AGENDA
Ordinary meeting of the
Governance Committee
Thursday 29 November 2018
Commencing at 9.00a.m.
Council Chamber
Civic House
110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
Pat
Dougherty
Chief
Executive
Membership: Councillor Ian Barker (Chairperson), Her Worship
the Mayor Rachel Reese, Councillors Luke Acland, Mel Courtney, Bill Dahlberg
(Deputy Chairperson), Gaile Noonan, Mike Rutledge, Tim Skinner, Stuart Walker,
Mr John Murray and Mr John Peters
Quorum: 6
Nelson
City Council Disclaimer
Please
note that the contents of these Council and Committee Agendas have yet to be
considered by Council and officer recommendations may be altered or changed by
the Council in the process of making the formal Council decision.
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
29
November 2018
Page
No.
1. Apologies
2. Confirmation
of Order of Business
3. Interests
3.1 Updates
to the Interests Register
3.2 Identify
any conflicts of interest in the agenda
4. Public
Forum
4.1 Sarah Holmes, Ian Kearney
and Wayne Jackson - Nelson Tasman Business Trust Annual Report
4.2 Mark Rawson, Chief
Executive, Nelson Regional Development Agency and Tony Lewis, Chief Executive,
Tasman Rugby Union. The impact of the All Blacks game for Nelson Tasman.
5. Confirmation
of Minutes
5.1 25
October 2018 11 - 15
Document
number M3857
Recommendation
That the Governance Committee
Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Governance
Committee, held on 25 October 2018, as a true and correct record.
6. Chairperson's Report
7. Nelson Regional
Development Agency - Statement of Expectation 2019/2020 16 - 78
Document
number R9752
Recommendation
That the Governance Committee:
Receives the report Nelson
Regional Development Agency - Statement of Expectation 2019/2020 (R9752) and its attachments (A2027039 and
A2066390).
Recommendation to Council
That the
Council:
Confirms
the general matters to be included in the Nelson Regional Development
Agency Statement of Expectation letter as those identified in paragraphs 4.3 to
4.7 of report R9752; and
Confirms
the specific matters to be included in the Statement of Expectation letter to
the Nelson Regional Development Agency as:
(a) How Council’s focus on
the city centre is to be achieved by the Nelson Regional
Development Agency; and
(b) How the Nelson Regional
Development Agency demonstrates it has acceptance by the business and visitor
community and stakeholders, including Māori, iwi and diverse sectors and
groups; and
(c) How value for money for
the Council is being achieved through the Nelson Regional
Development Agency, particularly given changes in the
Nelson Regional Development Agency’s
other funding streams; and
(d) The Nelson
Regional Development Agency’s role in the Te
Tauihu 2077 Regional Growth Strategy work; and
(e) How all deliverables will be achieved and within budget;
and
(f) How the Nelson
Regional Development Agency provides timely
information and advice on regional economic trends, supports significant
regional events that have an economic impact, and is flexible and responsive to
opportunities in line with Council outcomes; and
(g) How Māori and iwi economic aspirations are supported
by the Nelson Regional Development Agency; and
Confirms
the Nelson Regional Development Agency’s review of its performance will
be completed by 1 November 2019.
8. Bishop Suter Trust -
six-monthly presentation
Julie Catchpole, Suter Director
and representatives of the Bishop Suter Trust will give a strategic
presentation on the Bishop Suter Trust.
9. Bishop Suter Trust -
Statement of Expectation 2019/20 79 - 118
Document
number R9824
Recommendation
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report Bishop Suter
Trust - Statement of Expectation 2019/20 (R9824) and its attachment (A1923167).
Recommendation to Council
That the
Council
Confirms
the general matters to be included in the Bishop Suter Trust Statement of
Expectation 2019/20 letter as those identified in paragraphs 4.1 to 4.14 of
report R9824; and
Confirms
the following specific matters to be included in the Bishop Suter Trust
Statement of Expectation letter:
· Governance
succession plan; and
· Resilience;
and
· Good
employer obligations.
10. International Relationships
Policy 119 - 136
Document
number R9827
Recommendation
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report International
Relationships Policy (R9827) and
its attachment (A2076807).
Recommendation to Council
That the
Council
Adopts
the International Relationships Policy (A2076807).
11. Results of the 2018 Residents'
Survey 137 - 223
Document
number R9839
Recommendation
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report Results of the
2018 Residents' Survey (R9839) and
its attachment (A2042796); and
Notes
the actions that are planned to improve services for those activities that have
lower levels of satisfaction; and
Notes
the 2018 Residents’ Survey results (A2042796) will be communicated to the
public through Our Nelson and Council’s website.
12. Quarterly Report to Governance
Committee 1 July - 30 September 2018 224 - 235
Document
number R9737
Recommendation
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report Quarterly
Report to Governance Committee 1 July - 30 September 2018 (R9737) and its attachments (A2082587 and
A2082629).
13. Sister Cities Co-ordinator
Report 236 - 239
Document
number R9881
Recommendation
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report Sister Cities
Co-ordinator Report (R9881).
Public Excluded Business
14. Exclusion
of the Public
Recommendation
|
That
the Governance Committee
Confirms, in
accordance with sections 48(5) and 48(6) of the Local Government Official
Information and Meetings Act 1987, that representatives from Cephas remain
after the public has been excluded, for Item 5 of the Public Excluded agenda
(Update on Strategic Property Matters), as they have knowledge relating to this
matter that will assist the meeting.
|
Recommendation
That the Governance
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 - 25 October 2018
|
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)(g)
To maintain legal professional privilege
|
|
2
|
Nelmac
Limited - six monthly strategic presentation from the Board
|
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
|
Nelmac
Limited - matters for Statement of Expectations 2019/20
|
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
· Section
7(2)(i)
To enable the local
authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations
(including commercial and industrial negotiations)
|
|
4
|
Strategic
Property Central City
|
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)(b)(ii)
To protect information
where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to
prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the
subject of the information
· Section
7(2)(g)
To maintain legal
professional privilege
· Section
7(2)(h)
To enable the local
authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial
activities
|
|
5
|
Update on
Strategic Property Matters
|
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
· Section
7(2)(i)
To enable the local
authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations
(including commercial and industrial negotiations)
|
|
6
|
Maitai
Mountain Bike Hub Location
|
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)(b)(ii)
To protect information
where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to
prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the
subject of the information
· Section
7(2)(g)
To maintain legal
professional privilege
|
Note:
·
This meeting is expected to continue beyond lunchtime. (delete as appropriate)
·
Lunch will be provided. (delete as appropriate)
Governance Committee Minutes - 25
October 2018
Minutes of a meeting of
the Governance Committee
Held in the Council
Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson
On Thursday 25 October
2018, commencing at 10.11a.m.
Present: Councillor
I Barker (Chairperson), Councillors L Acland, M Courtney, B Dahlberg (Deputy
Chairperson), M Rutledge, T Skinner, S Walker, Mr J Murray and Mr J Peters
In
Attendance: Chief Executive (P Dougherty), Group Manager
Environmental Management (C Barton), Group Manager Community Services (R Ball),
Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Group Manager Strategy and
Communications (N McDonald), Manager Governance and Support Services (M Birch),
Manager Communications (P Shattock) and Governance Adviser (R Terry)
Leave of Absence: Her Worship The Mayor R Reese and
Councillor G Noonan
Apologies: Nil
1. Apologies
There
were no apologies.
2. Confirmation of Order of Business
The Chair advised that Item 8
would be taken before Item 7 on the Agenda.
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 6
September 2018
Document number M3742, agenda
pages 7 - 16 refer.
|
Resolved GOV/2018/066
That the Governance
Committee
Confirms the
minutes of the meeting of the Governance Committee, held on 6 September 2018,
as a true and correct record.
Barker/Walker Carried
|
6. Chairperson's Report
There
was no Chairperson’s Report.
7. Uniquely Nelson Memorandum of
Understanding 2018/2019
Document number R9552, agenda
pages 17 - 31 refer.
Group Manager Environmental
Management Clare Barton and Manager Uniquely Nelson, Simon Duffy presented and
discussion took place regarding:
·
Events in the CBD. Events were reviewed and feedback was
provided from retailers, hospitality workers and other Nelson residents
·
Enhancement of the CBD. Uniquely Nelson and the Nelson Regional
Development Agency (NRDA) were collaborating behind the scenes to encourage
people to create business spaces, retail opportunities and events in the CBD.
·
Alignment of NRDA and Uniquely Nelson. It was noted that there
was a cohesive approach between the two organisations and their strategies were
aligned and complementary.
·
Encouraging property owners to upgrade and lease their properties
and infrastructure. Discussions are happening with retailers, including
potential incentives for landlords
Attendance: Councillor Rutledge left the meeting at
11.01a.m.
|
Resolved GOV/2018/077
That the Governance Committee:
Receives the report Uniquely
Nelson Memorandum of Understanding 2018/2019 (R9552) and its attachments (A2016338 and A2016325).
Dahlberg/Skinner Carried
|
8. Policy review: Remuneration for
directors of Nelson City Council's Council Controlled Trading Organisations
Document number R9672, agenda
pages 32 - 37 refer.
Group Manager Corporate Services,
Nikki Harrison presented the report noting the only substantive change to the
review would be to align the current policy with the joint policy for
remuneration of directors.
The proposed amendment would look
at raising the directors’ fees from the lower quartile to the
lower-medium quartile, bringing them in line with other Council Controlled
Trading Organisations.
|
Resolved GOV/2018/078
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report Policy
review: Remuneration for directors of Nelson City Council's Council
Controlled Trading Organisations
(R9672) and its attachment
(A2045559).
Rutledge/Dahlberg Carried
|
|
Recommendation to Council
GOV/2018/079
That
the Council
Adopts
the amended 2018 Nelson City Council Policy for setting the remuneration for
directors of Nelson City Council’s council controlled trading
organisations (A2045559).
Rutledge/Dahlberg Carried
|
9. Forestry Advisory Group Minutes
11 September 2018
Document number R9804, agenda
pages 38 - 44 refer.
|
Resolved GOV/2018/080
That the Governance Committee
Receives the unconfirmed minutes
from the Forestry Advisory Group meeting held on 11 September 2018
(A2080255).
Murray/Acland Carried
|
10. Exclusion of the Public
|
Resolved GOV/2018/081
That
the Governance 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
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:
Walker/Peters 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 - 6 September 2018
|
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)(b)(ii)
To protect information
where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to
prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the
subject of the information
· Section
7(2)(h)
To enable the local
authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial
activities
· 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)(j)
To prevent the disclosure
or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage
|
|
2
|
State Advances Building
- Update
|
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)(g)
To maintain legal
professional privilege
|
|
3
|
Recommendation from
Civic Trust Annual General Meeting 19 October 2018
|
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 11.06a.m. and resumed in public session at 11.22a.m.
There being no further business the meeting ended at
11.22a.m.
Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:
Chairperson
Date
Item 7: Nelson Regional
Development Agency - Statement of Expectation 2019/2020
|
|
Governance Committee
29 November 2018
|
REPORT R9752
Nelson
Regional Development Agency - Statement of Expectation 2019/2020
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To
confirm Council's expectations for the Nelson Regional Development Agency
(NRDA) for the 2019/20 Statement of Intent.
2. Recommendation
|
That the Governance Committee:
Receives the report Nelson
Regional Development Agency - Statement of Expectation 2019/2020 (R9752) and its attachments (A2027039 and
A2066390).
|
Recommendation to Council
|
That the Council:
Confirms the general
matters to be included in the Nelson Regional Development Agency Statement of
Expectation letter as those identified in paragraphs 4.3 to 4.7 of report
R9752; and
Confirms
the specific matters to be included in the Statement of Expectation letter to
the Nelson Regional Development Agency as:
(a) How
Council’s focus on the city centre is to be achieved by the Nelson
Regional Development Agency; and
(b) How the Nelson
Regional Development Agency demonstrates it has acceptance by the business
and visitor community and stakeholders, including Māori, iwi and diverse
sectors and groups; and
(c) How
value for money for the Council is being achieved through the Nelson
Regional Development Agency, particularly given
changes in the Nelson Regional Development Agency’s other funding streams; and
(d) The Nelson
Regional Development Agency’s role in the Te
Tauihu 2077 Regional Growth Strategy work; and
(e) How all deliverables will be achieved and within budget;
and
(f) How the Nelson
Regional Development Agency provides timely
information and advice on regional economic trends, supports significant
regional events that have an economic impact, and is flexible and responsive
to opportunities in line with Council outcomes; and
(g) How Māori and iwi economic aspirations are supported
by the Nelson Regional Development Agency; and
Confirms
the Nelson Regional Development Agency’s review of its performance will
be completed by 1 November 2019.
|
3. Background
3.1 The
preparation of a Statement of Expectation is not required under the Local
Government Act 2002 (LGA). However, it is best practice for the Council
to signal to Council Controlled Organisations its expectations for the 2019/20
financial year. These expectations will then be considered by the NRDA to
guide its strategic direction and to assist in the development of the Statement
of Intent (SOI) for that financial year.
3.2 The
draft SOI will be presented to the Governance Committee on 18 April 2019.
3.3 To
assist the Committee, the NRDA’s 2017-18 Annual Report (Attachment 1) and
Statement of Intent 2018-19 are attached (Attachment 2).
4. Discussion
The NRDA
4.1 The
NRDA was established in July 2016 and its purpose is to enhance the sustainable
economic vitality of the Nelson and Tasman regions. The Nelson Tasman
identity, developed by the NRDA, has five pillars covering:
· Clever
business
· Stunning
natural landscapes
· Surprisingly
diverse
· Highly
connected
· Arts
and artisans.
4.2 Recently
Tasman District Council has moved to contract directly with the NRDA for
services rather than through an agreement of expectation and funding with
Nelson City Council. This shift will result in improved reporting about
the deliverables for Nelson and separately for Tasman.
General expectations to be
included in a Statement of Intent
4.3 SOIs
must:
(a) Include
a complete set of summary prospective financial statements
(b) Disclose
measures like Earnings before Interest and Tax (EBIT) and Earnings before
Interest, Tax, Depreciation and Amortisation (EBITDA)
(c) Comply
with legislation including Schedule 8 of the Local Government Act
(d) Report
on health and safety matters to meet the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015
(e) Disclose
dividends along with the dividend payout policies, where applicable
(f) Show
how the NRDA intends to increase non-Council revenue streams
(g) Include
capital expenditure and asset management intentions.
4.4 The
main aspects of the SOI performance story are:
· Strategic
context
· Specifying
and presentation of the outcomes framework
· Main
measures and targets, outcomes and objectives
· Linking
strategy outputs and performance together.
4.5 The
SOI should also include how the Board is considering and managing risks.
4.6 In
order to aid Council when making decisions on director remuneration and
appointments, the Board should undertake regular evaluation of its own
performance.
4.6.1 Council
expects these reviews to be carried out at least once every 12 months and the
next one by 1 November 2019. Note this has previously been every 18 months
but given the recent funding changes made by Tasman District Council it is
considered prudent to have a more regular review of performance.
4.6.2 The
Chair of the Board should reference this evaluation when making recommendations
on the re-appointment or recruitment of Board members.
4.7 The
NRDA should use the same information for both managing the business and
reporting to the Council. The report should be concise, relevant and
accessible and focused on meeting the needs of the Council and the public it
represents. The report shall outline the purpose of the NRDA, the goods
and services to be provided and what success looks like.
Specific expectations to be
included in a Statement of Intent
4.8 The
following areas are considered appropriate for inclusion in the SOI.
4.8.1 How
Council’s focus on the city centre is to be achieved by the NRDA.
The NRDA has a key role in the
delivery of the work programme for the city centre as does Uniquely
Nelson. As that work programme is developed, it is critical that any
actions identified for delivery by the NRDA are actioned by them and that
collaborative opportunities are identified and supported. Further, that
all parties are clear on their roles for delivery of the city centre
workstream. The NRDA also has an important role in assisting in framing
up the work programme.
4.8.2 How
the NRDA demonstrates it has acceptance by the business and visitor community
and stakeholders, including Māori, iwi and diverse sectors and
groups. How the NRDA intends to measure and report on the dialogue it is
having to build trust, relationships, social acceptance, shared decision making
and legitimacy.
4.8.3 How
value for money for the Council is being achieved through the NRDA,
particularly given changes in the NRDA’s other funding streams.
Tasman District Council no longer
contracts the NRDA through Nelson City Council but instead has moved to a
direct contract model. Given these recent changes, it would be helpful to
focus on the deliverables of the NRDA and what is being delivered for Nelson
including outlining what the costs and value proposition are.
4.8.4 The
NRDA’s role in the Te Tauihu Strategy 2077 Regional Growth Strategy work.
With Wakatu Incorporation leading
the project management of the Regional Growth Strategy, there needs to be a
clear articulation of the role of the NRDA going forward. As the Te
Tauihu strategy covers Nelson, Tasman and Marlborough, the NRDA needs to
demonstrate active support of initiatives that cover the wider region.
4.8.5 How
the NRDA will achieve all its deliverables and within budget.
Recent overspends in the events
fund highlight the need to carefully consider all of the deliverables for the
NRDA over the next 12 months, how they are funded and clearly articulate the
expected deliverables.
4.8.6 How
the NRDA provides timely information and advice on regional economic trends,
supports significant regional events that have an economic impact, and is
flexible and responsive to opportunities in line with Council outcomes;
It is necessary to more clearly
articulate the measures, monitoring and reporting on trends as well as focus
areas for events.
4.8.7 How
Māori and iwi economic aspirations are supported by the NRDA.
As outlined in the Long Term Plan
2018-28, Council believes that by working in partnership with iwi and
Māori it will create benefits for the whole community.
5. Options
5.1 There
are three options as outlined below. Option one is the preferred option.
|
Option 1: Accept the matters
included in section 4.8 of this report and include in the Statement of
Expectation letter
|
|
Advantages
|
· Provides
clear and early direction to the Board to assist with the preparation of the
2019/20 Statement of Intent.
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· Will
involve additional work to have them reflected in the SOI.
|
|
Option 2: Alter the
deliverables listed in Section 4.8 and include in the Statement of
Expectation letter
|
|
Advantages
|
· Provides
clear and early direction to the Board to assist with the preparation of the
2019/20 Statement of Intent (SOI).
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· Does
not provide full coverage of the issues that should be addressed in the SOI.
|
|
Option 3: Status Quo –
No change to the Statement of Intent
|
|
Advantages
|
· Provides
clear and early direction to the Board to assist with the preparation of the
2019/20 Statement of Intent.
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· Does
not provide full coverage of the issues that should be addressed in the SOI.
|
6. Conclusion
6.1 It
is recommended that the Statement of Expectation letter be sent to the NRDA and
incorporate the matters included in section 4.8 of this report.
Author: Clare
Barton, Group Manager Environmental Management
Attachments
Attachment 1: A2027039
- Nelson Regional Development Agency - FINAL Annual Report - 2017-18 - 7Aug2018
⇩
Attachment 2: A2066390
- Nelson Regional Development Agency - Statement of Intent - Final Draft Board
Approved - 2018-2019 - 14Mar2018 ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making
|
|
1. Fit
with Purpose of Local Government
NRDA provides local public services relating to
economic development and tourism in a cost effective way.
|
|
2. Consistency
with Community Outcomes and Council Policy
Although not required by the Local Government Act,
preparation of Statements of Expectation prior to the SOI process is best
practice.
|
|
3. Risk
None
|
|
4. Financial
impact
None
|
|
5. Degree
of significance and level of engagement
This matter is of low significance because this
decision is about setting expectations early in the SOI process and there are
other decision points along the way. Engagement will occur with the CCO
but is not required with the wider community.
|
|
6. Inclusion
of Māori in the decision making process
No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in
preparing this report.
|
|
7. Delegations
The Governance Committee has the following
delegations to consider the Statement of Expectation:
Areas of Responsibility
· Nelson
City Council Controlled Organisations
· Business,
economic development and tourism in Nelson
Powers to Recommend
· Documents
from Nelson City Council Controlled Organisations including statements of
intent, half yearly reports and appointments of directors
|
Item
7: Nelson Regional Development Agency - Statement of Expectation 2019/2020:
Attachment 1
Item
7: Nelson Regional Development Agency - Statement of Expectation 2019/2020:
Attachment 2
Item 9: Bishop Suter
Trust - Statement of Expectation 2019/20
|
|
Governance Committee
29 November 2018
|
REPORT R9824
Bishop
Suter Trust - Statement of Expectation 2019/20
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To
confirm Council's expectations for the Bishop Suter Trust (Trust) for the
2019/20 Statement of Intent.
2. Recommendation
|
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report Bishop Suter
Trust - Statement of Expectation 2019/20 (R9824) and its attachment (A1923167).
|
Recommendation to Council
|
That the Council
Confirms the general matters to
be included in the Bishop Suter Trust Statement of Expectation 2019/20 letter
as those identified in paragraphs 4.1 to 4.14 of report R9824; and
Confirms the following specific
matters to be included in the Bishop Suter Trust Statement of Expectation
letter:
· Governance
succession plan; and
· Resilience;
and
· Good
employer obligations.
|
3. Background
3.1 The preparation of Statements of
Expectation is not required under the Local Government Act. However, it
is best practice for the Council to signal to Council Controlled Organisations
(CCOs) its expectations for each organisation in the 2019/20 financial year.
These expectations can then be considered by the entities to guide their
strategic direction and to assist in the development of the Statement of Intent
(SOI) for that financial year.
3.2 This also means that Council
engages with CCOs early and any difference in expectations can be addressed
early in the process.
3.3 Council
officers maintain good relationships with their colleagues at each of these
organisations and are ready to assist them in the interpretation of Local
Government Act requirements and the preparation of their respective SOIs.
3.4 To
assist the Committee, the Trust’s SOI 2018 is attached as attachment 1.
4. Discussion
General expectations to be
included in SOIs/Statements of Corporate Intent (SOCIs)
4.1 SOIs/SOCIs must include a complete
set of summary prospective financial statements for at least three years
(preferably five years) i.e. Statement of Comprehensive Income, Statement of
Financial Position and cash flow statement.
4.2 SOIs/SOCIs should disclose measures
like earnings before interest and tax (EBIT) and earnings before interest, tax,
depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA) and balance sheet ratios where
applicable i.e. Council Controlled Trading Organisations (CCTOs).
4.3 SOIs must fully comply with
Schedule 8 of the Local Government Act.
4.4 Compliance with legislation and
reporting on Health and Safety matters must be given due emphasis.
4.5 Where the Council makes a financial
contribution to the operational costs of the organisation, the CCO should show
how it intends to increase non-council revenue streams.
4.6 Capital expenditure and asset
management intentions should be included.
4.7 CCOs should use the same
information for both managing the business and reporting through to the Council
i.e. the information used for setting targets and reporting against them for
the SOI should overlap and be a subset of the information used for internal
reporting.
4.8 SOIs and other CCO reports should
be in a plain style, concise, relevant, accessible and focused on meeting the
needs of the shareholding councils and the public they represent. The use of
graphs, tables and charts is expected to convey both financial and
non-financial information along with trends (past, current and future numbers).
4.9 To be effective, the SOI must
disclose the performance story for the CCO, providing a clear and succinct
understanding of the CCO purpose, the goods and services it delivers and what
success looks like. Providing a clear message to the boards on these
requirements and other expectations will assist in ongoing improvements in the
SOI and reporting.
4.10 The main aspects of the SOI performance story
are:
· Strategic
context
· Specifying
and presentation of the outcomes framework
· Main
measures and targets, outcomes and objectives
· Linking
the strategy outputs performance together
4.11 Risk management: The SOI should set out
clearly how the board is considering and managing risks, including natural
hazards and cyberattacks.
4.12 Sustainability: The SOI should provide detail
on how environmental impacts and outcomes are taken into account in the
operation of the CCO.
4.13 Health and Safety: Given the requirements of
the Health and Safety at Work Act 2015 (the Act), it is appropriate for Council
to set out its expectations in relation to Health and Safety in the CCOs/CCTOs.
4.13.1 Under section 44(3) of the Act elected members do not have a
duty to exercise due diligence to ensure that any council-controlled
organisation complies with its duties or obligations under the Act unless that
member is also an officer of that council-controlled organisation.
4.13.2 However, as a key funder it is still appropriate to set out
expectations of Health and Safety management in CCOs/CCTOs.
4.13.3 The Council expects the board to set appropriate Health and
Safety strategy and policy, understand the nature of risks/hazards within the
business, monitor performance and activities to ensure risk is being managed
and review Health and Safety systems and performance.
4.14 Governance performance: In order to aid
Council when making decisions on director/trustee remuneration and
appointments, the board should undertake regular evaluation of its own
performance.
4.14.1 Council expects this review to be carried out at least once
every eighteen months.
4.14.2 The
Chair of the Board should reference this evaluation when making recommendations
on the re-appointment or recruitment of board members.
Specific expectations to be
included in the Bishop Suter Trust Statement of Expectation letter
4.15 It
is proposed that the following specific expectations be set out in the
Statement of Expectation letter to the Trust:
4.15.1 Governance: Include in the SOI a governance succession plan
which details how the board will identify and mentor a future Chair of the
Trust.
4.15.2 Resilience: Include in the SOI a risk management plan which
details risks/hazards, mitigation strategies, response and recovery plans
including in relation to cyber-attacks and natural hazards.
4.15.3 Good employer obligations: Detail in the SOI how the Trust
meets its good employer obligations under the Local Government Act,
particularly in relation to fair pay and equal employment opportunities.
5. Options
|
Option 1: Accept the matters
to be included in the Statement of Expectation
|
|
Advantages
|
· Provides
clear and early direction to the board to assist with the preparation of the
2019/20 Statement of Intent
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· None
|
|
Option 2: Amend the matters to
be included in the Statement of Expectation
|
|
Advantages
|
· Provides
clear and early direction to the board to assist with the preparation of the
2019/20 Statement of Intent
|
|
Risks and Disadvantages
|
· None
|
Author: Michelle
Joubert, Executive Officer
Attachments
Attachment 1: A1923167 - Bishop Suter
Trust - Statement of Intent 2018-23 ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making
|
|
1. Fit
with Purpose of Local Government
The Bishop Suter Trust delivers local public
cultural services to our community. Although not required by the Local
Government Act, preparation of Statements of Expectation prior to the
SOI/SOCI process is best practice.
|
|
2. Consistency
with Community Outcomes and Council Policy
The decision aligns with the following outcomes:
· Our
Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective,
and community engagement
· Our
communities have access to a range of social, educational and recreational
facilities and activities
· Our
communities have opportunities to celebrate and explore their heritage,
identity and creativity.
|
|
3. Risk
Providing a Statement of Expectation mitigates the
low risk that the CCO develops a Statement of Intent which is not aligned with
Council’s expectations.
|
|
4. Financial
impact
None.
|
|
5. Degree
of significance and level of engagement
This matter is of low significance because this
decision is about setting expectations early in the SOI process and there are
other decision points along the way. Engagement will occur with the
Trust but is not required with the wider community.
|
|
6. Inclusion
of Māori in the decision making process
No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in
preparing this report.
|
|
7. Delegations
The Governance Committee has the following
delegations to consider the content of the Statement of Expectation:
Area of Responsibility
· Nelson
City Council Controlled Organisations and Nelson City Council Controlled
Trading Organisations.
Power to Recommend
· Documents
from Nelson City Council Controlled Organisations and Nelson City Council
Controlled Trading Organisations, including statements of intent, half yearly
reports and appointments of directors.
|
Item
9: Bishop Suter Trust - Statement of Expectation 2019/20: Attachment 1
Item 10: International
Relationships Policy
|
|
Governance Committee
29 November 2018
|
REPORT R9827
International
Relationships Policy
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To
consider the amended draft International Relationships Policy and recommend it
to Council for adoption.
2. Recommendation
1.
|
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report
International Relationships Policy (R9827)
and its attachment (A2076807).
|
Recommendation to Council
|
That the Council
Adopts
the International Relationships Policy (A2076807).
|
3. Background
3.1 Council
does not have an International Relationships Policy, instead it has been
relying on protocols developed by the Sister City Co-ordinating Group a number
of years ago.
3.2 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.
3.3 The
development of the draft International Relationships Policy has been
protracted, due in part to the frequency of the Sister City Co-ordinating Group
meetings and a change in the designated Council officer appointed to support
the Group.
3.4 A
workshop was originally held with members of the Sister City Co-ordinating
Group on 30 June 2016, to begin the policy development process. A draft
International Relationships Policy was presented to the Sister City
Co-ordinating Group on 12 July 2017, where a number of amendments were
suggested.
3.5 The
revised draft was presented to the Governance Committee on 7 September
2017. Minor amendments were made to incorporate further Maori protocols
and to reflect the responsibilities of the Sister City organisations. The
Committee approved the amended draft International Relationships Policy for
consultation.
3.6 The
draft went out for consultation between 24 October 2017 and 17 November 2017
and two submissions were received.
3.7 Officers
considered the submissions received and amended, as required, the draft policy.
This was considered by the Sister City Co-ordinating Group on 11 July 2018.
3.8 On
24 October 2018, the Sister City Co-ordinating Group reviewed the International
Relationships Policy and passed the following:
Recommendation to Governance
Committee
Resolved SC/2018/020
That the Governance Committee
Endorses the
amended Draft International Relationships Policy (A2076807) to Council for
approval.
Submissions
3.9 Submissions
were received and staff recommendations are as follows:
|
Submission
|
Staff Recommendation
|
|
Pip Jamieson
|
|
“Title should read "International Formal
Relationships" as NCC interacts with many parties internationally
through friendships, trading etc”
|
No change required. Addition of “formal” is
not necessary in the title. The purpose of and principles behind the policy
are clearly defined in sections 2 and 3.
|
|
“Principle 3.3 is too broad as "economic"
can include so many aspects. Add "formal" to clarify scope.”
|
No change required. Principle 3.3 relating to economic
partnerships and projects is one of the four principles. It does not
require further definition.
|
|
“3.4 Add minimal risk as a criteria Types - add
"One off projects"
|
No change required. There is transparency in the use
of Council allocated funding. There is no requirement for criteria to
be specified.
|
|
“Requests 8.1.4 -8.1.19 - add another section that
incorporates regular reviews of existing formal relationships to ensure that
any stay relevant meet set assessment criteria that indicates they are still
meeting objectives”
|
Agreed that there should be provision for a regular review
of existing relationships to ensure that the criteria are still met.
This has been incorporated in Section 8.
|
|
Queenie Balance - on
behalf of the Local Issues Group Nelson Branch National Council of Women NZ
|
|
“We wonder at the number of different titles listed
when currently, Nelson has only Sister City relationships. Both of these are
well known in the community.”
|
No change required. The types of relationship are
clearly defined and allow for different levels of relationship.
|
|
“In regard to the costs for the three sister city
relationships – this baseline has barely varied forever. It includes
NCC staff costs like administration and, to date, the individual groups ask
for a bare minimum and supplement costs though fund raising and
grants.”
|
No change required.
|
|
“We support the draft International Relationships
Policy.”
|
No change required.
|
Management of
Yangjiang Sister City Relationship
3.10 This
relationship was previously managed by the Nelson Regional Development Agency
(NRDA).
3.11 In July 2018, Chief Executive, Mark Rawson confirmed
that NRDA had changed its strategic vision and that closer ties with China were
no longer included. Consequently, NRDA would not be providing further
management of the Yangjiang Sister City Relationship or a NRDA representative on the Sister City
Co-ordinating Group.
3.12 The Yangjiang relationship is now being managed by the
China Friendship Society Nelson Branch, together with the Huangshi Sister City
Relationship. Funding has been adjusted accordingly.
The
International Relationships Policy
3.13 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.
3.14 Key
points to note are:
· The
suggested maximum number of Sister City relationships is remaining at three
· The
relationships will be reviewed, as required, by Council staff, with guidance
from the Mayor and Sister City Coordinator and input from the Nelson-Miyazu
Sister City Association and the NZ China Friendship Society Nelson Branch
· The
policy has been updated to reflect the new approach of NRDA and the resultant
changes to the management of the Sister City Relationships
· Membership
of the Sister City Co-ordinating Group has been updated to include a
representative of Nelson Youth Council and a designated Business and Economic
Advisor
· The
Draft International Relationships Policy, incorporating the amendments of both
the Governance Committee and the Sister City Co-ordinating Group is at
Attachment 1.
4. Options
4.1 The
preferred option is for the Committee to recommend to Council that the Policy
be approved and adopted as presented.
4.2 The
alternative option is for the Committee to suggest further amendments to the
Draft Policy.
Author: Mary
Birch, Manager Governance and Support Services
Attachments
Attachment 1: A2076807 - Draft
International Relationships Policy - 29 November 2018 ⇩
|
Important considerations for decision making
|
|
1. Fit
with Purpose of Local Government
This policy benefits our local community by ensuring
continued relationships with international communities.
|
|
2. Consistency
with Community Outcomes and Council Policy
Fit-for-purpose organisational and governance
policies are required to ensure the Community Outcome of Our Council
provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and
community engagement.
|
|
3. Risk
Approving this policy helps reduce risk as it would
provide guidance on appropriately managing existing international
relationships.
|
|
4. Financial
impact
There is no financial impact associated with
approving this policy.
|
|
5. Degree
of significance and level of engagement
This matter is of medium significance because it
impacts on our international relationships. Therefore public consultation was
undertaken.
|
|
6. Inclusion
of Māori in the decision making process
No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in
preparing this report.
|
|
7. Delegations
The Governance Committee has the following
delegations to consider the International Relationships Policy:
Areas of Responsibility
· Sister
City relationships and issues
Powers to Decide
· To
undertake community engagement other than Special Consultative Procedures for
any projects or proposals falling within the areas of responsibility
Powers to Recommend
· Development
or review of policies and strategies relating to areas of responsibility
|
Item
10: International Relationships Policy: Attachment 1
Item 11: Results of the
2018 Residents' Survey
|
|
Governance Committee
29 November 2018
|
REPORT R9839
Results
of the 2018 Residents' Survey
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To
provide the results of the 2018 Residents’ Survey and information on
actions that are underway to improve results in areas with lower levels of
satisfaction.
2. Summary
2.1 The
Residents’ Survey provides a snapshot of Nelson residents’
satisfaction with services provided by Council and feedback on some behaviours,
for example, how residents travel to work. In general the results of the 2018
survey had shown similar trends to previous years.
3. Recommendation
|
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report Results of
the 2018 Residents' Survey (R9839) and
its attachment (A2042796); and
Notes
the actions that are planned to improve services for those activities that
have lower levels of satisfaction; and
Notes
the 2018 Residents’ Survey results (A2042796) will be communicated to
the public through Our Nelson and Council’s website.
|
4. Background
4.1 Nelson
City Council has been undertaking a survey of residents’ views on a range
of services delivered by Council for the last twenty years. The survey’s
purpose is to provide Council with impartial and representative information on
resident satisfaction levels. This information is used to inform the
development of Asset and Activity Management Plans, and to report on the
achievement of targets set for levels of service. Where possible, results
include a comparison to previous years’ surveys.
4.2 This
year’s Residents’ Survey was undertaken by the National Research
Bureau (NRB) in June 2018 and consisted of a 10 minute survey of 407 randomly
selected residents. The majority of surveying was undertaken by telephone
interview, with a further 40 door-to-door interviews conducted to target those
in the 16-39 year old age group.
4.3 The
results have a margin of error of +/-5% at the 95% confidence interval. This
means that if the survey was run 100 times, the results from 95 surveys should
be the same, or very similar to, the results from this survey. Weightings
have been applied to ensure representation is proportionate to Nelson’s
2013 census data for age and gender.
4.4 The
Residents’ Survey provides results for a number of performance measures
set in the Long Term Plan (LTP). These results are included in the Annual
Report 2017/18, which was adopted on 25 October 2018.
4.5 At
the same time as the Residents’ Survey was carried out, an online survey
asking the same questions was also undertaken. This was in recognition that not
all residents will or can respond to traditional telephone surveying. Over 400
responses were received to the online survey and results have been included in
this report for a comparison.
4.6 It
should be noted that respondents to the online survey were self-selected. Of
respondents to the online survey, 43% were in the 16 to 39 age group, 36% were
in the 40 to 64 age group, and 8% were 65 years or over (13% did not provide
their age). Eighty-one percent of respondents were female.
5. Discussion
Council
activities
5.1 The
following paragraphs summarise, by activity, respondents’ satisfaction
with the services provided by Council as well as actions that are underway to
improve results in areas with lower levels of satisfaction.
Transport
Satisfaction with the overall
transport activity
5.2 The
target for the 2015-25 LTP was for 50% of respondents to be satisfied/very
satisfied and less than 10% dissatisfied /very dissatisfied with the overall
transport activity (including roads, cycleways, footpaths and public
transport). (Note: this measure has been removed from the 2018-28 LTP).
|
Residents’ Survey
|
Online Survey
|
|
42%
satisfied/ very satisfied
26%
dissatisfied/ very dissatisfied
|
52% satisfied/ very satisfied
31% dissatisfied/very dissatisfied
|
5.3 Of
Residents’ Survey respondents, people under 39 years were more satisfied
than those 40+ years and men were more satisfied than women.
5.4 In general, the most common reasons
for dissatisfaction, for respondents across Nelson, was the need for more
public transport and for it to service a wider area, with the exception
of residents in Tahunanui who noted heavy traffic and congestion as their
primary reason for dissatisfaction.
5.5 Satisfaction
levels with transport over the last five years are noted below.
Note: In the chart above + means does not add to 100%
due to rounding
Planned
actions for improvement
5.6 Improvements to public transport
signalled in the 2018-28 LTP are:
5.6.1 The
public transport network was reviewed in 2017/18 with an additional $250,000
per annum budgeted to provide for increasing overall services. Some of the
changes were introduced in August 2018, such as the Stoke Loop, with the
remainder scheduled for implementation in mid-2019.
5.6.2 The
network coverage is intended to be as close to houses in suburbs as is
practicable and affordable. At present 65% of households are within 400 metres
of a bus stop or regular ‘hail and ride’ bus service. The upcoming
bus review, scheduled for 2019, will reconsider this approach and will take
into account the results of this Residents’ Survey.
5.6.3 An
airport service is to be reconsidered as part of the 2019 public transport
review.
5.6.4 Since
the survey was undertaken new buses with low floors have been introduced to
improve access for people with mobility impairment which service valley routes
in and around Nelson.
5.6.5 Electronic
ticketing is being introduced in 2019, including smart cards and smart payment
technology, to eliminate the need for cash. At the same time the fare structure
will be rationalised and will result in a reduction in fares to all users.
5.6.6 Development
of a new bus hub is expected to improve the profile and access of the bus
service in the centre city through initiatives such as provision of real time
information to users.
5.6.7 Bus
timetables have been adjusted to extend the weekend service between Richmond
and Nelson into later afternoon.
5.6.8 Efforts
to encourage alternatives to single occupancy vehicle travel includes targeted
behaviour change work with specific workplaces and schools to encourage an
increase in carpooling and ride sharing and the promotion of active and public
transport.
5.7 Improvements
for heavy traffic and congestion:
5.7.1 In
the 2018-28 LTP Council noted support for continuing the Nelson Southern Link
Investigation and SH6 Rocks Road Walking and cycling project. Part of this
project will include investigating options for addressing congestion issues. It
is also recognised that the Government Policy Statement on Transport will be
used by Council to guide the development of the detailed business case for the
project.
Travel to Work
5.8 The
target for 2017/18 as set out in the 2015-25 LTP was for 24% of respondents to
travel to work by walking or cycling based on the Residents Survey and/or
national census. (Note: this measure has been amended to 20% in the 2018-28
LTP).
|
Residents’ Survey result
|
Online Survey result
|
|
14%
(8% bike
/ 6% walk-run)
|
17%
(6% bike / 11% walk-run)
|
5.9 The
percentage of respondents (14% in 2017/18) travelling to work by walking,
running or cycling has fluctuated since 2013 and is currently under the target
of 24% in the 2015-25 LTP.
5.10 In order to measure the success of public
transport and active transport initiatives, a number of different measure are
used, including counts of walking and cycling activity, public transport
passenger numbers, vehicle occupancy and traffic counts. Travel to work is one
sub-section of this, and although the Residents’ Survey result suggests
an overall drop in walking and cycling, regular screen counts demonstrate a
consistent increase in walking and cycling since regular counting began in
2006. The Residents’ Survey result indicates that the growth in active
transport may not have yet converted into the target level of journey to work
trips.
5.11 As the Residents’ Survey was carried out
one month later than previous surveys it is hard to determine the impact the
cooler weather may have had on the survey result. Moreover, the
Residents’ Survey only reports on residents aged 16 and over and on
journey to work. Council is planning an increased programme of work around
travel planning for both workplaces and schools with the objective of
increasing the proportion of both students and workers using active transport
and public transport modes to school and work.
5.12 The only national comparison for this measure is
the most recent Census data (which also asks a question about travel to work)
from 2013. When the results of the 2018 Census are available, Council will be
able to understand whether this decrease is specific to Nelson, or is part of a
wider trend. The 2013 Census data in comparison to the Residents’ Survey
result is shown below:
|
|
2013 Census National +
|
2013 Census Nelson
|
2018 Residents Survey +
|
|
Bike, walk, jog
|
9%
|
17%
|
14%
|
|
Drove a private car
|
57%
|
55%
|
68%
|
|
Drove a company car
|
13%
|
12%
|
9%
|
|
Passenger, public
transport, motor cycle, other
|
12%
|
7%
|
4%
|
|
Worked at home
|
10%
|
9%
|
7%
|
Note: In the chart above + means does not add to 100%
due to rounding
5.13 Resident
Survey figures for the last five years are noted in the table on the following
page. In summary, a higher percentage of respondents (68%) reported using their
private vehicle to travel to work (58% in 2017), with a lower percentage (14%)
travelling by bicycle or on foot than in 2017 (19%). Forty-nine percent of
respondents were in full time work, 23% in part time work and 28% not in the
workforce. More than half (68%) of respondents who worked (full or part time)
travelled to work in a private vehicle, while 14% cycled or walked/ran to work.
A further 9% used a company vehicle and the remainder either travelled as a
passenger, or by public transport or motorbike. Seven percent of respondents
worked from home.
Arts facilities and events
Suter
Art Gallery
5.14 The
target as set out in the 2015-25 LTP is for 80% satisfaction of respondents who
have used the Suter Art Gallery.
|
Residents’ Survey result
|
Online Survey result
|
|
85% of users satisfied/very
satisfied
|
52% of users satisfied/very satisfied
|
5.15 Overall
67% of respondents were very satisfied/satisfied with the Suter Art Gallery, up
from 64% in 2017. Fifty-eight percent of those surveyed had visited the gallery
in the last 12 months, and of those, 85% were very satisfied/satisfied.
Public Art
5.16 Council’s
target for 2017/18 was that 75% of residents were very satisfied or satisfied
with public art in Nelson. (Note: this measure has been removed from the
2018-28 LTP although it is still to be measured through the Council’s
Arts Activity Management Plan).
|
Residents’ Survey result
|
Online Survey result
|
|
42% satisfied/very satisfied
|
43% satisfied/very satisfied
|
5.18 This
result is down from 49% in 2017 and 55% in 2016, as shown below.
5.19 Although a high percentage of respondents were
not satisfied with public art in Nelson, the reasons for this were more about
the money spent on the art (19%) than the art itself (10%).
5.20 Some of the dissatisfaction may relate to issues
that were ongoing during the year with the Welcome Cloak. This artwork has
since been removed and is to be installed in a more appropriate location.
5.21 There were some suggestions made in the survey
responses that there should be more local art. It should be noted, that of all
64 public art pieces, 55 are from local artists, four are overseas artists and
the remainder from other parts of New Zealand. The Christmas decorations
project was also undertaken using local artists. Officers will continue to look
for opportunities to celebrate and promote local works.
5.22 Part of the work programme is also to look for
ways to increase community art in the city and to promote this work. This is
expected to involve the community and therefore see them more engaged in art in
the city.
Attendance
at Events
5.23 The
targets and results for attendance at Council events are as follows:
|
Target
|
Residents’ Survey
|
Online Survey
|
|
53% Summer Festivals
|
41%
|
48%
|
|
44% Masked Parade
|
34%
|
39%
|
|
31% Arts Festival
|
25%
|
18%
|
|
30% Opera in the Park
|
25%
|
18%
|
5.24 Respondents
aged over 65 years reported being less likely to attend the Summer Festival,
Masked Parade or other Council events. Residents between 16–39 years were
less likely to attend Opera in the Park.
5.25 Although
attendance levels were not yet at target in 2017/18, event attendance levels
are at a similar level to those in 2016 and some fluctuation is expected.
5.26 Factors
which may have influenced attendance levels and planned actions to improve
these include:
5.26.1 Summer
events: The weather over summer (in January in particular) was more variable
than usual which resulted in some events having to be cancelled e.g. Summer
Movies and Tahuna Summer Sounds. Additionally, an increase in the 2018/19
Summer Events budget should see enhancements to the content offered.
5.26.2 Arts
Festival (2017 year): The 2017 Festival reported a slow uptake on sales and
sold a lower number of tickets than in other years, although it did break even.
Shows in Christchurch, Wairarapa and Taranaki also reported a lower
uptake. For the 2018 Arts Festival, the launch was closer to the
commencement of events to ensure momentum and sales were in line with other
years and other centres providing arts festivals.
5.26.3 Opera
in the Park (2018) had to be relocated to Saxton Oval due to the turf
replacement prior to the upcoming All Blacks game. Also likely to have impacted
on attendance was the effect of Cyclone Gita, which occurred only days earlier.
5.26.4 The
Residents’ Survey does not capture the number of children who attend the
Masked Parade (October 2017) which attracts around 3,270 enrolments, plus
spectators. The number of schools participating can fluctuate because some
schools only enter every second year rather than annually. This
year’s Parade had a new contractor with a focus on community engagement.
Enrolments for the 2018 Parade were higher than expected for a low year.
Recreation Opportunities and Facilities
Libraries
5.27 The 2017/18 target was for 90% user satisfaction
for Libraries in Nelson
|
Residents’ Survey result
|
Online Survey result
|
|
92% satisfied/very satisfied
|
89% satisfied/very satisfied
|
Parks and Reserves –
overall activity
5.28 The
target for 2017/18 was 80% satisfaction with the overall activity which
included gardens, sports grounds, pools and reserves. The highest ratings of
satisfaction were from residents in Tahunanui.
|
Residents’ Survey result
|
Online Survey result
|
|
85% satisfied/very satisfied
|
75% satisfied/very satisfied
|
Recreational opportunities
5.29 The
target for satisfaction for recreational opportunities for people of all ages
and abilities was 80%. (Note: this measure has been removed from the 2018-28
LTP).
|
Residents’ Survey result
|
Online Survey result
|
|
70% satisfied/very satisfied
|
53% satisfied/very satisfied
|
5.30 From
the Residents’ Survey, men were the most satisfied and residents under 39
years were the most dissatisfied. Reasons for dissatisfaction include the
need for more recreational opportunities and recreation activities for young people,
better advertising of what was available, and better facilities.
Swimming Pools
5.31 The
2017/18 target for satisfaction with swimming pools was 80%. (Note: this
measure is not included in the 2018-28 LTP although it is still to be measured
through the Council’s Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan where
the measure has been amended to 75% satisfaction for the first two years).
|
Residents’ Survey result
|
Online Survey result
|
|
72% satisfied/very satisfied
|
76% satisfied/very satisfied
|
5.32 Forty-two
percent of residents have used or visited Riverside and/or Nayland Pool. The
percent of dissatisfied residents has risen from 5% in 2017 to 14% in 2018. The
main reasons for dissatisfaction were; need upgrading, need improvements to
cleaning, are too expensive and/or too small.
5.33 Satisfaction
with swimming pools over the last five years is noted below.
5.34 Actions
to improve satisfaction levels include funding in 2018/19 for a swimming pool
strategy to look at the current and future capacity of both Riverside and
Nayland Pools. This will help determine if Nelson can sustain a larger facility
in the future. Since the survey there has also been an upgrade of the heating
systems at Riverside Pool to provide more consistent temperatures and resurfacing
of all the pool surfaces to improve presentation.
Waste
and recycling
5.35 The
survey also had a question about the composting of waste, so as to establish a
baseline for future measures for the 2018-28 LTP. The levels of composting has
been an intermittent measure.
|
Residents’ Survey result
|
Online Survey result
|
|
57% compost food waste
62% compost garden waste
|
53% compost food waste
53% compost garden waste
|
Communication and consultation
5.36 The
target for 2017/18 as set out in the 2015-25 LTP was for a) at least 70%
satisfaction with opportunities to take part in decision making and b) at least
70% ‘about right’ amount of information. (Note: the target has been
amended in the 2018-28 LTP to show an ‘annual improvement in the % of
residents satisfied/very satisfied with opportunities to provide
feedback’).
|
Residents’ Survey result
|
Online Survey result
|
|
a) 36%
satisfied / very satisfied
b) not
asked
|
a) 25%
satisfied / very satisfied
b) b)
not asked
|
5.37 Satisfaction with the opportunities to provide
feedback and take part in Council’s decision making had decreased from
42% in 2017 to 36% in 2018 although no difference in dissatisfaction was
reported (there was an increase in those that answered ‘don’t know’).
The main reasons respondents were dissatisfied include not being aware of
opportunities, a lack of consultation, and Council ‘not listening’.
5.38 Forty-one percent of respondents stated that they
were very well/well informed about Council and its services, with those aged
65+ years the most informed. The main reasons respondents did not feel
informed was a lack of information, lack of time and/or effort and lack of
communication.
5.39 From the online survey, 25% were very
satisfied/satisfied with opportunities to provide feedback and participate in
Council’s decision-making while 20% were very dissatisfied/dissatisfied.
Thirty-six percent were very well informed/informed while 28% were not well
informed/ not informed.
5.40 The reasons for dissatisfaction with feedback
opportunities in 2017/18 included not being aware of opportunities/not seeing
or hearing about them, lack of consultation/decisions made without
consultation/hearing about it afterwards and Council not listening/doing what
it wants.
5.41 Satisfaction
with opportunities to provide feedback over the last seven years is noted
below:
5.42 In relation to comments of not being aware of
opportunities, residents were also asked about how they prefer to get
news/information about what Nelson City Council is doing. (Note: respondents
were able to select more than one answer).
5.43 The percentage of respondents (more likely to be
men and/or aged 65+ years) who prefer to get news about the Council through
newspaper articles had risen to 42% from 36% in 2017. Younger
respondents, aged 16–39 years, were more likely to use social media and
less likely to use Our Nelson as an information source, than other age groups.
In general, respondents reported a preference for receiving Our Nelson monthly.
5.44 For those that responded online, there was a
preference for receiving information online, with 76% preferring social media,
36% email/e-newsletter and 35% preferring Our Nelson. Forty percent of online
respondents would prefer to receive Our Nelson monthly, while 23% preferred
fortnightly and 21% said they did not read it.
5.45 A
multi-channel approach of providing information was used in 2017/18. This
included the targeted use of print (including Our Nelson, brochures/flyers),
broadcast (radio and online), digital (social media channels and website), and
face to face interactions. There has been an increased use of social media to
reach a broader market versus traditional print media. Our Nelson has recently
been made into an online publication to complement the existing printed
publication, and the consultation website has been improved over the last few
months. The objective is that these updates will make it easier for customers
to receive information and make submissions.
5.46 Based
on the information provided in the Residents’ Survey (about how people
like to receive information), the Communications Team is adjusting the channels
used for targeted communications to improve reach.
6. Conclusion
6.1 Activities that historically have had
high levels of satisfaction have generally maintained their results.
However, activities where there are challenges, or long-standing issues, have
generally recorded lower results e.g. transport. There are work programmes in
place to improve satisfaction in the lower scoring areas.
6.2 The Residents’ Survey measures
performance against targets set in the LTP. These results were reported in the
2017/18 Annual Report.
6.3 Results
of the 2018 Residents’ Survey will be made available to the public via
Council’s website, along with reports from previous year’s surveys.
Author: Gabrielle
Thorpe, Policy Adviser
Attachments
Attachment 1: A2042796 - Residents'
Survey 2018 ⇩
Item
11: Results of the 2018 Residents' Survey: Attachment 1
Item 12: Quarterly
Report to Governance Committee 1 July - 30 September 2018
|
|
Governance Committee
29 November 2018
|
REPORT R9737
Quarterly
Report to Governance Committee 1 July - 30 September 2018
1. Purpose
of Report
1.1 To
inform the Committee of the financial and non-financial results for the first
quarter for the activities under its delegated authority.
1.2 To
highlight any material variations.
2. Recommendation
|
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report Quarterly
Report to Governance Committee 1 July - 30 September 2018 (R9737) and its attachments (A2082587 and
A2082629).
|
3. Background
3.1 Quarterly
reports on performance are being provided to each Committee on the performance
and delivery of projects and areas within their responsibility.
3.2 The financial reporting focuses on the three month performance (1
July to 30 September) compared with the year-to-date (YTD) approved capital and
operating budgets.
3.3 Unless
otherwise indicated, all information is against approved operating budget,
which is 2018/19 Long Term Plan budget plus any carry forwards, plus or minus
any other additions or changes as approved by the Committee or Council.
3.4 The contents of this report will
be a work in progress, and officers welcome feedback from all Committees. In
the interests of efficiency it is proposed to keep the contents of the
quarterly reports standard to all Committees and avoid customisation where
possible.
4. Key
development for the three months to 30 September 2018
4.1 The
final Long Term Plan 2018-28 was published. A Long Term Plan Our Nelson Special
was released, informing the community about the outcome of Council
deliberations. Submitters to the Long Term Plan received their response letters
from Council.
4.2 The
Annual Report for 2017/18 was prepared, the draft approved by Council, and the
audit commenced. The Annual Report was adopted by Council and made available to
the public in quarter two.
4.3 Planning
for the Annual Plan 2019/20 has commenced.
4.4 The
Residents’ Survey results were received and are being reported to this
meeting of the Governance Committee.
4.5 The
Customer Service Centre came third out of 78 councils in the Association of
Local Government Information Management’s Customer Experience Mystery
Shop.
4.6 There
were 26 meetings under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings
Act 1987 (LGOIMA) for the July to September quarter.
4.7 There
were 52 LGOIMA requests received between 1 July and 30 September.
4.8 A
programme to deploy new tablet and laptop devices to the organisation was successfully
completed during the quarter ensuing.
4.9 Key
developments for investment management, forestry and other sub-activities are
covered in the financial result section of this report.
5. Financial
Results – Operating Revenue and Expenditure
5.1 Financial
information is shown in charts below, with an explanation following.
Revenue
5.2 Cost
of Democracy YTD ahead of budget relating to Penalties on Rates ($29,000)
and Petrol Tax received ($33,000).
5.3 Investment
management has received an unbudgeted special dividend from Port Nelson of
$750,000 (used to repay debt) plus the 2017/18 final dividend of $375,000 from
Nelson Airport which was budgeted to be recognised in the last financial year.
Interest income on short term investments is also ahead of budget ($78,000) due
to the $5m deposit held to offset the pre-funding of debt maturing in 2019.
5.4 Civic
House has recorded greater rent recoveries YTD than budgeted. These are
internal recoveries so this will be offset in expenditure in other cost centres.
5.5 Rental
Properties are showing less revenue collected than budgeted. This is due to
a credit to Nelmac for rental of the nursery after a lease renegotiation.
5.6 Forestry
– harvesting income is ahead of budget YTD by $515,000, with
associated extra expenditure.
5.7 Emergency
Response Fund revenue includes an unbudgeted insurance refund for the
February storm event of $260,000 offset by decreased internal recoveries for
infrastructure insurance due to increased premiums.
5.8 Economic
Development has a variance as the expected revenue is now being paid
directly to the NRDA by TDC.
Operating expenditure
5.9 Key
variances are:
5.10 Admin
and meeting support is ahead of budget by $84,000 in the
allocation for staff time and overhead. This relates to a change in business
units for the executive assistants, a mismatch between the amount of staff time
budgeted and that applied, and timing variances for overheads, particularly
insurance charges.
5.11 Civic
House is behind budget year to date (YTD) in energy, cleaning, insurance
and maintenance costs.
5.12 Forestry
is ahead of budget with unbudgeted harvest costs of $678,000 YTD.
Programmed maintenance is behind budget YTD by $85,000 with Land Prep/Establishment
showing nil spent this year.
5.13 Policy
is ahead of budget by $27,000 in staff time allocation as a result of city
development time being miscoded to the policy activity.
5.14 Economic
Development is $62,000 ahead of budget with $50,000 paid to the Nelson
Cycle Lift Society (which was budgeted in 2017/18 and for which a carry forward
of budget had been requested), and $20,000 for traffic management and temporary
facilities relating to the All Blacks fixture. The NRDA operating grant is currently
on budget but will run behind budget for the rest of the year reflecting the
process change for TDC’s contribution (will result in both under budget
income and under budget expenditure for the full financial year).
Capital expenditure
5.15 All
capital projects with a budget greater than $250k in this financial year have a
project sheet in Attachment 1 of this report.
6. Commentary
on capital projects
6.1 There
are three capital projects, within the Governance Committee delegations, that
are included as part of the quarterly reporting. All of these are over $250,000
for 2018/19.
6.2 Project
status is analysed based on three factors; quality, time and budget. From
the consideration of these three factors the project is summarised as being on
track (green), some issues/risks (yellow), or major issues/risks (red).
Projects that are within 5% of their budget are considered to be on track in
regards to the budget factor.
6.3 Of
those capital projects attached, all are related to Civic House improvements and
are red as they are on hold.
7. Project
reports - Operational
7.1 There
is one non-capital project, within the Governance Committee delegations, that
is included as part of the quarterly reporting. This project, the 2019/20
Annual Plan, has been selected for quarterly reporting as it makes an important
contribution to Council’s work programme. The summary is included in
Attachment 1.
8. Key
Performance Measures
8.1 As
part of the development of the Long Term Plan 2018-28 Council approved levels
of service, performance measures and targets for each activity. There are
ten performance measures that are within the Governance Committee’s
delegations.
8.2 Final
results for each measure will be reported on through the Annual Report 2018/20
but we have included an indication of progress for those measures that an
assessment of current performance is available at this quarterly stage.
8.3 A
number of performance measures cannot be reported on until the end of the
financial year, accordingly the scale to report on the performance measures is
as follows:
· On track
· Not on track
· Achieved
· Not achieved
· Not measured yet
8.4 Attachment
2 lists all performance measures within the Governance Committee delegations,
their status and commentary for the quarter.
Quarterly Review of Performance Measures
8.5 Three
of the ten measures were on target as at the end of the first quarter of
2018/19.
8.6 The
results of seven measures cannot yet be reported on. Some of this data comes
with a time lag, while data on events has not been provided for quarter one,
but it is expected this will be available for future quarterly reports.
9. Conclusion
9.1 The
review of performance for the first quarter for the Governance Committee is
included in this report, with project reports and performance measure updates
attached.
Author: Nicky
McDonald, Group Manager Strategy and Communications
Attachments
Attachment 1: A2082587 - Governance
quarterly report project sheets - quarter 1 - Sep2018 ⇩
Attachment 2: A2082629
- Performance measure summary for the Governance Committee - Quarter One ⇩
Item
12: Quarterly Report to Governance Committee 1 July - 30 September 2018:
Attachment 1
Item
12: Quarterly Report to Governance Committee 1 July - 30 September 2018:
Attachment 2
Item 13: Sister Cities
Co-ordinator Report
|
|
Governance Committee
29 November 2018
|
REPORT R9881
Sister
Cities Co-ordinator Report
1. Recommendation
2.
|
That the Governance Committee
Receives the report Sister
Cities Co-ordinator Report (R9881).
|
2. Nelson
City Council Sister Cities Coordinator
2.1 This
is a voluntary position within Council which now works with the designated
Council Officer, Manager Governance and Support Services (Mary Birch), Strategy
and Communications. Its purpose is to promote and strengthen Nelson City
Council’s Sister City relationships.
2.2 I
report against some of the duties of the Co-ordinator role, appendix three,
International Relationships Policy.
2.3 The
Nelson – Miyazu Sister City Association, New Zealand China Friendship Society
– Nelson Branch and Nelson–Eureka Sister City Association
(Emeritus) the three organisations who have responsibility to coordinate and
manage on your behalf the formal relationships with China, Japan and USA report
to each of the quarterly Sister City Coordinating Group meetings.
To liaise with Nelson City
Council’s Sister City organisations
2.4 The
16th annual Cherry Blossom festival was timed perfectly for sunny weather and
peak blooms attended by approximately 3000 people who were entertained by
Japanese dancers, a calligrapher and ate tons of Japanese food. The
Embassy of Japan flew over from Wellington and their very first stall strongly
promoted the 2019 Rugby World cup and 2020 Olympic Games.
2.5 Offers
of home stays from both Nelson College and Nelson College for Girls were
greater than required for the visit by 5 students from Miyazu. The students
attended school and also English language workshops in between farm visits and
touring Nelson.
2.6 Cycling
in Japan is being promoted following a bike tour by a member who biked 280 km
from Osaka to Miyazu. Maps and information are available for a tourism holiday
with a difference.
Huangshi
2.7 The
NZCFS Nelson Branch is calling for expressions of interest for Nelsonians to
join in a 'friendship delegation visit to Huangshi 2019. This is an opportunity
that councillors and staff might like to participate in visiting China and
learning more about Huangshi city and its people.
2.8 The
Mid-Autumn Moon festival was held in the Huangshi Chinese Garden. The festival
celebrates the rice and wheat harvests when friends and relatives visit
together. About 50 people attended, branch members as well as a stream of
people walking through the Chinese garden who stopped for moon cakes, 100 year
eggs and a variety of Chinese teas.
Yang Jiang
2.9 The
NZCFS Nelson now has responsibility for the Yang Jiang relationship following a
change to the outcomes of the Nelson Regional Development Agency who no longer
initiate business development with China.
2.10 Following
an extremely successful Nelson student exchange, the first international
student visit to Guangdong Liangyang Senior High School a reciprocal exchange
is planned for March 2019. Financial support is being sought from NZCFS
National Executive DENG Fund.
Eureka
2.11 Four
visitors from Eureka have indicated they intend to visit Nelson next year.
Questions were posted on the Facebook page asking for details about the
relationship and these were directed onto contacts in Eureka City as interest
in furthering and rejuvenating the relationship were raised.
To attend Sister City
Association Annual General Meetings
2.12
The Nelson Miyazu Association AGM is scheduled for 14 November.
To provide reports to the
Sister Cities Co-ordinating Group on the Co-ordinator’s activities
2.13 Chair
meetings of the Sister Cities Coordinating Group and check draft minutes prior
to distribution
2.14 This
is actioned for each of the quarterly meetings. During the year Alex Hunter was
welcomed to the meetings as a representative of the NCC Youth Council. Initially
the appointment came as a community representative. Since then a position for a
youth council representative has been added into the International
relationships policy. Each year the incoming youth council can decide if they
want to up lift this role which provides extremely useful connections when the
organisations are planning youth events and exchanges.
To report on Sister City
matters to the March and September meetings of the Governance Committee of
Council. (Proposed to be May and November)
To attend the Annual
Conference of Sister Cities New Zealand organisation.
2.15 Thank
you for the opportunity to attend the conference in Lower Hutt. SCNZ conference
is always an interesting, stimulating conference to attend. A high light was
the attendance of representatives from Hutt City’s three sister cities
– Tempe, Arizona, USA, Minoh City, Osaka, Japan and Taizhou, China.
2.16
A suggestion that came from the Mayoral forum that councils and groups with
responsibility for SC relationships liaise with local business that already
have contacts in China and Japan. Using the expertise and knowledge gained to
support each other. This can also build strong links for possible sponsorship
arrangements for exchanges and travel.
2.17 There
was a focus on youth throughout the conference with one young intermediate
student telling the story of leaving NZ for the first time. The principal
commented that the growth in self-confidence and pride as an outcome was
rewarding for the school. (Low decile) Ongoing contact is kept up through
regular Skype appointments. I have a full report from the conference that can
be emailed to anyone who has an interest. SCNZ newsletters are also available
from the web site.
To provide advice on funding
requirements for each of the three sister cities to the Council officer
delegated Sister City responsibility by end of February each year, and if
additional funds are required by December.
2.18 Reporting
on the use of 2017 -2018 funds has been made by each organisation. No requests
for additional funds have been reported.
Other matters
2.19 The
International Relationships Policy has been fine-tuned several times and thanks
to the feedback further editorial adjustments have been made. The membership
proposes two additional members.
2.20 A
member of the NZCFS Nelson spoke to me about his efforts to have an access way
in Washington Valley named to honour and recognise his relative, the first
person from China granted New Zealand citizenship – Appo Hocton.
The Sister City Coordinating group would support this proposed name. I
understand the proposal is currently out for consultation with Iwi.
2.21 In
a personal capacity and with the support of Eureka Nelson Sister City
Association I once again submitted on the Brook Reserve Management Plan -
Reclassification and Vesting, highlighting Eureka Park that is part of the
reserve to keep the concept alive to recognise the NCC Sister City relationship
and progress the development.
Author: Gail
Collingwood, Sister City Co-ordinator
Attachments
Nil
