration - 2017/18
|
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) |
13. Re-admittance of the public
Recommendation
That the Committee
Re-admits the public to the meeting.
Minutes of a meeting of the Governance Committee
Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Thursday 27 July 2017, commencing at 1.00pm
Present: Councillor I Barker (Chairperson), Her Worship the Mayor R Reese, Councillors M Courtney, B Dahlberg (Deputy Chairperson), P Matheson, M Rutledge and T Skinner
In Attendance: Councillor S Walker, Acting Chief Executive (D Hammond), Group Manager Community Services (C Ward), Senior Strategic Adviser (N McDonald), Team Leader Administration Advisers (R Byrne) and Youth Councillor Jamie Morgan.
Apology: Councillor G Noonan
1. Apologies
|
Resolved GOV/2017/044 That the Committee Receives and accepts an apology from Councillor Noonan. Skinner/Rutledge 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 Nelson Cycle Lift Society
Jo Rainey, Matt Griffin, Martin Mangan of the Nelson Cycle Lift Society and consultant Darron Charity, tabled and presented a progress report on the Nelson Gondola. They answered questions on the proposed location, liaising with Council on future planning and costs associated with the project.
Mr Charity noted it was too early to advise a proposed route, the current project was to determine market demand, understand gaps in the market and review if the project matched growing tourism interests. He noted that the next stage was to have an open dialogue with willing partners; this could be a commercial enterprise enabled by a small amount of public funding, or it could be not for profit operation.
|
Attachments 1 A1801687 Nelson Cycle Lift Public Forum presentation |
5. Confirmation of Minutes
5.1 20 April 2017
Document number M2508, agenda pages 7 - 13 refer.
|
Resolved GOV/2017/045 That the Committee Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Committee, held on 20 April 2017, as a true and correct record. Courtney/Dahlberg Carried |
6. Status Report - Governance Committee - 27 July 2017
Document number R8088, agenda pages 14 - 15 refer.
|
Resolved GOV/2017/046 That the Committee Receives the Status Report Governance Committee 27 July 2017 (R8088) and its attachment (A1160658). Her Worship the Mayor/Skinner Carried |
Chairperson's Report
7. Chairperson's Report
There was no Chairperson’s Report.
Governance
8. Sister City Co-ordinator's Report
Document number R8087, agenda pages 16 - 23 refer.
Sister City Coordinator Gail Collingwood presented her report. She noted that Eureka Park was in the area discussed by the previous presenters and asked Council to ensure that due care was given to the redwood trees in the park, which acknowledged Nelson’s relationship with its sister city Eureka.
|
Resolved GOV/2017/047 That the Committee Receives the report Sister City Co-ordinator's Report (R8087) and its attachment (A1786626). Dahlberg/Rutledge Carried |
9. Adoption of final Statements of Intent 2017/18: Nelson Regional Development Agency and Bishop Suter Trust
Document number R8056, agenda pages 24 - 86 refer.
The Group Manager Community Services Chris Ward presented the report and added that recruitment of a trustee for the Bishop Suter Trust was currently in progress.
|
Resolved GOV/2017/048 That the Committee Receives the report Adoption of final Statements of Intent 2017/18: Nelson Regional Development Agency and Bishop Suter Trust (R8056) and its attachments (A1790437 and A1724813). Dahlberg/Skinner Carried |
|
Recommendation to Council That the Council Approves the draft Statement of Intent of the Bishop Suter Trust (A1724813) as the Final Statement of Intent for the 2017/18 year; and Approves the draft Statement of Intent of the Nelson Regional Development Agency (A1790437) as the Final Statement of Intent for the 2017/18 year. |
Finance
10. Allocation of Events Funding 2016/17
Document number R8065, agenda pages 87 - 88 refer.
Group Manager Community Services Chris Ward presented the report and noted that this would be an annual item for the Committee Agenda.
|
Resolved GOV/2017/049 That the Committee Receives the report Allocation of Events Funding 2016/17 (R8065). Barker/Rutledge Carried |
11. Exclusion of the Public
|
Resolved GOV/2017/050 That the Committee Excludes the public 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: Rutledge/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 |
Governance Committee Meeting - Public Excluded Minutes - 20 April 2017 |
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). |
|
2 |
Nelson Regional Development Agency - Board appointment
|
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 |
The meeting went into public excluded session at 2.05pm and resumed in public session at 2.08pm.
12. Re-admittance of the Public
|
Resolved GOV/2017/051 That the Committee Re-admits the public to the meeting. Her Worship the Mayor/Skinner Carried |
There being no further business the meeting ended at 2.08pm.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
Chairperson
Date
|
|
Governance Committee 7 September 2017 |
REPORT R8288
Status Report - Governance - 7 September 2017
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To provide an update on the status of actions requested and pending.
2. Recommendation
|
Receives the Status Report Governance Committee 7 September 2017 (R8288) and its attachment (A1160658). |
Attachments
Attachment 1: A1160658 - Governance Committee Status Report - 7 September 2017 ⇩
|
|
Governance Committee 7 September 2017 |
REPORT R6488
Uniquely Nelson Memorandum of Understanding 2017/18
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To confirm expectations to be included within the Memorandum of Understanding.
2. Recommendation
|
Receives the report Uniquely Nelson Memorandum of Understanding 2017/18 (R6488) and its attachments (A1818573 and A1730720). |
Recommendation to Council
|
Approves the Uniquely Nelson Memorandum of Understanding 2017-18 (A1818573). |
3. Background
3.1 Uniquely Nelson is not a Council Controlled Organisation. It is an independent grouping of Central Business District businesses that exists to assist them to act collectively for the benefit of all.
3.2 Funding for Uniquely Nelson comes from the commercial differential paid by CBD businesses. A budget of $143,466 was confirmed in the Annual Plan for Uniquely Nelson for the 2017/18 year.
3.3 Council manages its relationship with Uniquely Nelson through an MoU (Attachment 1), which is updated regularly. In addition to the MoU, Uniquely Nelson provides Council with a business plan detailing its work programme for the year. That has been attached for information (Attachment 2).
4. Discussion
4.1 Council previously signed the MoU with Uniquely Nelson in 2016 for the 2016/17 year. It is a relatively simple document that sets out Council’s priorities for Uniquely Nelson. At that time it was felt that a one year extension was appropriate in order to allow the new Chief Executive of the NRDA to have time to assess the priorities of the new organisation and to better understand its relationship with Uniquely Nelson.
4.2 There is a need for clear alignment between the work of the Nelson Regional Development Agency (NRDA), which promotes and markets the region, and the work of Uniquely Nelson, which promotes and markets the Nelson CBD. At present alignment is happening due to the strong relationship between the CEO of the NRDA and the Manager of Uniquely Nelson.
4.3 However, better long term, strategic alignment could be achieved by delegating the responsibility for managing the contract to the NRDA. It is recommended that Council indicate to the Uniquely Nelson board that this option will be given further consideration with a view to implementation in the 2018/19 year.
4.4 In the meantime, it is suggested that a new clause be added:
“4. Work alongside the Nelson Regional Development Agency to promote the Nelson CBD in a manner consistent with the regional identity project.”
4.5 No other changes are proposed to the MoU and it is recommended that it be confirmed for the 2017/18 year.
5. Options
5.1 The Committee can either accept the draft MoU as presented or make changes to it prior to its adoption by Council.
Chris Ward
Group Manager Community Services
Attachments
Attachment 1: A1818573 - Uniquely Nelson draft Memorandum of Understanding 2017/18 ⇩
Attachment 2: A1730720 - Uniquely Nelson Business Plan 2017-2018 ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making |
|
1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government Uniquely Nelson provides a discretionary local public service within the Central City. |
|
2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy Uniquely Nelson contributes to the outcomes ‘Our urban and rural environments are people-friendly, well planned and sustainably managed’ and ‘Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy.’ |
|
3. Risk The MoU and ongoing engagement with Uniquely Nelson mitigate the risk that Council funding does not deliver desired outcomes for the central city. |
|
4. Financial impact This is a budgeted activity within the LTP 2015-2025 and the Annual Plan 2017-2018. |
|
5. Degree of significance and level of engagement This matter is of low significance as it relates to an existing service that has been subject to previous consultation through long term plans. |
|
6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process Maori have not been involved in this decision making process. |
|
7. Delegations The Governance Committee’s areas of responsibility include business, economic development and tourism in Nelson. |
|
|
Governance Committee 7 September 2017 |
REPORT R8100
Significance and Engagement Policy
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To adopt the amended Significance and Engagement Policy and the summary of the Significance and Engagement Policy.
2. Recommendation
|
Receives the report Significance and Engagement Policy (R8100) and its attachments (A1766622 and A1810631); |
Recommendation to Council
|
Adopts the amended Significance and Engagement Policy (A1766622); and Approves the summary of the Significance and Engagement Policy (A1810631) |
3. Background
3.1 Council prepared and adopted a Significance and Engagement Policy (the Policy) in 2015, ahead of the Long Term Plan 2015-25. The Policy sets out how Council will engage with the community on issues in relation to the level of significance of the issue.
3.2 The Policy was amended in 2016 to remove reference to specific pieces of legislation that require consultation to follow a Special Consultative Procedure (SCP) as this section could have become outdated with legislation changes.
3.3 As part of the preparation of the Long Term Plan 2018-28, the Significance and Engagement Policy has been reviewed. Council discussed the policy at Council workshops on 17 May and 3 August 2017. One minor amendment is recommended to be made to the Policy following this review.
Amendment to the Policy
3.4 The single amendment to be made to the policy (highlighted in Attachment 1) is to correct the reference to the Local Government Act 2002 in the definition of strategic asset in the Policy. The amendment replaces the reference to s90(2) with a reference to s76AA(3). Section 90 of the Local Government Act related to the Policy on Significance which was repealed by the Local Government Act amendments in 2014 and has been replaced with s76AA of the Local Government Act. This amendment will correct the discrepancy in the Policy.
Community consultation for amended Policy
3.5 Consultation on this amendment to the Significance and Engagement Policy is not recommended. It is an amendment that provides clarity to the Policy and does not impact on how the Policy will be applied.
Summary of Significance and Engagement Policy
3.6 Council’s Long Term Plan 2018-28 must contain a summary of the Significance and Engagement Policy and reference to where the full policy can be found. This is attached for approval by Council now, in advance of it being included as part of the Long Term Plan 2018-28.
4. Options
4.1 Council can adopt the amended Significance and Engagement Policy, which would correct a reference to a section of the Local Government Act in the definition of strategic asset. This is the recommended option.
4.2 Council could consider that further amendments are required. The Policy has been discussed with Council at workshops and no changes were considered necessary through that process.
5. Conclusion
5.1 It is recommended that Council adopt the amended Significance and Engagement Policy and summary of the Significance and Engagement Policy as attached.
Jane Loughnan
Policy Coordinator
Attachments
Attachment 1: Amended Significance and Engagement Policy (A1766622) ⇩
Attachment 2: Significance and Engagement Policy Overview (A1810631) ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making |
|
1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government The Significance and Engagement Policy lets both Council and the community identify the degree of significance attached to particular decisions, to understand when the community can expect to be engaged in Council’s decision making processes, and know how this engagement is likely to take place. This fits with the purpose of local government by providing information about opportunities for engagement on decisions affecting communities. |
|
2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy The adoption of a Significance and Engagement Policy is required under the Local Government Act 2002 and must be summarised as part of the Long Term Plan 2018-28. |
|
3. Risk There is little risk in Council’s decision to adopt the amended Significance and Engagement Policy. |
|
4. Financial impact There is no financial impact from the decision to adopt the amended Significance and Engagement Policy. |
|
5. Degree of significance and level of engagement This matter is of low significance because it is a minor amendment to correct a misalignment between the Policy and the Local Government Act and the amendment does not impact on Council’s application of the Policy. Therefore no consultation will occur. The amended Policy, when approved, will be included on Council’s website. |
|
6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process Maori have not been invited to provide feedback on this recommendation. |
|
7. Delegations The Governance Committee has the responsibility for considering all policies specified in the Local Government Act 2002 for Annual Plan and Long Term Plan development. The Governance Committee has the power to make a recommendation to Council on this matter. |
|
|
Governance Committee 7 September 2017 |
REPORT R8047
International Relationships Policy
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To consider a draft International Relationships Policy.
2. Recommendation
|
Receives the report International Relationships Policy (R8047) and its attachment (A1496780); and Approves the Draft International Relationships Policy (A1496780) for consultation. |
3. Background
3.1 Council does not have an International Relationships Policy, instead relying on protocols developed by the Sister City Co-ordinating Group a number of years ago.
3.2 Whilst the protocols provide some guidance on existing relationships, there is no guidance provided on how to respond to approaches for new relationships.
3.3 The purpose of the draft International Relationships Policy is to give guidance on:
- managing existing relationships and requests for future relationships
- protocols in relation to visits to and from cities Council has a formal relationship with
- allocation of budgets
- roles and responsibilities of Council staff and community volunteers
3.4 A workshop was held with members of the Sister City Co-ordinating Group on 30 June 2016 to begin the policy development process.
3.5 A draft was then presented to the Sister City Co-ordinating Group on 12 July 2017, where a number of amendments were suggested. The Group agreed to
Provide the following feedback on the Draft International Relations Policy (A1496780):
Clause 7.2 – amend ‘up to two elected members’ to ‘the Mayor and another elected member’;
Clause 7.2 – amend ‘one community representative independent of active Sister City Associations’ to ‘one community representative who may be independent of active Sister City Associations’;
Appendix One – list Yangjiang in ‘Current Sister City Relationships’ status;
Appendix Two – clarify $4000 to ‘each’ constituted group;
Appendix Three – amend clause 1(c) to read ‘New Zealand China Friendship Association – Nelson branch’ rather than ‘Nelson Huangshi Sister City Association’;
Appendix Three - amend clause 7 to read ‘attend the Annual Conference of Sister Cities New Zealand’; and
Correct any other spelling/typographical errors.
4. Discussion
The International Relationships Policy
4.1 The Policy pulls together a number of previous council documents and council direction to give clear guidance to those involved with the Sister Cities activity.
4.2 Key points to note are:
· The suggested maximum number of Sister City relationships
· The status of the Yangjiang relationship
· The status of the Eureka relationship
4.3 The draft Policy states that there should be no more than three active Sister Relationships at any given time. This maximum is based on experience of the amount of time and resource taken to service existing relationships, both from a governance and a management perspective.
Yangjiang Sister City Relationship
4.4 Council signed a ‘Friendly City’ relationship agreement with Yangjiang in 2014. In China, this relationship would be viewed as the highest formal relationship i.e. as a full Sister City.
4.5 To date the Yangjiang relationship has not had a strong community element to it. There have been business delegations and Mayor to Mayor visits, but there is no dedicated Association, and the Nelson Branch of the NZ China Friendship Society has traditionally focussed on the Huanshi relationship.
4.6 Staff originally had identified the relationship as a friendly city relationship in the draft policy. The Sister City Co-ordinating Group believe that it should be considered a full Sister City.
4.7 If Council wishes to consider this relationship as a full Sister City relationship then it is recommended that the NZ China Friendship Society be asked to begin building community relationships with Yangjiang. Council should then recognise that this would mean Council had its full complement of Sister City relationships (see 4.3).
Eureka Sister City Relationship
4.8 The Eureka relationship began as a Friendship relationship in 2002 and was then confirmed as a Sister City relationship in 2004.
4.9 Over recent years formal activity has been minimal. A public meeting was held on 15 July 2014 to gauge community interest in maintaining an active Sister City relationship with Eureka. Whilst there was general interest in the relationship, there was no-one prepared to drive activity. It was suggested that the relationship be put into ‘recess’.
4.10 It is suggested that it may be appropriate to designate the relationship as an Emeritus Sister City Relationship. This term has been use previously by Sister Cities International to denote relationships where there might be future activity but where currently the status is inactive. It leaves the door open for the community to pursue the relationship in the future.
Consultation
4.11 To date consultation has been limited to the Sister City Co-ordinating Group. It is recommended that officers seek some wider feedback from interested groups.
5. Options
5.1 The Committee can either suggest amendments to the Draft Policy or recommend to that the Policy be approved for consultation as presented.
Chris Ward
Group Manager Community Services
Attachments
Attachment 1: A1496780 - Draft International Relationships Policy ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making |
|
1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government This is a discretionary activity that delivers cultural and economic benefits to the City. |
|
2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy Sister Cities relationships contribute to the community outcomes of: Our communities are healthy, safe, inclusive and resilient; Our communities have opportunities to celebrate and explore their heritage, identity and creativity; and Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy. |
|
3. Risk There is currently low risk of reputational damage and financial impact from uncertainty in relation to Council/Community responsibilities. The policy aims to mitigate that risk. |
|
4. Financial impact There is no financial impact as Sister Cities is a budgeted activity. |
|
5. Degree of significance and level of engagement This matter is of low significance because the funding involved is modest and because ongoing engagement takes place with the Sister City Co-ordinating Group. |
|
6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process Maori have not been involved in the preparation of this report. |
|
7. Delegations The Governance Committee has responsibility for Sister City relationships. It has the power to recommend to Council on the development of policy relating to Sister Cities. |
|
|
Governance Committee 7 September 2017 |
REPORT R8215
Rates remissions for the year ending 30 June 2017
1. Purpose of Report
1.1 To update the Governance Committee on the Rates remissions for the year ending 30 June 2017.
2. Recommendation
|
That the Committee Receives the report Rates remissions for the year ending 30 June 2017 (R8215) and its attachments (A1793175, A1383906 and A1483852). |
3. Background
3.1 Council has a number of rates remission policies which are consulted on through the Long Term Plan. The policies approved through the Long Term Plan 2015-25 are included as Attachment 1.
3.2 The amendments consulted on last year as part of the 2016/17 Annual Plan that came into effect from 1 July 2016 (2016/17) were:
3.2.1 Rates postponement policy changes;
3.2.2 New rates remission policy for separately used or inhabited parts of commercial rating units less than 20m2 (Attachment 2).
4. Discussion
4.1 Rates remissions for 2016/17 were $388,373 compared with $375,231 in 2015/16 (excluding GST). The new remissions category (Commercial rating units less than 20m2) accounts for 38% of the increase with largely water credits the remainder. The rates remissions are a budgeted expense.
4.2 Attachment
3 shows the detail of the rates remissions given for community, sporting and
other organisations and a summary of other remissions. The remission policies
are delegated to officers to administer.
|
Rates remissions |
2016/17 |
2015/16 |
|
Community sporting and other organisations |
72,862 |
73,106 |
|
Golf greens |
5,212 |
5,088 |
|
Rates penalties |
43,714 |
41,956 |
|
Residential properties in commercial areas |
7,478 |
9,500 |
|
Excess water credits - residential |
96,967 |
82,430 |
|
Excess water credits - commercial |
3,877 |
11,714 |
|
Conservation land |
343 |
332 |
|
Cemeteries |
24,834 |
24,636 |
|
Low value properties |
1,174 |
1,115 |
|
Heritage |
68,285 |
66,310 |
|
Clean heat warm homes |
52,292 |
52,428 |
|
Dependent relative |
1,396 |
1,403 |
|
Natural calamity |
5,054 |
5,213 |
|
Rating units less then 20m2 |
4,885 |
- |
|
Total |
$388,373 |
$375,231 |
5. Options
5.1 The options are to receive the report or not receive the report.
Tracey Hughes
Senior Accountant
Attachments
Attachment 1: A1383906 - Rates Remission Policy - extract from LTP ⇩
Attachment 2: A1483852 - Rates Remission Policy On Commercial Offices or Premises Less Than 20m2 ⇩
Attachment 3: A1793175 - 2016/17 Rates Remission summary ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making |
|
1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government The amounts remitted under the Rates Remission Policy are required to be included in the Annual Report 2016/17 which is a requirement of the Local Government Act and fits the purpose of local government by providing information about Council’s performance during 2016/17, thereby promoting accountability. |
|
2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy Providing rates remissions to some in our community is consistent with Council’s Community Outcome “Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and community engagement”. |
|
3. Risk There is no risk arising from this report. |
|
4. Financial impact There is an ongoing financial impact from having rates remission policies in place as it increases the rating burden elsewhere to compensate. |
|
5. Degree of significance and level of engagement This matter is of low significance because it is only reporting back on rates remission policies that have already been consulted on. Therefore no consultation will occur. |
|
6. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process Māori have not been specifically consulted on this report. |
|
7. Delegations The Governance Committee has the area of responsibility of rating systems and policies. |
