Agenda of Council - 11 May 2021

Council Minutes - 11 March 2021

Karakia Timatanga

1. Apologies

Nil

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 Bernie Goldsmith - Māori ward in the Nelson Electorate

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 11 March 2021 14 - 19

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 11 March 2021, as a true and correct record.

5.2 18 March 2021 19 - 32

Document number M16497

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 18 March 2021, as a true and correct record.

6. Adoption of Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan 33 - 150

Document number R23723

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Adoption of Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan (R23723) and its attachments (A2623408, A2323410 and A2323412); and

2. Notes the submissions on the Draft Plan and the recommendations of the Hearing Panel relating to the Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan, contained in the minutes of the hearings and deliberations meeting held on 10 February 2021 as per Attachment 1 (A2623408) of report R23723; and

3. Agrees to amend the wording of the Draft Plan as per the Hearing Panel recommendations contained in the minutes of the deliberations meeting held on 10 February 2021 (noting that these amendments have been incorporated into the version of the final Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan 2021, as per Attachment 2 (A2323410) of report R23723; and

4. Resolves in accordance with Section 41 of the Reserves Act 1977 and the delegated authority from the Minister of Conservation (dated 12 June 2013) to adopt the Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan 2021 as per Attachment 2 (A2323410) of report R23723; and

5. Authorises Councillor Edgar, along with a Councillor appointed by Tasman District Council, to approve any minor edits or changes to the Plan, prior to publication.

7. COVID 19 Rental Relief 151 - 157

Document number R23740

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report COVID 19 Rental Relief (R23740) and its attachments (A2485949 and A2603581); and

2. Approves 50% rental relief for outdoor dining licensees from 1 March 2021 through to December 2021 while the outdoor dining policy is reviewed; and

3. Directs officers to review the Outdoor Dining Policy before the end of the calendar year.

8. Civic House Refurbishment Business Case 158 - 211

Document number R23752

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Civic House Refurbishment Business Case (R23752) and its attachments (A2618201, A2618347 and A2618407); and

2. Approves, subject to final confirmation of funding through the Long Term Plan 2021-2031, option 1: staged refurbishment of Civic House contained within the Civic House Refurbishment Business Case (A2618201), noting that the scope includes:

- Progressively refurbishing each floor of Civic House over an eight year period;

- Moving the Chamber to the ground floor;

- Providing a Councillor lounge adjacent to the Chamber;

- Providing a consistent, modern staff working environment on each floor with a range of work areas;

- Raising the ground floor of Civic House to mitigate flooding based on a 1% AEP river flood event in 2080;

- Implementing measures to reduce electricity use by 20% and eliminate diesel use by 2030; and

3. Notes that the following renewals will be prioritised ahead of the overall refurbishment due to end of life/safety concerns:

- tower block roof;

- ventilation, heating and boiler systems; and

4. Delegates progress monitoring of the Civic House Refurbishment Project to the Strategic Development and Property Subcommittee, noting that substantive decisions will still be referred directly to the Council.

9. Recommendations from Committees

9.1 Strategic Development and Property Subcommittee - 1 April 2021

9.1.1 Setting marina fees and charges for 2021/22

Recommendation to Council

That the Council

1. Sets the marina fees and charges for 2021/22 as outlined in Attachment 2 (A2541155) to report R22618.

10. Mayor's Report 212 - 215

Document number R24823

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Mayor's Report (R24823); and

2. Amends the membership of the Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit on a permanent basis, effective immediately, as follows:

Chair

Deputy Chair

Membership

No change

~~Brian McGurk~~

Mel Courtney

3. Amends the liaison role on the Waimea Inlet Coordination Group on a permanent basis, effective immediately, as follows:

Councillor Liaison

~~Brian McGurk~~

Kate Fulton

11. Establishment of a Māori Ward for the 2022 Local Government Elections 216 - 226

Document number R22653

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Establishment of a Māori Ward for the 2022 Local Government Elections (R22653); and

2. Rescinds clause 4 of resolution CL/2020/140 made on 22 September 2020:

‘4. Decides not to introduce a Māori Ward;’

3. Establishes a Māori Ward in Whakatū/Nelson for the 2022 local government election, and

4. Notes that a Māori ward must exist within a wider ward-based system; and

5. Requests analysis and options for the 2021 Representation Review include specific focus on communities of interest and options for ward boundaries.

12. Options for Increasing Māori Representation on Committees and Subcommittees 227 - 235

Document number R22652

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Options for Increasing Māori Representation on Committees and Subcommittees (R22652); and

2. Establishes a Māori appointment in each of the following governance bodies of Council:

a. Community and Recreation Committee

b. Infrastructure Committee

c. Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee

d. Forestry Subcommittee

3. Directs Officers to liaise with iwi and seek nominations of an appropriate candidate for each role.

13. Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointees on Council Committees and Subcommittees 236 - 246

Document number R24782

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointees on Council Committees and Subcommittees (R24782) and its attachment (A2337456); and

2. Approves the Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointees on Council Committees and Subcommittees (A2337456).

14. Nelson Future Access - Preferred Programme Public Engagement 247 - 286

Document number R18168

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Nelson Future Access - Preferred Programme Public Engagement (R18168) and its attachments A2631617 and A2632937; and

2. Approves the Nelson Future Access Study Preferred Option as detailed in Attachment A2632937 of Report R18168 as the option to proceed to public engagement.

15. Nelson Regional Development Agency Six Month Report July - December 2020 287 - 305

Document number R24797

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Nelson Regional Development Agency Six Month Report July - December 2020 (R24797) and its attachment (A2617044).

16. Nelmac Limited six monthly report to 31 December 2020 306 - 314

Document number R23733

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Nelmac Limited six monthly report to 31 December 2020 (R23733) and its attachment (A2585117).

CONFIDENTIAL Business

17. Exclusion of the Public

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Confirms, in accordance with sections 48(5) and 48(6) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, that Jane Sheard, CEO of Nelmac Ltd remains after the public has been excluded, for Item 6 of the Confidential agenda (Nelmac Limited Six Monthly Report), as she has knowledge that will assist the meeting.

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Excludes the public from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

2. 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	Council Meeting - Confidential Minutes - 11 March 2021	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) · Section 7(2)(a) To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities
2	Council Meeting - Coinfidential Minutes - 18 March 2021	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)(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)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
3	NCC - TDC Engineering Services Agreement and NCC - TDC Waimea Community Dam Funding Agreement	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	Building Claim mediation update Mediation for claim and terms of settlement	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
5	Mayor’s Report – Update on current matters · Chief Executive’s Review Strategic Development and Property Subcommittee uupdate on: · Strawbridge Square · Haven Precinct · Kinzett Terrace · Tahuna Beach Camp Lease	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)(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	Nelmac six monthly strategic presentation	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
7	Nelmac Limited draft Statement of Intent 2021/22	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)
8	Recommendations from Committees	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

Item

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interests protected (where applicable)

Council Meeting - Confidential Minutes - 11 March 2021

Section 48(1)(a)

The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7.

The withholding of the information is necessary:

· Section 7(2)(i)

To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

· Section 7(2)(a)

To protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of a deceased person

· Section 7(2)(h)

To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities

Council Meeting - Coinfidential Minutes - 18 March 2021

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)(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)(i)

To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

NCC - TDC Engineering Services Agreement and NCC - TDC Waimea Community Dam Funding Agreement

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)

Building Claim mediation update

Mediation for claim and terms of settlement

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

Mayor’s Report – Update on current matters

· Chief Executive’s Review

Strategic Development and Property Subcommittee uupdate on:

· Strawbridge Square

· Haven Precinct

· Kinzett Terrace

· Tahuna Beach Camp Lease

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)(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)

Nelmac six monthly strategic presentation

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

Nelmac Limited draft Statement of Intent 2021/22

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)

Recommendations from Committees

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

Minutes of a meeting of the Nelson City Council

Held via audio-visual link (zoom), and in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson

On Thursday 11 March 2021, commencing at 9.04a.m.

Present: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese (Chairperson), Councillors Y Bowater, M Courtney, J Edgar (Deputy Mayor), K Fulton, M Lawrey, R O'Neill-Stevens, B McGurk, G Noonan, P Rainey, and R Sanson

Present (when reconvened): Councillors T Brand and T Skinner

In Attendance: Chief Executive (P Dougherty), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Environmental Management (C Barton), Group Manager Community Services (A White), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Group Manager Strategy and Communications (N McDonald), Governance Adviser (E-J Ruthven), Governance Support (P Boutle), and Youth Councillors (R Armstrong and D Lawrey)

Apologies : Nil

The meeting convened via audio-visual link (zoom), in accordance with the Epidemic Preparedness (COVID-19) Notice 2020 Renewal Notice (No 3) 2020, as Civic House was unable to be accessed at the advertised meeting start time.

18. Apologies

There were no apologies.

19. Confirmation of Order of Business

Her Worship the Mayor advised that there would be a public forum presentation, however this would be delayed until Civic House was able to be accessed.

The meeting was adjourned via audio-visual link at 9.06a.m, during which time Councillor Fulton left the meeting.

The meeting was reconvened in person in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, at 10.00a.m.

Attendance: Councillor Skinner joined the meeting at 10.00a.m.

There was a karakia timatanga.

20. Interests

The following updates to the Interests Register were made:

· Councillor Edgar advised she had been appointed to the Nelson Tasman Regional Hospice; and

· Her Worship the Mayor advised she had stepped down from the Interim Regional Skills Leadership Group for Nelson Tasman.

No interests with items on the agenda were declared.

Attendance: Councillor Brand joined the meeting at 10.03a.m.

21. Public Forum

4.1 Tahunanui Business and Citizens Association

John Gilbertson of the Tahunanui Business and Citizens Association, and Barbara Bowen, Principal of Tahunanui School, gave a presentation. They were supported by Ainslie Riddoch and David Pattinson.

Attendance: Councillor Fulton returned to the meeting at 10.07a.m.

Mr Gilbertson and Ms Bowen expressed their concerns regarding Council’s communications in relation to the Regional Public Transport Plan currently out for consultation. They noted that the impact on Tahunanui bus routes had not been highlighted in communications, and the changes were not well understood by businesses and residents of Tahunanui.

They suggested that, in future, consultation documents contain a key words list to assist with understanding proposed changes, public meetings be arranged in affected suburbs, and a database of key stakeholders in each suburb updated to assist with communicating proposed changes. They also suggested easier access to hard copy documents for residents who did not use online media.

A copy of the group’s speaking notes was tabled (A2591411).

Attachments

1 A2591411 - Public forum notes

22. Mayor's Report

Her Worship the Mayor advised that, given the delays to the meeting relating to access to Civic House, this item would be withdrawn from the agenda.

The meeting was adjourned from 10.22a.m. to 10.50a.m.

23. Elected Members' Reimbursement and Expenses Policy

Document number R15881, agenda pages 6 - 18 refer.

Team Leader Governance, Robyn Byrne, and Manager Governance and Support Services, Devi Nícuarta-Smith, presented the report. Ms Byrne noted that clause 6.3 of the Policy would be clarified to state that requests for a lump sum communications allowance at the start the financial year in an election year would be paid on a pro rata basis. Ms Byrne and Ms Nícuarta-Smith answered questions regarding the manner in which event attendance was reported back under clause 10.5 of the Policy, reasonable costs of transport between elected members’ homes and the Airport, and the potential for the Policy to be amended in the future should Council provide devices for elected member use.
Resolved CL/2021/015
	*That the Council* *1. Receives the report Elected Members' Reimbursement and Expenses Policy (R15881) and its attachment (A1546381); and* *2. Approves the updated Elected Members’ Reimbursement and Expenses Policy (A1546381); and* 3. Submits the Elected Members’ Reimbursement and Expenses Policy (A1546381) to the Remuneration Authority for review.
McGurk/Edgar Carried

24. Elected Member Travel and Training Budget and Criteria

Document number R21376, agenda pages 19 - 27 refer.

Team Leader Governance, Robyn Byrne, and Manager Governance and Support Services, Devi Nícuarta-Smith, presented the report and answered questions regarding the allocation of induction training costs.
Resolved CL/2021/016
	*That the Council* *1. Receives the report Elected Member Travel and Training Budget and Criteria (R21376) and its attachment (A1743623); and* *2. Approves the updated Elected Member Travel and Training Budget and Criteria* *(A1743623); and* 3. Confirms the individual councillor travel and training budget at $5,000 for the 2019 - 2022 triennium as outlined in 6.5 of this Report (R21376).
Noonan/Brand Carried

25. Exclusion of the Public

Resolved CL/2021/017

That the Council

3. Excludes the public from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

4. 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:

Rainey/McGurk 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	Community Housing settlement	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	Roading properties	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)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities

Item

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Particular interests protected (where applicable)

Community Housing settlement

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)

Roading properties

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)(h)

To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities

The meeting went into confidential session at 11.12am and resumed in public session at 12.02p.m..

Karakia Whakamutunga

A karakia whakamutunga was given.

Restatements

It was resolved while the public was excluded:

Recommendations from Committees

CONFIDENTIAL: Community Housing settlement

That the Council

1. Agrees that Report (R22684), and the decision remain confidential at this time.

CONFIDENTIAL: Roading properties

That the Council

1. Agrees that Report (R10199), Attachments (A2204394, A2188776 and A2188779) and the decision not be released from public excluded business at this time.

There being no further business the meeting ended at 12.04p.m.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Council Minutes - 18 March 2021

Minutes of a meeting of the Nelson City Council

Held in the Council Chamber, Civic House, 110 Trafalgar Street, Nelson

On Thursday 18 March 2021, commencing at 9.04a.m.

Present: Her Worship the Mayor R Reese (Chairperson), Councillors Y Bowater, T Brand, M Courtney, J Edgar (Deputy Mayor), K Fulton, M Lawrey, R O'Neill-Stevens, B McGurk, G Noonan, P Rainey, R Sanson and T Skinner

In Attendance: Chief Executive (P Dougherty), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Environmental Management (C Barton), Group Manager Community Services (A White), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Group Manager Strategy and Communications (N McDonald), Team Leader Governance (R Byrne), Governance Adviser (E Stephenson) and Youth Councillors (T Wheatley and S Herath)

Karakia Timatanga

Attendance: Councillor Lawrey entered the meeting at 9.06a.m.

1. Apologies

There were no apologies.

2. Confirmation of Order of Business

Agenda Item 9 - The Adoption of the Consultation Document for the Long Term Plan 2021-31 and Related Documents was considered after Item 6 - Recommendations from Committees.

3. Interests

There were no updates to the Interests Register, and no interests with items on the agenda were declared.

4. Public Forum

There was no public forum.

5. Confirmation of Minutes

5.1 18 February 2021

Document number M15422, agenda pages 10 - 21 refer.

Resolved CL/2021/025

That the Council

1. Confirms the minutes of the meeting of the Council, held on 18 February 2021, as a true and correct record.

Her Worship the Mayor/Skinner Carried

6. Recommendations from Committees

6.1 Environment and Climate Committee 17 February 2021

6.1.1 Biosecurity Annual Review

Resolved CL/2021/026

That the Council

1. Approves the Operational Plan 2020-21 for the Tasman-Nelson Regional Pest Management Plan (A2486628), specifically as it relates to Nelson City Council’s area.

Fulton/McGurk Carried

6.2 Community and Recreation Committee - 4 March 2021

6.2.1 Community and Recreation Fees and Charges 2021/22 and removal of Rates Remission for Cemeteries

Resolved CL/2021/027

That the Council

1. Agrees to consult on the removal of the Rates Remission Policy for cemeteries; and

2. Agrees the cemeteries remission changes to be consulted on within the Consultation Document to the Long Term Plan 2021-31.

Skinner/Edgar Carried

7. Adoption of the Consultation Document for the Long Term Plan 2021-31 and Related Documents (Agenda Item 9)

Document number R22525, agenda pages 30 - 446 refer.

The following documents were tabled:

1 A2596349 – Long Term Plan (LTP) Consultation Document Audit opinion

2 A2562891 - Updated Funding Impact Statement

3 A2563695 - Updated tracked changes LTP text Consultation Document

4 A2597949 - Working Copy Design Consultation Document

5 A2596173 - Appendix of changes to supporting information for LTP Consultation Document

John Mackey, Audit Director, Audit New Zealand (NZ), spoke to the tabled Audit NZ opinion (A2596349) via Zoom. It was confirmed that no Elected Members were aware of any actual or suspected fraud, which is a requirement of the Auditing Standards. Mr Mackey answered questions regarding the Audit NZ opinion.

Group Manager Corporate Services, Nikki Harrison, Group Manager Strategy and Communication, Nicky McDonald and Senior Policy Adviser, Michelle Joubert provided the rationale for the changes made to the draft Consultation Document and supporting information since the publication of the agenda, which were listed in full in the Appendix of changes to supporting information for the LTP 2021 – 31 (LTP) Consultation Document (CD) (A2595173). Ms Harrison, Ms McDonald and Ms Joubert answered questions regarding the changes and the LTP process.

The meeting was adjourned from 9.44a.m. until 9.55a.m., during which time Councillor Skinner left the meeting.

Attendance: Councillor Skinner returned to the meeting at 10.01a.m.

Questions and discussion continued.

The meeting was adjourned from 10.56a.m. until 11.15a.m.

Questions and discussion continued.

The meeting was adjourned from 12.26p.m. until 1.09p.m., during which time Councillors Edgar, Fulton, Lawrey, Noonan and Skinner left the meeting.

Councillor Lawrey returned to the meeting at 1.10p.m. and Councillors Skinner and Edgar returned to the meeting at 1.11p.m. Councillor Noonan returned to the meeting at 1.23p.m. and Councillor Fulton returned to the meeting at 1.26p.m.

During the detailed questions and discussion on the proposed changes to supporting information, further amendments were suggested, and any additional changes agreed during the meeting have been incorporated into Minutes Attachment 3 - A2563695 - Updated tracked changes LTP text Consultation Document (available in the Minutes Attachment document).

The recommendations were amended to reflect the adoption of the tabled documents and the amendments agreed at the meeting and an additional clause (6) to receive the Audit Opinion from Audit NZ was added.

The motion was taken in parts.

Her Worship the Mayor / Councillor Edgar

That the Council

1. Receives the report Adoption of the Consultation Document for the Long Term Plan 2021-31 and Related Documents (R22525) and its attachments (A2563695, A2573241, A2558353, A2562891, A2258406, A2508977, A2546062, A2364365, A2533099, A2554237, A2380354, A2587614, A2463444 and A2496998).

Carried

Her Worship the Mayor / Councillor Edgar

That the Council

2. Resolves that setting an unbalanced budget for years 2022/23 and 2023/24 of the Long Term Plan is prudent in terms of section 100 of the Local Government Act 2002 given the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, on the local economy and its ratepayers, having had regard to the matters in section 100(2) of the Local Government Act 2002.

Carried

During debate, Points of Order were raised and upheld as follows:

Councillor Rainey against Councillor Courtney for irrelevance; and

Her Worship the Mayor against Councillor Courtney for disrespectful language.

Following debate, the remaining parts of the motion were put.

Her Worship the Mayor / Councillor Edgar

3. Adopts the following documents, including tabled documents and amendments made at the meeting, as supporting information for Nelson’s Long Term Plan Consultation Document as required by section 93G of the Local Government Act 2002:

· Community Outcomes (A2573241)

· Financial Statements (Accounting Information) (A2558353)

· Funding Impact Statement (A2562891)

· Treasury Management Policy (A2258406)

· Forecasting Assumptions (A2508977)

· Activity Summaries (A2546062)

· Infrastructure Strategy (A2364365)

· Financial Strategy (A2533099)

· Statement on Fostering Māori Participation in Decision Making (A2554237)

· Population Growth and Demographics report (A2380354)

· Supporting information for a New Company Model for Nelson Airport and Port Nelson – (A2587614); and

4. Adopts the following for concurrent consultation under the provisions of s82 of the Local Government Act 2002 having considered all the reasonably practicable options:

· Rates Remission Policy (A2463444)

· Revenue and Financing Policy (A2496998).

Carried

Her Worship the Mayor / Councillor Edgar

That the Council

5. Agrees that having considered the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy and the importance of other matters to the Nelson Region and its communities, that the key issues and choices facing Council and the Nelson Region are included in the Consultation Document (A2563695).

Carried

Her Worship the Mayor / Councillor Edgar

That the Council

6. Receives the Audit Opinion from Audit New Zealand for inclusion in the Consultation Document.

Carried

Her Worship the Mayor / Councillor Edgar

That the Council

7. Adopts the updated Long Term Plan 2021-31 Consultation Document (A2563695), including tabled documents and amendments made at the meeting, for release as the basis for community consultation in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002; and

8. Agrees that the consultation approach (in paragraphs 5.12 to 5.15) includes sufficient steps to ensure the consultation process will be sufficiently accessible to the public and will be as widely publicised as reasonably practicable and in a manner appropriate to its purpose and significance; and

9. Delegates the Mayor and Chief Executive to make any necessary minor editorial amendments prior to the documents being released for public consultation.

Carried

Her Worship the Mayor acknowledged the importance of engagement and thanked Elected Members, John Mackey of Audit NZ, Council’s Chief Executive, Pat Dougherty and Council officers for their work on the LTP Consultation documents.

For clarity the full resolutions relating to the adoption of the LTP 2021 -31 Consultation document and related supporting information are below.

Resolved CL/2021/028
	*That the Council* 1. Receives the report Adoption of the Consultation Document for the Long Term Plan 2021-31 and Related Documents (R22525) and its attachments (A2563695, A2573241, A2558353, A2562891, A2258406, A2508977, A2546062, A2364365, A2533099, A2554237, A2380354, A2587614, A2463444 and A2496998); and 2. *Resolves* that setting an unbalanced budget for years 2022/23 and 2023/24 of the Long Term Plan is prudent in terms of section 100 of the Local Government Act 2002 given the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, on the local economy and its ratepayers, having had regard to the matters in section 100(2) of the Local Government Act 2002; and 3. Adopts the following documents, including tabled documents and amendments made at the meeting, as supporting information for Nelson’s Long Term Plan Consultation Document as required by section 93G of the Local Government Act 2002: · *Community Outcomes (A2573241)* · *Financial Statements (Accounting Information) (A2558353)* · *Funding Impact Statement (tabled) (A2562891)* · *Treasury Management Policy (A2258406)* · *Forecasting Assumptions (A2508977)* · *Activity Summaries (A2546062)* · *Infrastructure Strategy (A2364365)* · *Financial Strategy (A2533099)* · *Statement on Fostering Māori Participation in Decision Making (A2554237)* · *Population Growth and Demographics report (A2380354)* · *Supporting information for a New Company Model for Nelson Airport and Port Nelson – (A2587614); and* *4. Adopts the following for concurrent consultation under the provisions of s82 of the Local Government Act 2002 having considered all the reasonably practicable options:* · *Rates Remission Policy (A2463444)* · *Revenue and Financing Policy (A2496998); and* 5. Agrees that having considered the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy and the importance of other matters to the Nelson Region and its communities, that the key issues and choices facing Council and the Nelson Region are included in the Consultation Document (A2563695); and *6. Receives the Audit Opinion from Audit New Zealand for inclusion in the Consultation Document; and* 7. Adopts the updated Long Term Plan 2021-31 Consultation Document (A2563695), including tabled documents and amendments made at the meeting, for release as the basis for community consultation in accordance with the provisions of the Local Government Act 2002; and 8. Agrees that the consultation approach (in paragraphs 5.12 to 5.15) includes sufficient steps to ensure the consultation process will be sufficiently accessible to the public and will be as widely publicised as reasonably practicable and in a manner appropriate to its purpose and significance; and *9. Delegates the Mayor and Chief Executive to make any necessary minor editorial amendments prior to the documents being released for public consultation.*
Her Worship the Mayor/Edgar Carried
Attachments 1 A2596349 - LTP Consultation Document Audit opinion 2 A2562891 Updated Funding Impact Statement 3 A2563695 Updated tracked changes LTP text Consultation Document 4 A2597949 - Working Copy Design Consultation Document 5 A2596173 - Appendix of changes to supporting information for LTP Consultation Document

The meeting was adjourned from 2.39p.m. until 2.47p.m., during which time Her Worship the Mayor and Councillor Fulton left the meeting. The Deputy Mayor, Councillor Edgar, assumed the Chair at 2.47p.m.

Extension of Meeting Time
Resolved CL/2021/029
	*That the Council* *1. Extends the meeting time beyond six hours, pursuant to Standing Order 4.2.*
Bowater/Noonan Carried

Attendance: Councillor Fulton returned to the meeting at 2.49p.m.

8. Review of the Development Contributions Policy 2018 (Agenda Item 10)

Document number R22680, agenda pages 447 - 549 refer.

Team Leader City Development, Lisa Gibellini and Strategy and Environment Senior Analyst, Chris Pawson, noted an amendment to agenda page 543 – Proposed Significant Changes to the Policy -:

The proposed significant changes to the Development Contributions ~~and Financial Contributions Policy~~ 2018…

Ms Gibellini and Mr Pawson answered questions regarding incentives and exemptions. It was noted that a future report addressing a range of incentivisation levers would be provided.

It was agreed that the following amendment on agenda page 484 - 7.9 - Other exemptions - be made:

An application for an exemption ~~must~~ should be made to the Group Manager Environmental Management prior to an invoice being issued.

Resolved CL/2021/030

That the Council

1. Receives the report Review of the Development Contributions Policy 2018 (R22680) and its attachments (A2538607 and A2502141); and

2. Adopts the draft Development Contributions Policy 2021 and consultation document, as amended at the meeting, for consultation alongside the Long Term Plan 2021-2031 consultation process; and

3. Approves the consultation approach (set out in paragraph 8) and agrees:

(a) the plan includes sufficient steps to ensure the Consultation Document will be reasonably accessible to the public and will be publicised in a manner appropriate to its purpose and significance; and

(b) the plan will result in the Consultation Document being as widely publicised as is reasonably practicable as a basis for consultation.

McGurk/Rainey Carried

The meeting was adjourned from 3.09p.m. until 3.11p.m., at which time the Mayor resumed the Chair.

9. Mayor's Report (Agenda Item 7)

Document number R22721, agenda pages 22 - 27 refer.

Her Worship the Mayor noted that the addendum to her Mayor’s Report was the foreword to the LTP 2021 – 31 Consultation Document and spoke to her report.

Resolved CL/2021/031

That the Council

1. Receives the report Mayor's Report (R22721) and its attachment (A2585869).

Her Worship the Mayor/Bowater Carried

10. Council Status Report - 18 March 2021 (Agenda Item 8)

Document number R22716, agenda pages 28 - 29 refer.

Resolved CL/2021/032

That the Council

1. Receives the report Council Status Report - 18 March 2021 (R22716).

Her Worship the Mayor/Skinner Carried

11. Saltwater Creek Bridge - Gift to the Brook Waimārama Sanctuary Trust

Document number R22596, agenda pages 550 - 555 refer.

Principal Parks and Facilities Activity Planner, Andrew Petheram, answered a question regarding the timeframe for the removal of the bridge.

Resolved CL/2021/033

That the Council

1. Receives the report Saltwater Creek Bridge - Gift to the Brook Waimārama Sanctuary Trust (R22596) and its attachment (A2565116); and

2. Approves the gifting of the old Saltwater Creek Bridge to the Brook Waimārama Sanctuary Trust for installation at the Sanctuary at no charge, subject to the trust undertaking at its own expense the following matters:

a) Collection from the Marina;

b) Transportation to the Sanctuary;

c) Obtaining all consents and permits necessary;

d) Refurbishment;

e) Installation;

f) Ongoing maintenance; and

3. Agrees that the old Saltwater Creek Bridge is included as an asset of the Brook Waimārama Sanctuary Trust and appended to its lease agreement with the Council.

Bowater/Skinner Carried

12. Exclusion of the Public

Resolved CL/2021/034

That the Council

1. Excludes the public from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

Skinner/Fulton 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	Council Meeting - Public Excluded Minutes - 18 February 2021	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 · Section 7(2)(h) To enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities
3	Economic development outcomes and strategic priorities for the Nelson Regional Development Agency Letter of Expectation	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
4	Council Confidential Status Report - 18 March 2021	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)(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)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

The meeting went into confidential session at 3.30p.m. and resumed in public session at 4.07p.m., at which time the meeting was adjourned until 4.12p.m.

A request was made that the minutes note that matters in relation to the Science and Technology Precinct involving the Cawthron Institute (included in the Confidential Status Report) could now be made publicly available, and that officers were working on releasing the information on to Council’s Decisions Released from Confidential Session webpage. Councillor Brand was thanked for highlighting this point.

Karakia Whakamutunga

Her Worship the Mayor gave a closing karakia.

Restatements

It was resolved while the public was excluded:

CONFIDENTIAL: Economic development outcomes and strategic priorities for the Nelson Regional Development Agency Letter of Expectation

That the Council

5. Agrees that Report (R22517), Attachment (A2571970) and the decision remain confidential at this time.

There being no further business the meeting ended at 4.14p.m.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings:

Chairperson Date

Item 6: Adoption of Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan

Council

11 May 2021

REPORT R23723

Adoption of Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider the recommendations of the Hearing Panel appointed to hear submissions on the Draft Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan, and to adopt the amended Plan (Attachment 2, A2623410) as the final Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan 2021. A similar report is being considered by Tasman District Council.

2. Summary

2.1 A Hearing Panel heard and deliberated on the submissions on the draft Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan. While there was general support in the submissions for the content of the Draft Plan, some submitters requested changes to some wording and policies in the document. The Hearing Panel recommended a number of changes and the resulting draft Plan is being presented to both councils for adoption.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Adoption of Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan (R23723) and its attachments (A2623408, A2323410 and A2323412); and

5. Authorises Councillor Edgar, along with a Councillor appointed by Tasman District Council, to approve any minor edits or changes to the Plan, prior to publication.

4. Background

4.1 The current management plan for Saxton Field was adopted by Nelson City Council on 28 August 2008 and by Tasman District Council on 17 September 2008.

4.2 The intent to prepare the revised Plan was advertised on 1 November 2019. 120 groups and individuals provided initial feedback. Earlier workshops with sport clubs established a set of objectives and a draft vision for the revised Plan.

4.3 All Te Tau Ihu iwi were directly contacted in October 2019. Most wished to be only kept advised of progress, but Ngāti Koata, Ngāti Tama and Ngāti Rārua delegated input to Frank Hippolite, and a meeting was held with Te Atiawa. Mr Hippolite made contributions to the preparation of the first and second drafts of the Plan. The first draft was forwarded to Te Tau Ihi iwi in March 2020 and the second draft in July. The pre-release draft was sent to all Te Tau Ihu iwi in October 2020 with editorial input made by Te Atiawa.

4.4 The first draft of the Plan was prepared in May 2020 and reviewed by staff from both councils and the Saxton Field Committee. The second draft was considered by the Saxton Field Committee at a workshop on 4 September. The Draft Plan was approved by the Saxton Field Committee on 18 September 2020 for public release. The Draft Plan was released for public submissions on 8 October 2020, with 13 submissions received by 10 December 2020 closing date. Two submitters wished to be heard (Sport Tasman and Nelson Marlborough District Health Board).

4.5 A Hearing Panel comprising the Saxton Field Committee members and a Mātauranga Māori expert, Aroha Gilling, heard the submissions and deliberated on them. Hearings and deliberations took place on 10 February 2021.

4.6 There was general support in the submissions for the content of the Draft Plan. There were some issues and proposals raised in submissions, and some specific policies that submitters wanted amended. An analysis of the submissions is contained in Attachment 3, along with the staff recommendations provided to the Hearing Panel deliberations meeting in relation to the submissions. The full submissions can be viewed in the attachments to the Submission Hearing report (RSH21-02-1) for the 10 February hearing and deliberations meeting or can be requested from staff.

4.7 The Hearing Panel considered and deliberated on all the submissions, and recommended a number of changes to the content of the Draft Plan. The minutes of the deliberation meeting (Attachment 1) outline the Panel’s recommended changes. Following the deliberations, staff have amended the Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan in accordance with the Panel’s directions and recommended changes. The Hearing Panel delegated checking of the amended plan to Derek Shaw (Chair, Saxton Field Committee and Hearing Panel member) and Judene Edgar (Nelson City Council Deputy Mayor, Saxton Field Committee member and Hearing Panel member). They have reviewed the amended plan. A copy of the amended Plan (Attachment 2) is now being presented to the two councils for adoption as the final Plan.

4.8 The Reserve Management Plan will be updated to include the new Saxton Field branding prior to being published on the website.

5. Discussion

Key amendments made to the Draft Plan resulting from Hearing Panel deliberations

5.1 A copy of the amended Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan is contained in Attachment 2. A tracked-change version of the amended Plan is available on request.

5.2 The main changes incorporated into the amended Plan (i.e. that differ from those proposed in the Draft Plan) are summarised below:

5.2.1 changes to reflect that the plan has been finalised including removing references to the “Draft” Plan, removing references to calling for submissions through the consultation process and making additions noting the submission and hearing processes;

5.2.2 adding into the Vision section of the Plan that the development and use of Saxton Field will encourage behaviours that uphold and enhance the mana of the Saxton Field whenua and wai and a method requiring an audit of access provisions for those with limited mobility;

5.2.3 adding into the commercial activities and signage section of the Plan a note that the Saxton Field Committee will develop guidelines to assist with design and location decisions for commercial signs, particularly for internal facing signage;

5.2.4 adding into the commercial sponsorship and signage section of the Plan a reference to the Major Events Management Act 2007 requirements in relation to signage for declared major events;

5.2.5 adding conditions into the use and occupation agreements section of the Plan the types of conditions that would need to be applied to approvals for camping activities based on the conditions imposed for the Bay Dreams event;

5.2.6 making changes to the alcohol policies and methods and the smoke and vape free policies and methods to reflect the changes required by the Hearing Panel in relation to the submission by the Nelson Marlborough District Health Board;

5.2.7 making changes in the Development of New Built Features and Facilities section of the Plan noting the expectation that any code or organisation applying for a new or enhanced facility at Saxton Field will have considered Sport New Zealand’s National Sporting Facilities Framework, relevant National Sport Organisation facility strategies, the Regional Facilities Strategy and the latest regional sports and recreation facility plans, and the need for any funding of regional facilities to be considered by the joint councils’ Regional Funding Forum (or other committee formed for that purpose);

5.2.8 adding into the buildings and structures section of the Plan the expectation that the sporting/recreational codes who wish to construct new facilities will have to fundraise at least 20% of the costs of those facilities with the councils contributing the remaining amount;

5.2.9 adding in the buildings and structures policies and methods section of the Plan that the councils may support existing users where they identify the need to develop amenities which provide shade, water and other community safety and comfort requirements;

5.2.10 amending Appendix 7 of the Plan to summarise the various community feedback and consultation processes undertaken during the preparation of the Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan 2021.

6. Options

6.1 At the 10 February 2021 deliberations meeting, the Hearing Panel considered all the submissions received on the Draft Plan. The Panel also formed recommendations on how the Draft Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan should be amended in response to submission points that they accepted in full or in part. The Hearing Panel recommendations are summarised in section 5 of this report and further details are included within the minutes of the deliberations meeting.

6.2 The Hearing Panel recommendations of 10 February have been given effect to in the wording of the amended Plan. Council is being asked to consider and then adopt this amended Plan as the final Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan.

6.3 Three options exist for Council as follows:

6.3.1 Option 1 - Agree to all of the changes recommended by the Hearing Panel and adopt the amended Plan (contained in Attachment 2) as the final Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan. This is the option recommended by staff.

6.3.2 Option 2 - Agree to some of the changes recommended by the Hearing Panel, reject other changes and/or make further amendments to the Plan text before finalising and adopting the Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan.

6.3.3 Option 3 - Adopt the Draft Plan prepared for community engagement as the final Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan without amendment, other than the amendments necessary to change the Plan from a “draft” to a “final” Plan.

6.4 The advantages of Option 1 are that it shows that submitter views have been considered by the Hearing Panel and, where appropriate, amendments have been made to Plan. The disadvantage is that not every submission point has been accepted. Some submitters may therefore be disappointed that their suggestions were not given effect to in the amended Plan. However, this is part of the public submission process and not all suggestions will be appropriate or can be adopted.

6.5 Option 2 has similar advantages and disadvantages to Option 1. An additional advantage is that it would enable Council to make amendments to the Plan before it is finalised if not all of the Hearing Panel’s recommendations are accepted. Any amendments made by this Council will also need to be agreed to by Tasman District Council.

6.6 The disadvantage of Option 3 is that it ignores all the submissions received and the councils will be open to criticism for not listening to the community’s views through the public consultation process. There are no advantages to this option.

7. Conclusion

7.1 An extensive public consultation process has been undertaken, initially seeking ideas for inclusion in a Draft Plan, and then hearing and deliberating on written and oral submissions on the Draft Plan which was publicly notified on 8 October 2020.

7.2 The Hearing Panel recommended that the two councils adopt the amended Plan, which incorporates amendments made in response to matters raised by submitters. This is also recommended by staff.

8. Next Steps

8.1 The final Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan will come into effect following adoption by the two councils.

8.2 Staff will publish the final Plan on both councils’ websites, distribute copies of the final Plan as required under the Reserves Act 1977, and make hard copies available in both councils’ offices and libraries.

8.3 Staff will also respond to all submitters in writing, advising them of the two councils’ decisions on the matters they raised.

Author: Jane Loughnan, Parks and Facilities Asset Planner

Attachments

Attachment 1: Minutes of the hearing and deliberations meeting - 10Feb2021 (A2623408) ⇩

Attachment 2: Final Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan (A2623410) ⇩

Attachment 3: Summary of submissions to the Saxton Field consultation (A2623412) ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The appropriate use and development of Saxton Field governed by this Plan contributes to the social, cultural, environmental and economic well-being of the Nelson/Tasman regional community by providing a facility that enables the community to participate in activities that enhance wellbeing, including both informal and formal recreation and promoting events to the region which bring economic benefit. The green space and trees provided at Saxton Field and the improved planting around the stream delivers environmental benefits.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan aligns with the Community Outcomes that:

· Our communities have access to a range of social, educational and recreational facilities and activities

· Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and community engagement

3. Risk

There is minimal risk to the councils of adopting the amended Plan as the final Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan, as it takes into consideration the submissions received on the Draft Plan and the recommendations of the Hearing Panel. While some submitters may be concerned that not all of their suggestions were incorporated into the amended Plan, there has been general support for the direction and content in the Plan.

4. Financial impact

The costs of preparing this Plan have been shared between the two councils and covered within the relevant operating budgets.

There will be costs associated with implementing aspects of the Plan. The draft Long Term Plans of both councils include provision for managing and developing Saxton Field in accordance with this Plan.

By adopting this Plan, the councils are not committing to funding all projects identified in the Plan, or to fund them by a particular date.

Adopting the Plan will not in itself have an impact on debt and rates. Budget allocation decisions will be made separately, as part of future annual and long-term plan processes.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

The Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan is moderately significant for our regional community as it impacts on their use and enjoyment of the reserve. The community engagement and consultation procedures followed during the preparation of this Plan enabled the public to provide the councils with their views on the Plan, and the processes meet the statutory requirement of the Reserves Act 1977.

6. Climate Impact

The Plan provides for environmental enhancements which are likely to have a positive impact on the climate.

In relation to sustainability and climate change, the Plan has expectations on efficient use of resources and reducing environmental footprints and has policies and methods that address this, including around new builds being designed and constructed with sustainability principles, and the use of public and active transport.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Engagement with iwi has been undertaken in preparing this Plan.

8. Delegations

The Saxton Field Committee has the following delegations to consider the adoption of the Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan

Areas of Responsibility:

· Considering proposals for reserve development

· Promotion and marketing of Saxton Field as a regional venue

· Capital development of Saxton Field

· Developing a naming and signage policy and considering requests under this policy

· Considering applications for leases and licenses

· Activities, developments and management actions provided for in the adopted Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan and associated policies

· Developing a work programme including any community consultation required.

Delegations:

· Approval of the draft Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan for public consultation, to undertake the public consultation process and to be the Hearings Panel to hear and deliberate on the submissions for the draft Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan

Powers to Recommend (if applicable):

· Reserve policies for approval including the Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan and any Development Plan

As a result, this matter has been recommended from the Saxton Field Committee to Council for adoption. Council has the delegation to adopt the Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan and any Development Plan.

Item 6: Adoption of Saxton Field Reserve Management Plan: Attachment 2

PDF Creator

Item 7: COVID 19 Rental Relief

Council

11 May 2021

REPORT R23740

COVID 19 Rental Relief

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider the request for rental relief for outdoor dining license holders due to the ongoing impact of COVID-19.

2. Summary

2.1 Outdoor license holders have requested an extension of the rent relief provided in 2020 due to COVIC-19 impacts. No evidence has been provided by businesses to substantiate an ongoing impact over summer. Officers recommend rent relief over winter instead and that the situation of street stalls and concession holders be considered on a case by case basis.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report COVID 19 Rental Relief (R23740) and its attachments (A2485949 and A2603581); and

2. Approves 50% rental relief for outdoor dining licensees from 1 March 2021 through to December 2021 while the outdoor dining policy is reviewed; and

3. Directs officers to review the Outdoor Dining Policy before the end of the calendar year.

4. Background

4.1 Rent relief was provided to outdoor license holders from April 2020 through to 1 December 2020 due to the impacts of COVID-19. The amount of rental relief was $108,000 over the 8 month period ($67,500 in the current financial year).

4.2 Outdoor license holders requested ongoing rent relief over the summer of 2020/21 due to the borders still being shut.

4.3 As the impact was unknown and there was evidence that there would be more domestic travel, it was agreed that the invoices for December 2020 and January 2021 would be deferred and issued in February and if the impact on businesses was material Council would engage with license holders on what further support could be offered (Attachment 1).

5. Discussion

5.1 Hospitality NZ Nelson Branch is reporting that turnover is down between 20% and 40% on the previous summer and has requested further rental relief (Attachment 2). The businesses are unwilling to provide financial data to support the request, even confidentially to the Group Manager Corporate Services at their respective accountant’s offices.

5.2 When considering other ad hoc rental relief requests from businesses and groups, it is current practice to seek financial data to support the request, as the appropriate level of prudence and due diligence when dealing with ratepayer funds. This information would be expected from their landlords and banks if the businesses were seeking rental relief or financial assistance from that quarter. Officers have also requested information on other support received ie rental relief from landlord, government assistance etc but that has not been provided.

5.3 Officers met with Upper Trafalgar Street outdoor dining license holders on the 4^th February 2021 and the group highlighted a number of issues particularly with Upper Trafalgar Street:

5.3.1 Affordability of outdoor dining licenses – verbally requested rental relief through to 1 December 2021

5.3.2 Timing of the review of the Outdoor Dining Policy and the impact of seasonality

5.3.3 Maintenance of the existing Council infrastructure

5.3.4 Impact of next phase of the Upper Trafalgar Street upgrades

5.4 In the 2020/21 Annual Plan a provision of $1.1 million was made for COVID 19 impacts on leases and licenses. Currently $155,000 has been approved by the Chief Executive with a couple of requests outstanding.

5.5 There are 52 outdoor dining licenses, either on the footpath or carparks which generate about $162,000 per annum. There is a summer and winter rate but at the request of license holders rents are averaged over the year and paid monthly. Most of the amounts are low however there are three in Upper Trafalgar Street over $10,000 per annum. The values are based on the income lost from parking forgone to outdoor dining, a calculation that is no longer valid given the pedestrian mall declaration.

5.6 Although a number of license holders (mainly in the Upper Trafalgar Street area) have cancelled their monthly rent direct debits, most license holders have paid for the December to February 2020/21 summer period and are now back on monthly payments from March 2021.

5.7 If the Council was of a mind to consider further rent relief, there is a question about whether ongoing support should be given to other parties such as street stalls (of which there are currently 11 generating $35,000 per annum) and concession holders (9 generating $14,000 per annum). Officers recommend continuing to consider rent relief for these parties on a case by case basis.

5.8 Officers are working on the review of the Outdoor Dining Policy with a view to having a new regime in place for next summer.

5.9 Upper Trafalgar Street permanent pedestrian mall works are to begin imminently, extending over an eight week period with a planned completion before June. These works involve some disruption and rearrangement of outdoor dining areas in Upper Trafalgar Street, before the benefits of lighting can be achieved to assist activation of the space in winter. This is a significant investment by Council which, while benefitting the whole community, will advantage Upper Trafalgar Street businesses more than other outdoor dining license holders.

5.10 Officers recommend a balanced approach of not providing any summer rent relief (December 2020 to 1 March 2021) but providing 50% rent relief from 1 March through to 1 December 2021 while the Outdoor Dining Policy is reviewed.

6. Options

Option 1: Do not provide any summer rent relief (December 2020 to 1 March 2021) but provide 50% rent relief from 1 March through to 1 December 2021 (preferred option)
Advantages	· Recognises the ongoing impact of COVID-19 on the tourism sector
Risks and Disadvantages	· Additional cost to Council of $61,000 over current year and 2021/22
Option 2: Do not provide any summer rent relief (December 2020 to 1 March 2021) but provide 100% rent relief from 1 March through to 1 December 2021
Advantages	· Recognises the ongoing impact of COVID-19 on the tourism sector
Risks and Disadvantages	· Additional cost to Council of $121,000 over current year and 2021/22
Option 3: Provide 50% summer rent relief (December 2020 to March 2021) and provide 100% rent relief from 1 March through to 1 December 2021
Advantages	· Recognises the ongoing impact of COVID-19 on the tourism sector
Risks and Disadvantages	· Additional cost to Council of $141,000
Option 4: Do not provide any rent relief for outdoor dining licenses
Advantages	· Least cost to council · Consistent with treatment of other adhoc rent relief requests (providing financials)
Risks and Disadvantages	· License holders may give up license areas, particularly over the winter months to save rental

7. Conclusion

7.1 Rental relief was provided to outdoor license holders from April 2020 through to 1 December 2020 due to the impacts of COVID-19.

7.2 Officers do not support providing rental relief to outdoor dining licenses for the summer 2020/21 period but consider it may be appropriate to provide rent relief through the winter of 2021 due to the ongoing impacts of COVID-19.

8. Next Steps

8.1 Officers will review the Outdoor Dining Policy prior to next summer.

8.2 Officers will communicate with outdoor dining license holders to ensure invoices are paid or credited depending on the situation.

Author: Nikki Harrison, Group Manager Corporate Services

Attachments

Attachment 1: A2485949 - Summer outdoor dining letter from the Mayor 12Oct2020 ⇩

Attachment 2: A2603581 - Email to Mayor from Ian Williams HNZ 26Jan2021 ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

This report provides options for Council to consider to promote the social and economic wellbeing of the community post COVID19 lockdown now and in the future.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The options proposed in this report is consistent with the Community Outcome our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy.

3. Risk

The risk of not providing rent relief as requested are that there is further economic and social downturn in the city centre with businesses giving up their outdoor dining licenses due to financial pressure.

4. Financial impact

Direct financial impacts on Council are assessed in the options considered in the report.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because it affects a limited number of ratepayers. Therefore no consultation will occur.

6. Climate Impact

Climate change impact has not been specifically considered as part of this report.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in preparing this report.

8. Delegations

The Council has the following delegations to consider COVID 19 outdoor dining rent relief:

· COVID-19 impact on the Nelson community and Council’s role in the recovery from COVID-19, including actions arising from Project Kōkiri.

Item 8: Civic House Refurbishment Business Case

Council

11 May 2021

REPORT R23752

Civic House Refurbishment Business Case

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To approve the Business Case for the refurbishment of Civic House.

2. Summary

2.1 Council has asked officers to prepare a Business Case for the refurbishment of Civic House. The Business Case identifies three key areas for improvement:

· Civic function – how well does the building meet the needs of elected representatives and the community?

· Staff working environment – how does the building perform as a modern office that accommodates the diversity of function of local government staff?

· Sustainability and resiliency – how energy-efficient is the building, and how resilient is it to the impacts of climate change?

2.2 A range of issues are identified. The option to refurbish Civic House meets the needs identified in the areas for improvement. Approval of the Business Case will allow planning work to commence in July 2021, once the Long Term Plan 2021-31 has been adopted.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Civic House Refurbishment Business Case (R23752) and its attachments (A2618201, A2618347 and A2618407); and

- Progressively refurbishing each floor of Civic House over an eight year period;

- Moving the Chamber to the ground floor;

- Providing a Councillor lounge adjacent to the Chamber;

- Providing a consistent, modern staff working environment on each floor with a range of work areas;

- Raising the ground floor of Civic House to mitigate flooding based on a 1% AEP river flood event in 2080;

- Implementing measures to reduce electricity use by 20% and eliminate diesel use by 2030; and

3. Notes that the following renewals will be prioritised ahead of the overall refurbishment due to end of life/safety concerns:

- tower block roof;

- ventilation, heating and boiler systems; and

4. Background

4.1 Civic House has been the main administrative centre for Council since the early 1980s. It comprises three separate buildings – the State Advances building (constructed in 1938, and which has recently been sold), the old Post Office Savings Bank building (constructed in 1956), and the seven-storey office block and clock tower (constructed in 1974).

4.2 In 2017, Council let a contract to Arthouse Architects to develop a design for the refurbishment of floor one. On 14 December 2017, Council received this design (report R8730) and approved the high-level implementation plan for Civic House Floor one. Infrastructure staff were then moved (in 2018) from the first floor to floor six. Implementation of the floor one upgrade was put on hold to allow Council to consider the option of moving civic house, potentially as part of the Elma Turner Library redevelopment.

4.3 Council received further advice in November and December 2019 on its options for Civic House and, on 12 December 2019, approved the engagement of a consultant so that there could be better strategic alignment between a decision on Civic House and decisions relating to the Elma Turner Library redevelopment and options for a Climatorium. As part of that work, Council wanted to ensure it had a good understanding of Wakatū Incorporation’s intentions for the wider Riverside Precinct development.

4.4 On 13 August 2020, Council received a report on options for the long-term future of Civic House.

4.5 It summarised the key issues with the existing arrangements, including:

· Underinvestment in Civic House has resulted in substandard working conditions which affect Council’s ability to recruit and retain staff;

· A comprehensive improvement programme has been repeatedly deferred since 2008 (with the exception of the development of the Customer Service Centre);

· Essential infrastructure renewals, required to retain the building’s warrant of fitness, have also been deferred.

4.6 After considering options: to move Civic House into the Riverside Precinct; or to move Civic House to a different part of the city; or to refurbish the existing Civic House, Council resolved:

4.7 That the Council

1. Receives the report Civic House Options (R18154) and its attachments (A2430651, A2420980, and A2421781); and

2. Confirms that, subject to final approval through the Business Case process, Council’s main office will remain in Civic House, at its current location; and

3. Notes that the preliminary version of the Property and Facilities Asset Management Plan 2021-2031 will include capital funding for the sequential upgrade of staff accommodation, the Council Chamber and Councillor amenities in Civic House; and

4. Agrees that this report (R18154) and its attachments (A2420980 and A2421781) be released from public excluded with paragraphs 6.34 to 6.41 and attachment A2430651 redacted.

4.8 A draft Business Case (Attachment 1, A2618201) for Civic House has been developed and is attached. Council approval of the Business Case will allow work to commence in the 2021/22 financial year subject to final confirmation of funding through the Long Term Plan 2021-2031.

5. Discussion

5.1 There are three key strategic areas that are addressed in the Business Case:

· Civic function – how well does the building meet the needs of elected representatives and the community?

· Staff working environment – how does the building perform as a modern office that accommodates the diversity of function of local government staff?

· Sustainability and resiliency – how energy-efficient is the building, and how resilient is it to the impacts of climate change?

5.2 A number of issues and opportunities are identified under each of these areas. The Business Case provides more detail on these, but they include:

· Location of the Chamber

· Lack of Councillor accommodation

· Sizing of the Customer Service Centre

· Availability and size range of meeting rooms

· Contribution of building to central city vibrancy

· Quality of the work environment

· Safety

· End of life systems, including heating and ventilation

· Energy usage

· Resiliency to flooding/inundation events

5.3 Much of the detail of the proposed refurbishment will sit with management as it relates to the operational functions of the Council. However, there are some key areas that Council may wish to note.

Council Chamber and Councillor Lounge

5.4 Council has previously indicated a desire to move the Council Chamber to the ground floor, to improve accessibility and functionality. It is proposed to provide a Councillor lounge and access for Councillors to meeting rooms (also on the ground floor) as part of the redevelopment.

Improving Environmental Performance

5.5 An energy audit has been conducted and the executive summary is attached (Attachment 2, A2618347). The majority of its recommendations are included in the scope for the refurbishment.

5.6 As part of planning for the roof replacement, further advice was sought on the cost-benefit of installing photovoltaic (PV) panels on the roof (Attachment 3, A2618407). The consultants indicated that a 13kW system comprising 35 solar panels could be installed, with a rough order cost of $51,000. The payback period was calculated as between 17 (if an energy unit cost of 14.0 cents per kWh) and 22 years (if the energy unit cost is 10.7 cents per kWh. Council’s current average unit cost generally ranges between 11 and 12 cents per kWh. The useful life of the panels is 25 years, making the installation of PV panels borderline if the Council’s unit cost stays at the lower end of the range.

5.7 The consultant’s report concludes by saying ‘In an order of priority, it would be economically sensible to look at implementing some of the other energy saving initiatives proposed in the Emsol report: reduce energy wastage by replacement of fluorescent lighting with LEDs, optimising the HVAC system, upgrading existing technologies, and encouraging staff commitment to energy saving by behavioural adjustments.’

5.8 Although the economic benefits of the PV panels are marginal to Council at the present time, it is considered that the Council does have a role to play in championing the use of renewable energy sources. At this stage, therefore, the installation of PV panels has been included within the scope of the refurbishment.

5.9 Consideration has been given to Greenstar accreditation. Greenstar points are awarded through analysis of the performance of a building across a range of domains, including management, indoor environment quality, energy, transport, water, materials, land use and ecology, emissions, and innovation.

5.10 Given the nature of the refurbishment, it is recommended that a focus be placed on meeting or surpassing Greenstar standards for indoor environmental quality, energy and water. The other domains will be addressed but not prioritised. This will result in more efficient use of funds on refurbishment that meets both business need and Greenstar standards. Formal accreditation of the building will not be sought.

Phasing of Refurbishment

5.11 The most economically efficient way of delivering this type of refurbishment is to vacate the building and complete construction works in a period of 18-24 months. This is neither practicable nor feasible for Council. Relocating staff, even if suitable premises could be found, would cause significant disruption to business and to customer service.

5.12 Instead, a phased approach is proposed, whereby a level is completed each year. This may cause some disruption during business hours particularly to people occupying the floor below that being refurbished.

5.13 Under this approach, opportunities to minimise the number of staff who are seated directly above or below building work will be explored. Options include: requiring contractors to work over a five-day period that includes weekends; continuing to offer staff flexible working conditions (e.g. working from home) and/or moving groups of staff onto other floors, or into alternative accommodation.

Reporting

5.14 Currently the delegation for Civic House sits with Council. It is proposed that the Council is kept informed of progress through its Strategic Development and Property Subcommittee. Substantive decisions would still come to full Council, as per existing delegations register.

Costs

5.15 A budget of $16.5 million (uninflated) has been included in the draft Long Term Plan 2021-31 for this project. This is based on a square metre rate of $2,900/m², and includes separate provision for:

5.15.1 Heat recovery/ventilation – $300/m²

5.15.2 High performance LED Lighting – $100/m²

5.15.3 Double glazing of glass area - $1,000/m²

5.16 Detailed costs will be refined during the design stage.

6. Options

6.1 Council can choose to accept the Business Case as presented, amend the Business Case or reject it. Officers recommend option 1: approve the Business Case.

Option 1: Approve the Business Case for a staged refurbishment of Civic House. Recommended option.
Advantages	· Gives certainty to staff over improvements to their work environment · Provides enhanced civic functionality · Provides safety and amenity improvements to Councillors
Risks and Disadvantages	· Staged approach means work will not conclude until 2028/29
Option 2: Approve the Business Case for a staged refurbishment of Civic House, with amendments
Advantages	· Provides governance input into key issues such as location of the Chamber and sustainability accreditation
Risks and Disadvantages	· Adding to scope may result in additional costs · Significant changes in scope may not be technically feasible
Option 3: Reject the Business Case for a staged refurbishment of Civic House
Advantages	· Allows Council to set a different direction for meeting the needs for a civic administration building. This would have to include a planned relocation to new premises
Risks and Disadvantages	· Renewals expenditure on Civic House roof, heating, ventilation and ceiling tiles will still proceed as they are end of life · The work environment for staff is not improved in the short to medium term, affecting Council’s ability to retain and recruit staff · Will be a more expensive option that is not budgeted within Long Term Plan · No immediate change to accessibility of Council Chamber or to Councillor facilities.

7. Conclusion

7.1 Officers have prepared a business case for the staged refurbishment of Civic House. It sets out the key issues and drivers and the scope of works required. It is recommended that Council approves the Business Case to allow work to commence in the new financial year, subject to approval through the LTP process.

8. Next Steps

8.1 Council will deliberate on LTP submissions on 18 May 2021. Once funding is confirmed for the refurbishment, officers will:

8.1.1 Confirm the scope of the refurbishment project;

8.1.2 Procure the necessary design and engineering expertise to develop concepts;

8.1.3 Seek feedback from Councillors on the proposed location of the Chamber, the associated Councillor lounge and publicly accessible meeting rooms;

8.1.4 Engage with staff to ensure business needs are met during and after the refurbishment;

8.1.5 Develop a staged project plan that minimises disruption caused by building works and which minimises the need for teams to move multiple times;

8.1.6 Engage with Civic House tenants to keep them informed of progress.

Author: Alec Louverdis, Group Manager Infrastructure

Attachments

Attachment 1: A2618201 - DRAFT Civic House Business Case - Apr2021 ⇩

Attachment 2: A2618347 - Civic House Level 2 - Energy Audit Report - Executive Summary - 05Aug2020 ⇩

Attachment 3: A2618407 - Civic House Roof - PV Panel Feasibility Study - Dec2020 ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Approval of the Business Case for the refurbishment of Civic House supports the economic wellbeing of Nelson by improving Council’s ability to achieve appropriate staffing and an efficient and productive work environment.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The recommendations in this report fit with the community outcomes:

· Our urban and rural environments are people-friendly, well planned and sustainably managed.

· Our infrastructure is efficient, cost effective and meets current and future needs.

· Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy.

3. Risk

Council risks being unable to recruit and retain staff if accommodation is not brought up to a standard befitting a modern office environment. Any building project is subject to unknown risk, e.g. presence of asbestos. There is also uncertainty relating to overall cost as design work needs to be carried out. These risks are manageable given the multi-year nature of the refurbishment.

The recommended option does not preclude moving Civic House in the future.

4. Financial Impact

The budget for this refurbishment has been included in the Draft Long Term Plan 2021-31. It has been phased over eight years to allow for design work then progressive implementation.

5. Degree of Significance and Level of Engagement

This matter is of low significance as is to be managed within current budgets, with consultation through the Long Term Plan process if required.

6. Climate Impact

The recommendation in this report is consistent with Council’s Climate Emergency Declaration. Refurbishing Civic House makes efficient use of the Carbon embedded in the building and energy efficiency and climate resiliency features will be incorporated into the design.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in preparing this report.

8. Delegations

Council has retained all responsibilities, powers, functions and duties in relation to governance matters for Civic House.

Item 10: Mayor's Report

Council

11 May 2021

REPORT R24823

Mayor's Report

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To update Council on current matters.

2. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Mayor's Report (R24823); and

2. Amends the membership of the Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit on a permanent basis, effective immediately, as follows:

Chair

Deputy Chair

Membership

No change

~~Brian McGurk~~

Mel Courtney

3. Amends the liaison role on the Waimea Inlet Coordination Group on a permanent basis, effective immediately, as follows:

Councillor Liaison

~~Brian McGurk~~

Kate Fulton

3. Discussion

Reassigning Elected Member workloads

3.1 Earlier in the triennium Councillor McGurk stepped in to take on the membership of Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit (NTRLBU) for Councillor Fulton. Now there are two deputies for the Environment and Climate Committee it is appropriate that this role is undertaken by the other deputy – Councillor Courtney.

3.2 Councillor Fulton has indicated that she now has capacity to undertake the liaison role on liaison role on Waimea Inlet Coordination Group (WICG).

3.3 The appropriate recommendations are included in this report.

Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) Conference 2021

3.4 Early Bird registration for the LGNZ conference in Blenheim on 15 – 17 July closes on 21 May 2021. Some Elected Members have expressed an interest to attend for one day of the three-day Conference, day registrations are available. Further information is available on the LGNZ Conference website.

3.5 Individual Elected Members’ travel and training budgets will be used to fund the cost of registration, accommodation and travel. To date two Elected Members have confirmed attending, should anyone else wish to attend please contact Devorah Nicuarta-Smith, Manager Governance and Support Services in the first instance.

3.6 As the conference is being held in Blenheim, to reduce costs and emissions, it is recommended that members carpool and an NCC vehicle can be provided for this.

Covid Emergency Fund

3.7 Two grants have been approved:

3.7.1 The Male Room: $7461 for additional costs associated with development fees and building consent fees for the Whare Haumaru project

3.7.2 Inspired Productions Trust: $2500 towards administration costs

3.8 The fund has a balance of $55,329 unallocated.

Report from the Chair of Strategic Development and Property Subcommittee

8.9 Report from Chair Strategic Development and Property subcommittee on meeting held 1 April 2021

8.10 The subcommittee decisions were confirming minutes of 11 February 2021 meeting, receiving Chairperson’s report (R23749).

8.11 A recommendation was also made to Council to set the marina fees.

8.12 In 2020 Annual Plan a request for an increase in funding for work at the marina (including a governance review) was approved. Work is underway by officers on reviewing the operations and the strategic plan. The meeting agreed a small group of Committee members would meet to begin scoping a process for reviewing marina governance to work alongside the Group Manager in the first instance. The Chair, Mayor and Mr Murray will start the process.`

Miyazu 45th Sister City Anniversary celebrations.

8.13 On 3 May I hosted, with Mayor Kizaki Masafumi, a Zoom meeting of approximately 20 delegates as part of Nelson - Miyazu 45th Sister City Anniversary celebrations.

8.14 The gathering was opened and closed by Council Kaumātua Luke Katu, who spoke of the difficulties that Nelson and Miyazu are experiencing as a result of COVID-19 and included in his blessings that our communities be safe. Japan is experiencing far more cases of COVID-19 than New Zealand, and our support and good wishes were appreciated by the Miyazu delegation.

8.15 Both Mayors spoke of the benefits of the Sister City relationship and reflected on some of the milestones shared over the last four and a half decades, including the 2014 visit from Nelson to Miyazu that I shared with Nelson residents.

8.16 One of the benefits of the Sister City relationship is the exchange of ideas on how our respective communities respond to various challenges. Both our cities have been significantly affected by the decrease in tourism as a result of COVID-19. Part of Miyazu’s response is the development of a plan to attract younger residents to the City. It will be useful to learn more on the implementation of this plan and see whether there are aspects which could be applied in Nelson.

8.17 We also discussed establishing online connections between young Nelson and Miyazu residents. This is a priority for both cities, not just because we don’t know when in-person exchanges will recommence, but because it will build on what we already know - that our links with Miyazu are successful because they are built on a solid base of people-to-people interaction.

8.18 Normally a significant anniversary such as this would have included a visit by representatives from one city to the other. Holding a Zoom meeting is a reflection of the current times, but the warmth of the exchange, including sharing a laugh or two, highlighted once again the value of sister city relationships.

8.19 I appreciated the support of Councillor Brand, Kaumātua Luke Katu, Mrs Gail Collingwood (Sister Cities Coordinator), Mr Uda (translator) and members of the Nelson Miyazu Sister City Association and Nelson Japanese Society.

8.20 There will be other celebrations of the anniversary this year, and there will be an update on Sister City activities at the 17 June Community and Recreation Committee meeting.

Author: Rachel Reese, Mayor of Nelson

Attachments

Nil

Item 11: Establishment of a Māori Ward for the 2022 Local Government Elections

Council

11 May 2021

REPORT R22653

Establishment of a Māori Ward for the 2022 Local Government Elections

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider the establishment of a Māori Ward in Whakatū/ Nelson under the provisions of the Local Electoral (Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Act 2021 (the Māori Wards Act), which came into force on 2 March 2021.

2. Summary

2.1 Under the provisions of the Māori Wards Act, Council is able to reconsider whether to establish a Māori Ward for the 2022 local government election, as long as any decision is made by 21 May 2021.

2.2 When this matter was last considered on 22 September 2020, Council chose not to establish a Māori ward due to concerns about the difference in process between general and Māori ward establishment under the legislation of the time.

2.3 These concerns have been addressed by the Māori Wards Act and the matter is now brought back to Council for further consideration.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Establishment of a Māori Ward for the 2022 Local Government Elections (R22653); and

2. Rescinds clause 4 of resolution CL/2020/140 made on 22 September 2020:

‘4. Decides not to introduce a Māori Ward;’

3. Establishes a Māori Ward in Whakatū/Nelson for the 2022 local government election, and

4. Notes that a Māori ward must exist within a wider ward-based system; and

5. Requests analysis and options for the 2021 Representation Review include specific focus on communities of interest and options for ward boundaries.

4. Background

4.1 In 2020 Council was required to consider the two precursor matters to the wider representation review due for completion in 2021:

· agreeing an electoral system to be used for voting, and

· whether or not to establish a Māori ward where the relevant local population ratio allowed for one.

Concern regarding the legislated distinction in process between the establishment of a Māori ward and general wards led to the decision of Council not to establish a Māori ward at that time.

4.2 On 1 February 2021, the Hon Nanaia Mahuta announced the introduction of the Local Electoral (Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill to Parliament. The Bill, which proposed provisions intended to address distinctions between the processes to establish Māori and general wards, received its first reading on 9 February, following which submissions were considered by Te Komiti Whiriwhiri Take Māori (the Māori Affairs Committee).

4.3 Nelson City Council made a submission, acknowledging its iwi partners of Te Tauihu: Te Ātiawa, Ngāti Koata, Ngāti Toa Rangatira, Ngāti Tama, Ngāti Rarua, Ngāti Kuia, Ngāti Apa ki te Rā Tō and Rangitāne, and including the following elements:

· Council strongly supports the Local/ Electoral (Māori Ward and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Bill removing the poll provisions, and its clear intention to foster equity.

· Council also supports the provisions providing for a transition period, which will ensure all councils have the opportunity to resolve to establish Māori wards and Māori constituencies for the 2022 local elections.

4.4 Council had previously resolved at its meeting on 22 September 2020 that the Mayor write to the Hon Nanaia Mahuta (and Chief Executive of the Department of Internal Affairs) urging an amendment to the Local Electoral Act 2001 to ensure the legal requirements to establish a Māori ward are the same as a general ward. The resolution was made alongside advice from the Iwi-Council Partnership Group (involving eight iwi Chairs of Te Tauihu and Council) not to set up a Māori ward at that time but to pursue increased Māori involvement in decision-making through alternative mechanisms.

4.5 That letter outlined Council’s views on the inadequacy of the current legislation. When writing to the Minister, a commitment was also made to continue to expand the decision-making roles of Māori at Council and this is occurring through appointments to committees and sub-committees of Council. These appointments all hold voting rights.

4.6 The current legislation includes a barrier invited Māori members having voting rights at full Council meetings. Council encouraged the Select Committee to consider the removal of this barrier to further expand the decision-making role of Māori.

4.7 Council also supported the Minister’s comments during the First Reading of the Bill where she said, “What we're enabling is for councillors who are elected to represent the interests of their electorate to not be thwarted through a discriminatory 5 percent poll provision that could overturn their resolution at the council table. It's an idea whose time has come”

4.8 The establishment of Māori wards provides an opportunity for fair and effective representation for Māori communities.

4.9 Nelson City Council has long maintained that the establishment of a Māori ward should be a positive step for Māori and Council partnership, and that it is it is not fair or honouring of the spirit of partnership to require Māori wards to negotiate extra hurdles in order to be established. The system was set up in such a way that it is very difficult for Māori to gain representation at Council.

4.10 Under sections 19ZA to 19ZG of the Local Electoral Act as drafted in 2001, any decision to set up a Māori Ward would trigger a public ballot if demanded by at least five percent of electors. This requirement was not in place for the establishment of general wards, meaning that any ballot was often a debate on race.

4.11 Nelson City Council’s views on the matter are in line with Local Government New Zealand, which took a stance on the issue in 2018.

4.12 The Māori Wards Act subsequently came into effect on 2 March 2021.

4.13 The passing of the provisions within the Māori Wards Act now allows councils that wish to make a decision regarding Māori wards for the 2022 local government election to do so, as long as any resolution is made by 21 May 2021. Should a council wish to consider the matter but be unable to reach a decision by this date, the resolution would apply to the 2025 local government election at the earliest. The provisions do not require a council to consider the matter of Māori wards for 2022 but open up the opportunity to do so (which otherwise closed in November 2020 for the 2022 election).

4.14 Based on Council’s previous stance in relation to a Māori ward the matter has now been brought back for re-consideration in light of the legislative amendments.

4.15 While the Council’s position in relation to Māori contribution to decision-making has been well established over the last decade, views in the community are spread. In 2012, when a poll was held following a late-2011 resolution of Council to establish a Māori ward, it raised strong debate. Iwi strongly support the establishment of a Māori ward, as do many others in the community. However, the contrasting position is held equally strongly by others. It is acknowledged that the spread of community views means that whichever decision is made by Council some residents may not be happy.

5. Discussion

5.1 If Council does at this point resolve to establish a Māori ward, while this would be a change from the most recent decision on this matter it would not be inconsistent with it. This is because the September 2020 resolution was made based on Council’s clearly articulated concerns about the outcomes of the previous legislative processes, which have now been addressed through the Māori Wards Act, and the government’s commitment to more permanent review of the Local Electoral Act 2001.

5.2 The establishment of a Māori ward would directly contribute to the requirements on a local authority outlined in the Local Government Act 2002:

Section 4

In order to recognise and respect the Crown’s responsibility to take appropriate account of the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi and to maintain and improve opportunities for Māori to contribute to local government decision-making processes, Parts 2 and 6 provide principles and requirements for local authorities that are intended to facilitate participation by Māori in local authority decision-making processes.

Section 14 (1)(d)

In performing its role, a local authority must act in accordance with the following principles:

a local authority should provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to its decision-making processes.

Section 81(1)

A local authority must—

(a) establish and maintain processes to provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority; and

(b) consider ways in which it may foster the development of Māori capacity to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority; and

(c) provide relevant information to Māori for the purposes of paragraphs (a) and (b).

5.3 The number of possible Māori vacancies that could be established by a council is based on the population ratio of those on the national Māori roll to those on the national general roll. For Whakatū/Nelson the current ratio is 0.73, which is rounded up to 1 for electoral purposes. Therefore, one Māori councillor vacancy (and by implication, one Māori ward) would be able to be established.

5.4 There are a number of factors for Council to weigh up as it reconsiders the option to establish a Māori Ward.

Iwi partner perspectives

5.5 Similar to Council itself, Council’s iwi partners have supported the establishment of a Māori ward over a number of years but have also had considerable concern about the impacts of the polling requirements in the Local Electoral Act 2001. This concern has been to the extent that the preference communicated to Council in 2020 was not to proceed with a ward while those requirements still stood.

5.6 Following the commencement of the amendment Bill, Council has again had specific kōrero with iwi partners seeking clarity on their current views on the establishment of a Māori ward. At the Council-Iwi partnership hui held in March 2021, the 6 iwi representatives present confirmed that they would prefer a Māori ward to be established now.

Criteria for candidates and voters in a Māori ward

5.7 If a Māori ward is established, only those who are on the national Māori electoral roll will be able to stand as a candidate. The next opportunity to be listed on this roll is not until 2024.

5.8 No one standing for an election needs to live in the area they are standing for, and this is the same for a Māori ward. This means that as long as a potential candidate is on the Māori electoral roll they could be nominated as a candidate for Whakatū whether they live here, or have any ties to the area or not.

5.9 Equally, only those on the Māori electoral roll in Whakatū will be able to vote for the candidates standing in a Māori ward.

5.10 Those on the Māori roll will not be able to vote for candidates standing in any general wards, so should a Māori ward be established in Whakatū this will need to be factored into the thinking on “fair and effective representation” that is required through a representation review.

5.11 The establishment of a Māori ward does not preclude the ability of those of Māori descent who are on the general roll standing for general vacancies.

Implementation of a vacancy if established

5.12 If a decision is made by Council before 21 May 2021 to establish a Māori ward this would create a vacancy for the 2022 election. If Council needed more time, and the decision was made after 21 May, the vacancy would apply but not until 2025.

Polls

5.13 The mandatory and binding community polls on Māori ward resolutions have been removed from the legislation with the passing of the new Act. This means that the decision and any future review of decisions sits solely with Council.

5.14 The new Act allows for non-binding polls to be undertaken, if a Council wishes to canvas the views of their community at any time, but there is no obligation to do so.

Representation Review

5.15 The decision on Māori representation through electoral process must be made before any other representation structures are reviewed. Where a council is not already required to complete a representation review in that year, establishing a Māori ward or wards will immediately trigger one.

5.16 Nelson City Council is already required to complete a review this year so the establishment of a Māori ward would not add unexpected work into the year’s programme.

5.17 If Council decides to establish a Māori ward, other representation topics will then be brought to Council once the appropriate research and analysis can be completed to support Council decision making, and in line with the statutory time frames for the representation review. An initial representation review proposal must be adopted by Council by 8 September 2021, following which public consultation must be undertaken in line with the requirements of the Local Electoral Act 2001.

5.18 While other matters in relation to wider representation cannot be formally addressed at this time, it is important to note that some topics within the review would require different emphasis than may otherwise be the case should a Māori ward be established.

5.19 For example, a Māori ward must be part of a larger ward system. The system could be fully ward based, or a mixed system (where some candidates are voted for “at large” and some general candidates voted for by ward alongside the Māori ward). However, Council cannot simply ‘add’ a Māori ward to an “at large” system for candidates on the general roll.

5.20 Where wards exist, voters may only vote for candidates in their ward and any “at large” vacancies (the Mayor is always voted for “at large”).

5.21 Should Council resolve to establish a Māori ward, through the ensuing representation review the communities of interest in Whakatū/Nelson and the statistical meshblocks will be considered as to how different ward options could be structured and sized to meet fair and effective representation requirements.

5.22 The Local Government Commission is also already considering a variety of scenarios and options for those localities which currently have “at large’ systems and are considering Māori wards, as it is this part of representation discussions which can be most complex.

5.23 It would theoretically be possible to create a single general ward alongside a single Māori ward; this would mean that those on the Māori roll could only vote for one vacancy (the Māori councillor) plus the Mayor, and general voters could vote for the remaining number of councillor vacancies plus the Mayor. While it is an option, this particular model creates a deep imbalance and a variety of other scenarios will be developed for consideration as Council may prefer to achieve a more balanced approach.

6. Options

Option 1:

Establish a Māori ward for the 2022 local government election

Advantages

· Directly contributes to the requirements on a local authority outlined in the Local Government Act 2002:

Section 4

Section 14 (1)(d)

In performing its role, a local authority must act in accordance with the following principles:

a local authority should provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to its decision-making processes.

Section 81(1)

A local authority must—

(a) establish and maintain processes to provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority; and

(b) consider ways in which it may foster the development of Māori capacity to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority; and

(c) provide relevant information to Māori for the purposes of paragraphs (a) and (b).

· Reflects the consistent position of Council over the previous decade

· Honours the preference of iwi partners

· Provides for the inclusion of a Māori voice and perspectives into Council decision-making which are typically underrepresented nationwide

· Aligns with the existing representation review requirements for 2021

Risks and Disadvantages

· Must exist in a wider ward-based system, which Whakatū/ Nelson does not currently have. The structure of any new system would be considered through the ensuing representation review

Option 2:

Choose not to establish a Māori ward for the 2022 local government election.

NB Deferring the decision in relation to establishing a Māori ward beyond past 21 May 2021 would have the same effect.

Advantages

· Council would have time to seek further community feedback in relation to the decision if its feels that the positions are not currently well enough understood.

Risks and Disadvantages

· Does not reflect the consistent position of Council over the previous decade

· Does not honour the preference of iwi partners

· Does not provide for the inclusion of a Māori voice and perspectives into Council decision-making which are typically underrepresented nationwide

· Would require that a further representation review is undertaken prior to the 2025 election

7. Conclusion

7.1 The Māori Wards Act provides councils with the opportunity to review their current decisions in relation to Māori wards for the 2022 local government election.

7.2 The establishment of a Māori ward at this time would be consistent with Council’s longstanding position on this matter, reflect Iwi preferences, and align with the timing of a representation review that the Council must already complete.

7.3 Establishing a Māori ward would mean increased emphasis on the identification and recognition of communities of interest, and the subsequent creation of general wards, within the Whakatū/Nelson electoral region as part of the representation review.

8. Next Steps

8.1 Regardless of whether Council resolves to establish a Māori ward for the 2022 local government election, a representation review must still be completed in line with statutory requirements.

8.2 However if a Māori ward is established, it is likely that the focus of the review would change; new general ward boundaries would need to be considered and established.

8.3 Officers will complete the research and analysis and bring a report back through to Council for consideration of an initial representation proposal. The initial proposal must be resolved by 8 September 2021, following which it is consulted on with the public for at least a month in line with the expectations of the Local Electoral Act 2001.

Author: Devorah Nicuarta-Smith, Manager Governance and Support Services

Attachments

Nil

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

Māori representation as a whole is an important contributor both to the purpose of Local Government and its responsibilities specifically to Māori also expressed throughout the Local Government Act 2002.

Traditionally Māori within communities nationwide have been under-represented within electoral processes and the establishment of a Māori ward is one way this can be addressed.

Bringing a Māori world view to the Council table actively contributes towards promoting social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being within Whakatū/ Nelson through the direct expression of the perspectives of Māori at decision-making level.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

This matter aligns with many of Council’s community outcomes outlined in the Long Term Plan, including:

· Our communities are healthy, safe inclusive and resilient

· Our communities have opportunities to celebrate and explore their heritage, identity and creativity

· Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective and community engagement

3. Risk

While the Council’s position in relation to Māori contribution to decision-making has been well established over the last decade, views in the community remain spread. The establishment of a Māori ward may lead to a race-based debate within the community similar to the disputes that occurred in 2012.

Not establishing a Māori ward will not be consistent with the strengthening relationship Council is developing with local iwi.

4. Financial impact

The establishment of a Māori ward must take place as part of a wider ward based system, the structure of which would be considered through the representation review Council must complete in 2021. The main costs associated with representation structures are included in Council’s budgets.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of high significance to our Māori communities but of lower significance to other groups, because the establishment of a Māori ward directly provides for representation of those on the Māori roll without precluding representation of those on the general roll.

6. Climate Impact

The establishment of a Māori ward does not have an immediate direct impact in relation to climate change but would facilitate a Māori perspective on this matter being actively voiced in Council debate.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

Extensive engagement with Council’s iwi partners has been undertaken over a number of years in relation to the advantages and disadvantages of establishing a Māori Ward, and opportunities for Māori representation more widely at Council. This has included specific kōrero through the Council-Iwi Partnership Group following the Māori Wards Act.

8. Delegations

The Local Electoral Act 2001 states that decisions in relation to representation matters, including the establishment (or otherwise) of a Māori ward must be made by Council.

Item 12: Options for Increasing Māori Representation on Committees and Subcommittees

Council

11 May 2021

REPORT R22652

Options for Increasing Māori Representation on Committees and Subcommittees

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider the option to expand Māori representation further across Council’s committees and subcommittees prior to the 2022 Local Government Election.

2. Summary

2.1 Council has maintained a consistent approach to meeting the Local Government Act 2002 requirements to provide opportunities for Māori contribution to decision making, including

· Establishing iwi appointments in the Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit and the Nelson Tasman Region Landfill Business Unit.

· Confirming that the existing external appointment to the Environment and Climate Committee fulfils a dual role drawing on both technical knowledge and matauranga Māori.

· Making provision for Māori in the membership of the two new subcommittees of Council established in October 2020, namely the Urban Development Subcommittee and Strategic Development and Property Subcommittee.

2.2 This report provides options for expanding Māori appointments across further standing committees and subcommittees.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Options for Increasing Māori Representation on Committees and Subcommittees (R22652); and

2. Establishes a Māori appointment in each of the following governance bodies of Council:

a. Community and Recreation Committee

b. Infrastructure Committee

c. Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee

d. Forestry Subcommittee

3. Directs Officers to liaise with iwi and seek nominations of an appropriate candidate for each role.

4. Background

4.1 Through extraordinary meetings of Council in October and November 2020, Council revised its governance structure and agreed the membership of the committees and subcommittees created through this process.

4.2 At this time, the existing external appointment to the Environment and Climate Committee was confirmed as fulfilling a dual role providing both technical knowledge and matauranga Māori, and space for Māori representatives was included in each of the two newly established subcommittees – Urban Development and Strategic Property and Development.

4.3 When a Māori ward was considered by Council on 22 September 2020, and at that time not pursued, the resolution included the following:

Resolved CL/2020/001

That the Council

6. Requests that, after further discussion with and input from the Iwi-Council Partnership Group, officers report back to Council with alternative options for increasing Māori participation in decision-making

4.4 In response to the September resolution, the following next steps have taken place to progress the direction of Council.

4.5 The matter was discussed at the Council-Iwi Partnership hui on 30 September 2020, where the minutes record confirms that iwi supported “increasing Māori representation on Council Committees, Subcommittees and subordinate decision making bodies.”

4.6 At the extraordinary meeting of Council on 5 November 2020 (at which membership of the revised committees and subcommittees of Council was agreed), two new Māori appointments were created, one in the Urban Development Subcommittee and one in the Strategic Development and Property Subcommittee. The potential to expand Māori representation further across the governance structure of Council was also raised in discussion at that meeting.

4.7 At the Council-Iwi Partnership hui in December 2020, an update on the Council decisions made in November was provided to iwi who advised that they would like to have involvement in the selection of the two appointees. It was also discussed that Council would be considering further Māori appointments.

4.8 At the Council-Iwi Partnership hui in March 2021 further discussion took place on the process to select the two subcommittee appointees.

4.9 This report now presents options for further Māori appointments as per the September 2020 resolution of Council.

4.10 The provision of opportunities for Māori to contribute to decision making is fundamental to Council’s obligations under the Local Government Act 2002, and Nelson City Council has a longstanding commitment to building partnership with Māori.

4.11 This report provides an opportunity for Council to consider expanding Māori representation more widely across the governance structure, as raised at the November meeting; namely whether appointed member roles should be created in the following governance bodies:

· Community and Recreation Committee

· Infrastructure Committee

· Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee

· Forestry Subcommittee

4.12 Appointments cannot be made to Council itself, as the law does not allow for this; however, a representative could be invited to regularly attend and speak if Council so wished.

5. Discussion

5.1 Fundamental to the expectations of a local authority outlined in the Local Government Act 2002 is the provision of opportunities for Māori to contribute to its decision-making:

Section 4

Section 14 (1)(d)

In performing its role, a local authority must act in accordance with the following principles:

a local authority should provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to its decision-making processes.

Section 81(1)

A local authority must—

(a) establish and maintain processes to provide opportunities for Māori to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority; and

(b) consider ways in which it may foster the development of Māori capacity to contribute to the decision-making processes of the local authority; and

(c) provide relevant information to Māori for the purposes of paragraphs (a) and (b).

5.2 While there are a variety of ways that this can be approached, appointing members within the governance structure is a particularly direct way of ensuring Māori voice and perspectives have input to decision making.

5.3 In its 2019 white paper to Councils on options and considerations when establishing a governance structure, Local Government New Zealand supported external appointments as a route to increasing community participation in Council decision making.

5.4 Through its earlier decisions Nelson City Council began a process of creating Māori appointments within its governance structure, with one committee appointee already established and two subcommittee positions pending. An appointee also sits on the Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit (NTRLBU) and a vacancy exists in the Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit (NRSBU). Creating the opportunity to make appointments to the remaining committees and subcommittees would ensure a consistent approach.

5.5 Appointments are typically for the duration of a triennium (although may be shorter); with an incoming Council the full governance structure is reviewed, including any appointments.

5.6 Appointees are able to, and expected to, fully participate in the business of the committee or subcommittee they are a member of, including voting on matters (where they do not hold any interest in the matter at hand). They must have the requisite skills and experience to enable them to contribute appropriately.

5.7 Appointed members do receive an annual honorarium for their time and input, the levels of which are established through internal policy; this is funded separately to the remuneration pool for elected members.

5.8 Provision has been made through the Long Term Plan to prepare for an increase in appointed members over the 10 years, should this occur. Council Policy currently allows the following annual honoraria for external appointees:

Committee – Member: $12,840 per annum

Subcommittee – Member: $7,000 per annum

Appointment Process

5.9 At the Council-iwi partnership hui in March 2021, it was agreed that the recruitment of candidates for Māori appointments will reflect the importance Council places on its relationship with iwi partners.

5.10 For new and newly vacant Māori appointments, the job description and relevant terms of reference for the committee or subcommittee will be provided to iwi through the Council-iwi partnership forum. The Te Waka a Maui o Te Tauihu iwi chairs forum will then select and nominate an appropriate candidate based on the requirements of the role.

5.11 Nominations will be brought to Council for consideration, accompanied by the relevant resume and biographical information to support the recommendation.

5.12 Should Council resolve to appoint the nominee, the candidate will then be notified.

Options

Option 1:

Establish vacancy for a Māori appointment to each of the following governance bodies of Council:

· Community and Recreation Committee

· Infrastructure Committee

· Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee

· Forestry Subcommittee

Advantages

· Aligns with the expectations of the Local Government Act 2002 to provide opportunities for Māori contribution to Council decision making

· Consistent with Council’s longstanding commitment to building partnership

· Creates a consistent approach to Māori appointments across all standing committees and subcommittees of Council

Disadvantages

· There may be elements of the community uncomfortable with the level of increase of Māori representation

Option 2: Establish vacancy for a Māori appointment to each of a subset of the governance bodies above

· Community and Recreation Committee

· Infrastructure Committee

Advantages

· Aligns with the expectations of the Local Government Act 2002 to provide opportunities for Māori contribution to Council decision making

· Maintains Council’s commitment to increasing participation but at a lower level

· May allow for emphasis on those governance bodies which Council feels are a particular priority for Māori input

· Would reduce funding requirements for appointments in the Long Term Plan

Risks and Disadvantages

· Māori may not agree with areas considered a priority by Council for representation

· Would improve but not fully remove the inconsistent opportunities for contribution by Māori across the governance structure of Council

Option 3: Do not establish vacancy for a Māori appointment to any further governance bodies (maintain the status quo)

Advantages

· Would reduce funding requirements for appointments through the Long Term Plan

Risks and Disadvantages

· Out of step with previous decisions and discussions of Council where expanding Māori contribution to decision making has been a priority

· Inconsistent contribution across the committees and subcommittees of Council

6. Conclusion

6.1 At the extraordinary meeting of 5 November 2020, discussion took place on the expansion of Māori representation beyond the NTRLBU, NRSBU, Environment and Climate Committee and the two Subcommittees of Council newly established in late October 2020.

6.2 Currently the following are without Māori appointees in their membership at this time:

· Community and Recreation Committee

· Infrastructure Committee

· Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee

· Forestry Subcommittee

6.3 Establishing further appointments is consistent with the expectations of a local authority outlined in the Local Government Act 2002, and with Council’s own longstanding position in relation to providing opportunities for Māori to contribute to decision making.

7. Next Steps

7.1 Should Council choose to establish further Māori appointments, the nomination process will be initiated with iwi to seek an appropriate candidate for each role.

Author: Devorah Nicuarta-Smith, Manager Governance and Support Services

Attachments

Nil

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

One of the expectations on a local authority in the Local Government Act 2002 is the inclusion of Māori in decision making and building Māori capacity to support participation. Appointing Māori representatives within the governance structure of Council is a very direct way to ensure a Māori view is considered in decision-making.

Including a Māori world view across the committees and subcommittees of Council actively contributes towards promoting social, economic, environmental and cultural well-being within Whakatū/ Nelson through the direct expression of the perspectives of Māori at decision-making level.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

This matter aligns with many of Council’s community outcomes outlined in the Long Term Plan, including:

· Our communities are healthy, safe inclusive and resilient

· Our communities have opportunities to celebrate and explore their heritage, identity and creativity

· Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective and community engagement

3. Risk

The goal of increasing the number of Māori appointments within the governance structure of Council is to provide greater opportunity for Māori to contribute to decision making; when accompanied by appropriate nominations to fill any roles created and regular attendance of meetings by appointees there is a low risk that this goal will not be achieved.

Sections of the community may raise race-based concerns with increasing Māori appointments in the governance structure.

4. Financial impact

Increasing the number of appointed members will increase the annual budget required for honoraria, and there may be increased demand on staff resourcing to recruit and support the members.

The Long Term Plan budget has been adjusted to prepare for an increase in appointed members, to ensure that this was not an unintended barrier to Council’s decision making should it wish to pursue further appointments.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

The appointment of any members within the governance structure of Council takes place at the discretion of Council, in order to support the effective and efficient management of the decision-making workload. Appointed members can bring specialist skills and experience that may not be held by elected members in a particular triennium; they can also increase direct community participation in decision-making as noted by Local Government New Zealand in its 2019 white paper on establishing successful governance structures.

No consultation took place in relation to any of the existing external appointee positions.

6. Climate Impact

There is no direct climate impact from the appointment or otherwise of further Māori representatives; however often there is a high interest from mana whenua in environmental impacts of decisions and this would have increased opportunity to be expressed at the decision making table by appointees.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

The possibility of appointing Māori representatives to further committees and subcommittees of Council has been discussed at each Council-Iwi Partnership hui following the 22 September 2020 resolution of Council: 30 September 2020, 9 December 2020, 23 March 2021.

Iwi representatives attending these hui have consistently supported the efforts Council is making to increase Māori representation in decision making.

8. Delegations

Under Local Government Act 2002 Schedule 7 clause 31 the Council has primary responsibility for appointing or discharging members of a committee.

All subcommittees in the current Nelson City Council governance structure are subcommittees of Council, (as opposed to a committee), and therefore Council also has primary responsibility for appointing or discharging members of these.

Item 13: Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointees on Council Committees and Subcommittees

Council

11 May 2021

REPORT R24782

Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointees on Council Committees and Subcommittees

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To adopt the policy on selection, appointment and remuneration of external appointees to Council’s committees and subcommittees.

2. Summary

2.1 Council has the ability to make external appointments to its committees and subcommittees. These appointments are currently administered under two separate policies that in essence contain the same information, with minor changes when discussing remuneration. Officers propose that the two policies be combined to form the Selection, Appointment and Remuneration of External Appointees to Council Committees and Subcommittees Policy.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointees on Council Committees and Subcommittees (R24782) and its attachment (A2337456); and

2. Approves the Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointees on Council Committees and Subcommittees (A2337456).

4. Background

4.1 The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) Schedule 7, section 31 states that Council may appoint or discharge any member of a committee or subcommittee. Section 31(3):

The members of a committee or subcommittee may, but need not be, elected members of the local authority, and a local authority or committee may appoint to a committee or subcommittee a person who is not a member of the local authority or committee if, in the opinion of the local authority, that person has the skills, attributes, or knowledge that will assist the work

4.2 In 2014 Council adopted a Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointments on Council Committees. This Policy was last reviewed and adopted in December 2016.

4.3 In 2017 Council adopted a Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointments on Council Subcommittees.

4.4 Both Policies were to be reviewed early in 2020, however due to COVID-19, this review was deferred as no substantive changes were proposed and it was not considered a priority.

4.5 Having two policies that are very similar can cause confusion. As they both set out the same process for appointment in accordance with Schedule 7, clause 31 of the Local Government Act 2002, officers propose that they be combined.

5. Discussion

5.1 The draft Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointments on Council Committees and Subcommittees is attached (A2337456). Changes from merging the two documents have not been included, however substantive changes have been highlighted.

5.2 The Policy provides an updated framework to guide the selection and appointment process.

Proposed changes

5.3 Section 2: Scope

5.3.1 This section has been updated to clarify that appointments of independent commissioners, external appointments to joint committees, or subordinate decision-making bodies like the District Licensing Committee are not included in the scope.

5.4 Section 4: Selection and Appointment

5.4.1 Section 4.5 has been added where the appointee is to be a Māori representative, to reflect that Council may seek nominations directly from iwi for an appropriate candidate.

5.4.2 Sections 4.9 – 4.11 have been added to clarify the appointment process and that the preferred applicant will be contacted after the Council resolution to appoint.

5.5 Section 5: Remuneration

5.5.1 Sections 5.2 to 5.5 have been expanded to provide clear direction on setting remuneration.

5.5.2 There is a mix of ways that remuneration of external appointees is addressed in other councils. These include an hourly rate aligned with Hearings fees and an annual remuneration. Council currently uses an annual remuneration, and it is proposed to continue this approach. It is appropriate that any increases are aligned with increases determined by the Remuneration Authority.

5.5.3 Remuneration for subordinate decision-making bodies (e.g. District Licencing Committee) has been removed from the Policy as remuneration is set by the Cabinet Fees Framework or the Remuneration Authority and therefore not within the scope of the Policy.

5.6 Section 6: Training

5.6.1 This section has been updated to explain that external appointees are personally responsible for professional development for their field of expertise. Budget has been allocated to provide induction and local government specific training that is required.

5.7 Section 8: Effectiveness Review

5.7.1 Section 8.1 has been expanded to include the procedure for the review.

6. Options

Option 1: Adopt the Policy for External Appointments (Recommended Option)
Advantages	· One clear updated policy to set out the process for appointing external members to Committees and Subcommittees · In adopting the recommended changes Council would ensure the Policy is in line with best practice and other governance policies.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Nil
Option 2: Do not adopt the Policy
Advantages	·
Risks and Disadvantages	· Two policies can cause confusion. · Remuneration will not be updated. · Council is not up to date with best practice and other governance policies.

7. Conclusion

7.1 Council should decide whether to approve the Policy, make further amendments prior to approval, or request a further review of two separate policies.

Author: Robyn Byrne, Team Leader Governance

Attachments

Attachment 1: A2337456 Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointees on Council Committees and Subcommittees ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, Section 31 provides for the appointment of external appointees to Council committees (and subcommittees).

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

Merging the Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointees on Council Committees, and the Selection, Appointment and Remuneration Policy for External Appointees on Council Subcommittees considers alignment with best practice and other governance policy documents. This meets the community outcome of Council providing leadership and fostering partnerships. It also meets the review requirements set out in the individual documents.

3. Risk

The Policy provides an up-to-date framework for selection and appointment process and thereby reduces risk.

4. Financial impact

There is existing budget to remunerate proposed external appointees.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because it does not involve any major changes or impacts on the community. Therefore no engagement is proposed.

6. Climate Impact

There is no direct climate impact.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

No engagement with Māori has been undertaken in preparing this report.

8. Delegations

This is a decision of Council.

Item 14: Nelson Future Access - Preferred Programme Public Engagement

Council

11 May 2021

REPORT R18168

Nelson Future Access - Preferred Programme Public Engagement

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To approve the Nelson Future Access project (NFA) preferred programme to enable public engagement to commence.

2. Summary

2.1 The NFA project is led by Waka Kotahi New Zealand Transport Agency (Waka Kotahi), with Nelson City Council (NCC) as a key Project Partner.

2.2 Work on the Detailed Business Case is well advanced and public engagement on the long-term options has been completed. Those submissions received, the Multi-Criteria Analysis (MCA) and further technical analysis have guided the development of a preferred programme that will, as part of the next step in the process, proceed to public engagement.

2.3 Council approval is sought to proceed with further engagement on the preferred programme noting that there are three substantive components - Short-term, Rocks Road Walk and Cycle, and Priority Lanes. The engagement will focus on the first two components, the Short-term programme and the Rocks Road Walk and Cycle project. The community will also be informed on the long-term as the project has already engaged on this in June-July 2020.

2.4 Council approval is essential as without that approval Waka Kotahi will not be proceeding with public engagement, as a significant portion of the recommendation involves the local road network.

2.5 Feedback from this next round of engagement will be used to refine the preferred programme and inform the next stage. A summary of the feedback will also be brought back to Council, via the Regional Transport Committee (RTC), for information.

2.6 Implementation of any approved option will involve Council and Waka Kotahi funding.

2.7 Once the business case is completed and depending on the significance of the funding requirements, a separate consultation process may be required to amend the RLTP and possibly the LTP.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Nelson Future Access - Preferred Programme Public Engagement (R18168) and its attachments A2631617 and A2632937; and

2. Approves the Nelson Future Access Study Preferred Option as detailed in Attachment A2632937 of Report R18168 as the option to proceed to public engagement.

4. Background

4.1 The background to this process was provided to Council on 25 June 2020 and is not replicated here. That report is appended as Attachment 1.

5. Community Input

5.1 Community input, prior to the first round of public engagement in June 2020, has been gained through the formation of a Project Reference Group (PRG) to gather community insight with representation from transport system users, iwi, community, residential and business groups. The PRG has met on four occasions, most recently on 2 September 2020.

6. Iwi Partnership

6.1 Iwi are a key partner of the NFA project. Following initial hui with Te Tauihu Iwi chair representatives it was agreed that an iwi representative be part of the Governance Group (GG), as well as participation at the PRG workshops. More recently Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) on Māori cultural values have been collaboratively developed with iwi advisors and used to assess the packages.

7. Multi Criteria Analysis

7.1 The packages were assessed using an MCA, that included Iwi partner/stakeholder values, Investment objectives, Assessment of effects and Implementability criteria. All parties have completed their analysis with the PRG having scored the stakeholder values, iwi the Māori values and technical experts the rest.

7.2 Details of the MCA, including the scoring by our Iwi partner and PRG stakeholders, is contained within the attached Waka Kotahi report.

8. Rocks Road Walk and Cycle Single Stage Business Case (RRSSBC)

8.1 Included in the scope endorsed by Council in December 2018 was the proposal to deliver the RRSSBC ahead of the wider project. Due to the complexities with sea level rise and the age and condition of the sea wall, it was later determined that a more robust business case would be made by considering the Rocks Road Walk and Cycle component in tandem with the wider NFA. This approach was noted by the Governance Group and was also reported to the NCC Regional Transport Committee (RTC).

9. NFA/Rocks Road Funding and links to the Regional Transport Committee

9.1 The three Te Tauihu Regional Transport Committees (RTCs) – Nelson City Council, Tasman District Council and Marlborough District Council have approved a Joint Regional Land Transport Plan 2021-31 (RLTP). Consultation on that document has closed, hearings held and the NCC RTC has deliberated on the matter and recommendations for consideration have been made to Council.

9.2 An amount of $30M (over the next 10 years and including Waka Kotahi’s share at the Funding Assistance rate of 51%) was included in both the draft RLTP and DRAFT Long-Term Plan (LTP) as a funding placeholder for the possible implementation of short to medium term measures. Any works however would need to align with the outcome of the NFA detailed business case to ensure that all works are future proofed.

9.3 Council is also mindful that any improvement measures implemented on its arterial roads are also likely to provide benefit to the state highway and Council will be advocating that any works should qualify for an increased subsidy higher than the current 51%.

9.4 Council’s Draft 2021-31 Long-Term Plan consultation document notes:

“Nelson Future Access Project (NFA)

Waka Kotahi has advised that the NFA project (including the Rocks Rd walking and cycling facility) is running significantly behind time and that no decisions on packages of activities have been made yet. This means that Council has been unable to place any specific work related to this project in the LTP (or RLTP) other than general placeholders over the next 10 years. That placeholder funding includes provision for a range of short/medium term activities targeted at making best use of existing infrastructure that will improve safety and increase the attractiveness of public transport, walking and cycling.

Completion of the NFA business case still requires careful consideration of the environmental factors relating to working within the coastal marine area, as well as the feedback from residents, transport system users and other stakeholders and partners. An agreed package of activities will need to be included in the final business case, and the business case endorsed by Nelson City Council and approved by Waka Kotahi, before Waka Kotahi can consider funding. The NFA business case will not be completed before the LTP or RLTP is finalised. Once the business case is completed the RLTP will need to be amended to include the relevant activities and that will then need to be considered by Council for funding. Depending on the significance of the funding requirements a separate consultation process may be required”.

10. National Land Transport Programme (NLTP)

10.1 For a project to feature in the NLTP and be eligible for national funding, it must be part of an RLTP. The current RLTP (and draft NCC LTP) does not include the detail as presented in this report, because it was not available at the time of consultation.

10.2 Following the completion of the business case, any proposed works will need to be included in the RLTP (as a variation) and will as already noted, depending on the significance, need to be the subject of a special consultative procedure.

11. Council decisions

11.1 As a key project partner, NCC’s involvement is required at the next key milestone, that being approval of the preferred programme to go to engagement. This approval is necessary as the outcome from engagement will inform the recommended programme which will have financial implications for NCC and will need to be included in Council’s RLTP (as a variation).

11.2 Whilst Waka Kotahi has approved engagement on the preferred programme, approval from NCC as a project partner is key and it is preferable that both parties (ie Waka Kotahi and NCC) provide their approval to proceed to engagement on the preferred programme.

11.3 Without Council approval, Waka Kotahi will not be proceeding with the next round of public engagement.

12. Timeline

12.1 The timeline from this point on is as follows:

12.1.1 Public engagement – Thursday 13 May to mid-June 2021.

12.1.2 Assessment of feedback and reporting back to the Governance Group (anticipated August 2021).

12.1.3 Recommended programme confirmed through completion of the NFAP Detailed Business Case (including identified next steps in delivering the recommended programme) which will require both the Waka Kotahi Board and Council approval.

12.1.4 Formal consultation to amend the RLTP and possibly the LTP.

13. Discussion

13.1 The preferred programme (refer to attachment 2 from Waka Kotahi) is the culmination of well over a year’s targeted work involving key stakeholders through the Project Reference Group (PRG), iwi Partners and the governance structure.

13.2 Council approval is sought to proceed with further engagement on the preferred programme noting that there are three substantive components.

· Short-term;

· Rocks Road Walk and Cycle;

· Priority Lanes

13.3 The engagement will focus on the first two components, the short-term programme noting that this will be staged over 30 years and the Rocks Road Walk and Cycle project. The community will be informed about the long term as the project has already engaged on this in June-July 2020.

13.4 The Governance Group has endorsed the preferred programme. The preferred programme is not final and will be further refined, taking on board feedback from the engagement process.

13.5 The Waka Kotahi project team will attend the meeting to talk to the preferred programme and to answer questions Councillors may have.

14. Options

14.1 Public engagement on the preferred programme is the next step in the process and the preferred programme is presented to Council for approval.

14.2 Council has the option of either approving or not approving the preferred programme to go to the next round of public engagement. Officers recommend option 1.

Option 1: Approve the preferred programme to go out for public engagement. Officers recommend option 1
Advantages	· Will show Council leadership · Will enable community feedback and insight · A necessary step to finalise the NFA business case · Will recognise the commitment from the PRG · Will show commitment to addressing the problem statements · Strengthens collaborative working relationship with Waka Kotahi
Risks and Disadvantages	· The preferred programme may raise expectation in the community ahead of securing funding via the NLTP
Option 2: Do not approve the preferred programme
Advantages	· None
Risks and Disadvantages	· Reputational risk with the wider Nelson community and the PRG · Apathy and fatigue with likely PRG and wider Nelson community burn-out who have been dealing with this project for many years · No positive outcome for Nelson · If Waka Kotahi do not proceed with this engagement, any variation to the RLTP will be delayed and the project will miss prioritisation for investment in government’s NLTP. · Potential for business case not being able to be finalised by Waka Kotahi or to be unsupported by NCC leaving a vacuum in the long-term transport system planning for Nelson

15. Conclusion

15.1 Arriving at a preferred programme, as presented in this report, is the culmination of three years of investigation work and collaboration with iwi, key stakeholders and the wider public. The preferred programme is presented to Council for approval to allow public engagement to commence.

16. Next Steps

16.1 The next step will be for Waka Kotahi to commence public engagement on the preferred programme and receive/report back key feedback received.

Author: Alec Louverdis, Group Manager Infrastructure

Attachments

Attachment 1: A2631617 - NFA Report - Council - 25 June 2020 ⇩

Attachment 2: A2632937 - NFAP Council Endorse to Enable Public Engagement 13 May 2021 ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

1. Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The proposed NFA public engagement aligns very well with the purpose of local government in that it will solicit feedback that will enable democratic local decision-making and progress a project that will promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities for the future.

2. Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The recommendation to proceed to public engagement will contribute to the following community outcomes - “Our infrastructure is efficient, cost effective and meets current and future needs”; “Our communities are healthy, safe, inclusive and resilient”; “Our region is supported by an innovative and sustainable economy.

3. Risk

The report seeks to proceed with public engagement on the preferred programme with the aim of ascertaining views from the wider public. The process followed, to minimise risk, has been extensive and has included:

- Following the Waka Kotahi Business Case approach;

- Setting up a three-tiered governance structure;

- Setting up of a PRG comprising a wide range of stakeholders;

- Liaising with Iwi at a high level.

4. Financial impact

Cost implication for Council and Waka Kotahi will depend on the outcome of the NFA and any cost to Council will involve discussions with Waka Kotahi and other parties at the appropriate time.

5. Degree of significance and level of engagement

This outcome of the NFA is of high significance and public engagement is proposed.

6. Climate Impact

The NFA Investment Logic Map has as one of its benefits “Nelson’s transport system contributes to quality urban environments” with an associated KPI of increasingly moving to carbon neutrality.

The project is also focussing on adaptation with respect to sea level rise.

7. Inclusion of Māori in the decision-making process

Separate consultation has been held with the Te Tau Ihu Iwi chairs who have also been afforded representation at the Governance Group. Consultation with iwi will also take place as part of the proposed wider public engagement.

8. Delegations

Regular updates on the NFA have been provided to the Nelson Regional Transport Committee (RTC). The objectives and scope of the NFA were received by the 3 December 2018 Nelson RTC and endorsed by Council on 13 December 2018.

The decision to proceed to public engagement is Waka Kotahi’s. The Governance Group has endorsed the preferred programme and Council’s role is to approve the preferred programme for further public engagement.