Agenda of Council - Thursday, 10 November 2022

2. Directs that no further expenditure be incurred on the new library project in the Maitai precinct pending further direction from this Council; and that changes be drafted and prepared for consideration of the removal of the project from the Long Term Plan; and

3. Agrees that an amendment will be required to the Long Term Plan 2021-31 as changes to the capital programme in 2023/24 and following years will be material due to the impacts on Council’s work programme of the August weather event and subsequent recovery process.

8. Mayor's Report - Governance Structures 28 - 47

Document number R27326

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Mayor's Report - Governance Structures (R27326) and its attachments (1982984479-5247 and 1982984479-5241); and

2. Notes that in May 2023, the Mayor intends to fully review the committee structure and allocation of roles in consultation with councillors, with the intention of any changes coming into effect on 1 July 2023; and

3. Endorses the allocation of the post-election 2022/23 councillor remuneration pool as follows:

Deputy Mayor $65,000.00

Councillor $49,484.82; and

4. Approves the establishment of a Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee under section 105(9) Land Transport Management Act 2003, subject to similar approval being reached by Tasman District Council; and

5. Endorses the Terms of Reference for the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee (1982984479-5241); and

6. Notes that the delegations for the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee include responsibility to prepare a Regional Land Transport Plan, prepare a Regional Public Transport Plan and undertake a review of speed limits; and

7. Notes the Nelson City Council membership of the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee has been included in the governance appointments for the 2022 triennium; and

8. Notes the initial governance structure and roles for the 2022 triennium, including the appointment of Councillor Mel Courtney as Interim Chair of the Audit Risk and Finance Committee

Group 1: Representation Appointments:

*Name of Organisation*	*Appointees*
*Whakatu Marae*	*Mayor Nick Smith*
*Cawthron Institute Board*	*Mayor Nick Smith*
*Mayoral Taskforce for Jobs Steering Group*	*Mayor Nick Smith*
*Mayoral Taskforce for City Futures*	*Mayor Nick Smith*
*Nelson Mayoral Relief Trust*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *Cr Matty Anderson* *Cr Trudie Brand*
*Sister Cities Coordinating Group*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *Cr Trudie Brand*
*Tasman Bays Heritage Trust Appointments Committee*	*Cr Mel Courtney* *Cr Kahu Paki Paki*
*Nelson Youth Council*	*Cr James Hodgson* *All other councillors attend via rotation*
*Urban Design Champion*	*Cr Pete Rainey*
*Youth Nelson (The Young Nelson Trust)*	*DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens*
*Sport Tasman (Tasman Regional Sports Trust)*	*Cr Tim Skinner*
*Nelson Tasman Business Trust*	*Cr Matthew Benge*
*Accessibility for All*	*Cr Campbell Rollo*
*Arts Council Nelson Incorporated*	*DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens* *Cr Matty Anderson*
*Positive Ageing Forum*	*Cr Rachel Sanson*
*Heritage Houses: Broadgreen Facility, Melrose House*	*Cr Mel Courtney (Broadgreen)* *Cr James Hodgson (Melrose)*
Tāhunanui Liaison Councillor*	*Cr Campbell Rollo*
Nelson North Liaison Councillor*	*Cr Aaron Stallard*
Pacific and Ethnic Communities Liaison Councillor*	*Cr Matty Anderson*

*These are new roles for which the Terms of Reference will be brought to the December 2022 Council meeting

Group 2: Joint Nelson Tasman Committee Appointments:

Committee

Members

Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee

Two elected members (and two alternates)- Nelson City Council

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Cr Mel Courtney (alternate)

Cr James Hodgson (alternate)

Two Elected Members (and two alternates )Tasman District Council

Waka Kotahi representative

Joint Committee

All elected members Nelson City Council

All elected members Tasman District Council

Joint Shareholders Committee

Mayor and 5 councillors Nelson City Council

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Cr Mel Courtney

Cr Matthew Benge

Cr Kahu Paki Paki

Cr Rachel Sanson

Mayor and 5 councillors Tasman District Council

Saxton Field Joint Committee

Nelson City Councillor x 2

Cr Campbell Rollo

Cr Tim Skinner

Tasman District Councillor x 2

Independent Chair TBC

Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group

Mayor Nelson City Council

Mayor Tasman District Council

Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit

Nelson City Councillor x 2

Cr Mel Courtney

Cr Aaron Stallard

Tasman District Councillor x 2

Iwi Representative

Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit

Nelson City Councillor x 2

Cr Kahu Paki Paki

Cr Tim Skinner

Tasman District Councillor x 2

Independent Member

Regional Pest Management Joint Committee

Nelson City Councillor x 3

Cr Matthew Benge

Cr Rachel Sanson

Cr Aaron Stallard

Tasman District Councillor x 3

Joint Regional Cemetery Working Group

Nelson City Councillor x 2

Cr Trudie Brand

Cr Tim Skinner

Tasman District Councillor x 2

Iwi Representative

Nelson Tasman Joint Waste Review Working Party

Cr Matthew Benge

Cr Rachel Sanson

Cr Aaron Stallard

Waimea Inlet Coordination Group

Nelson City Councillor x 1

Cr Rachel Sanson

Group 3: Nelson City Council Committee Appointments:

Chief Executive Employment Committee

Mayor Nick Smith (Chair)

DM Rohan O’Neill-Smith

Cr Trudie Brand

Cr Pete Rainey

Paul Bell (external advisor, no voting rights)

Audit, Risk and Finance Committee

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Cr Mel Courtney (Interim chair)

Cr Rachel Sanson

Shanell Kelly (direct Māori re-appointment proposed)

One or two independent appointees – to be sought

Tenders Committee

Mayor Nick Smith (Chair)

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Cr Mel Courtney

Cr Kahu Paki Paki

Eelco Boswijk Civic Awards Committee

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Cr Trudie Brand (Chair)

Councillor Matty Anderson

Councillor Pete Rainey

Hearing Panel

All elected members

Rotating attendance in panels of three

District Licensing Committee

Oke Blaikie (external appointee)

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens (Deputy Chair)

Cr Trudie Brand

Group 4: Forum Appointments:

Iwi Council partnership hui

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Councillor Kahu Paki Paki

Councillor Rachel Sanson

Councillor Tim Skinner

Climate Change Forum

Mayor

Deputy Mayor

Community and Whanau

Mayor

Councillor Matty Anderson

Councillor James Hodgson

Nelson Biodiversity Forum

Councillor Rachel Sanson

Councillor Aaron Stallard

Councillor Matthew Benge

City Centre Business Forum

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens (Chair)

Councillor Pete Rainey

Councillor Tim Skinner

Representatives to include:

· Uniquely Nelson

· Hospitality sector

· Retail sector

· Property owners

Group 5: Taskforce Appointments:

*Elma Turner Library Reopening Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith (lead)* *Councillor Kahu Paki Paki* *Councillor Tim Skinner* *Councillor Aaron Stallard*
*Civic House Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *Councillor Pete Rainey (lead)* *Councillor Mel Courtney* *Councillor Campbell Rollo*
*Local Government Reform Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith (lead)* *DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens* *Councillor Matthew Benge* *Councillor Trudie Brand* *Councillor James Hodgson* *Councillor Aaron Stallard*
*Community Housing Acceleration Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens* *Councillor Rachel Sanson (lead)* *Councillor James Hodgson* *Councillor Kahu Paki Paki* *Councillor Pete Rainey*
*Storm Recovery Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith (lead)* *Councillor Matty Anderson* *Councillor Trudie Brand*
*Sports Facilities Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *Councillor Tim Skinner (lead)* *Councillor Matty Anderson* *Councillor Mathew Benge* *Councillor Campbell Rollo*
*Annual Plan 2023/24 Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens* *Councillor Mel Courtney (lead)* *Councillor Trudie Brand* *Councillor Rachel Sanson* *Councillor Aaron Stallard*

; and

9. Notes that the Chief Executive Employment Committee will have within its delegation the power to make recommendations on the recruitment and appointment of a Chief Executive, including the ability to establish a panel for interviewing; and

10. Directs Officers to advertise for up to two independent appointees to the Audit, Risk and Finance Committee, to be considered by the Committee with a view to making a recommendation to Council on the appointments; and

11. Endorses the following dates for Council meetings, noting that a full draft meeting schedule – including committee dates where these have been set – will be brought to the December Council meeting:

· 15 December 2022

· 2 and 3 February 2023 – Annual Plan workshops

· 9 February 2023

· 9 March 2023

· 13 April 2023

· 11 May 2023

· 8 June 2023

· 22 June 2023 – adoption of Annual Plan/setting rates

9. Elma Turner Library - Library Reopening Taskforce 48 - 54

Document number R27308

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Elma Turner Library - Library Reopening Taskforce (R27308) and its attachment (1982984479-5255); and

2. Approves the establishment of an Elma Turner Library – Library Reopening Taskforce with the following membership which is to be made up of

· Mayor Nick Smith (Chair)

· Councillors Kahu Paki Paki, Tim Skinner and Aaron Stallard

To be supported by such staff as assigned by the Chief Executive to enable a return to full provision of library services for Nelson City Centre; and

3. Approves the Terms of Reference for the Library Reopening Taskforce (1982984479-5255).

10. Extreme Weather Event - August 2022 55 - 67

Document number R27296

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Extreme Weather Event - August 2022 (R27296) and its attachments (1590798627-103 and 1982984479-5256); and

2. Approves retrospectively unbudgeted expenditure incurred to 30 September 2022 on the clean-up and remedial works following the August 2022 extreme weather event of $6.1M; and

3. Approves the establishment of a Storm Recovery Taskforce with the following membership

· Mayor Nick Smith (Chair)

· Councillors Matty Anderson and Trudie Brand

to be supported by staff as assigned by the Chief Executive to liaise on all matters relating to the August 2022 weather event; and

4. Approves the Terms of Reference for the Storm Recovery Taskforce (1982984479-5256), and

5. Notes that the recovery effort will continue with reporting to Council on a quarterly basis; and

6. Approves that expenses incurred to the end of June 2023 with be brought to the Council via Quarterly reports for retrospective approval; and

7. Approves changes to the Nelson City Council Procurement Policy, as detailed in Report R2729, for projects up to $2M; and

8. Notes the structure to address the ongoing issues relating to the extreme August 2022 weather event; and

9. Agrees that waivers on resource and building consent fees (other than the requirement for obtaining building consent for repairing wall linings to flooded properties), apply only to the end of the formal Civil Defence Transitional Recovery period; and

10. Notes that flood recovery assistance has been provided to the Kokorua rural residents as part of the August 2022 recovery event, and that Council consider as part of the 2023/24 Annual Plan that rates be charged to all rural properties for flood protection; and

11. Notes that in order to make the August 2022 recovery a priority and to attend to Business-As-Usual, additional resources and/or the use of consultants are likely to be required and/or projects may need to be deferred in the current financial year or as part of the upcoming 2023/24 Annual Plan.

11. Establishment of a Local Government Reform Taskforce 68 - 73

Document number R27324

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Establishment of a Local Government Reform Taskforce (R27324) and its attachment (789843239-48); and

2. Approves the establishment of a Local Government Reform Taskforce with the following membership

· Mayor Nick Smith (Chair)

· Deputy Mayor Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

· Councillors Matthew Benge, Trudie Brand, James Hodgson, and Aaron Stallard; and

3. Approves the Terms of Reference for the Local Government Reform Taskforce (789843239-48), and

4. Directs staff to prepare a submission, for approval by Council, on the proposals contained in the draft report of the Review into the Future of Local Government, taking into account guidance provided by the Local Government Reform Taskforce.

12. Nelson Local Body Elections 2022 Professionally Conducted Random Poll 74 - 84

Document number R27316

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Nelson Local Body Elections 2022 Professionally Conducted Random Poll (R27316) and its attachment (839498445–13186); and

2. Approves the commissioning of a professionally conducted random poll on the Nelson 2022 Local Body Elections.

13. Annual Report 2021/22 85 - 93

Document number R27288

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Annual Report 2021/22 (R27288) and its attachment (839498445-13184); and

2. Adopts the Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 2022 in accordance with S98 of the Local Government Act 2002; and

3. Receives the Audit New Zealand Opinion as tabled; and

4. Delegates the Mayor and Chief Executive authority to approve minor editorial changes to the Annual Report 2021/22 (83948445-13184), as necessary.

14. IRIS NextGen shared environmental data platform 94 - 102

Document number R27278

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report IRIS NextGen shared environmental data platform (R27278); and

2. Approves unbudgeted expenditure of $210,635 in 202/23 ($164,671 Capex and $45,964 Opex) to progress Council’s participation in the Iris NextGen shared environmental data platform.

15. Uniquely Nelson Annual Report 2021/22 103 - 133

Document number R27188

Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Uniquely Nelson Annual Report 2021/22 (R27188) and its attachments (839498445-7431 and 839498445-8307); and

2. Approves the Uniquely Nelson Annual Report as sufficient to provide Council with an overview of its activities during the 2021/22 year.

Confidential Business

16. Exclusion of the Public

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	Mayor's Report - Confidential	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
2	Section 17A review - Venue maintenance, marketing and management	Section 48(1)(a) The public conduct of this matter would be likely to result in disclosure of information for which good reason exists under section 7	The withholding of the information is necessary: · Section 7(2)(i) To enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)
3	Reappointment of Trustees to the City of Nelson Civic Trust	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

Karakia Whakamutanga

Nelson City Council Minutes - 28 October 2022

Shape

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Minutes of a meeting of the

Nelson City Council

Te Kaunihera o Whakatū

Held in the Trafalgar Centre Northern Extension, 13 Paru Paru Road, Nelson on Friday 28 October 2022, commencing at 12.00p.m.

Present: His Worship the Mayor N Smith (Chairperson), Councillors M Anderson, M Benge, T Brand, M Courtney, J Hodgson, R O'Neill-Stevens, K Paki Paki, P Rainey, C Rollo, T Skinner and A Stallard

In Attendance: Chief Executive (P Dougherty), Group Manager Infrastructure (A Louverdis), Group Manager Community Services (A White), Group Manager Corporate Services (N Harrison), Acting Group Manager Strategy and Communications (K Grade), Senior Governance Adviser (M Macfarlane) and Assistant Governance Adviser (A Bryce-Neumann)

Apology: An apology has been received from Councillor-elect R Sanson

Karakia and Mihi Timatanga

1. Statutory Declarations (Agenda item 6)

Document number R27310, agenda pages 5 - 6 refer.

His Worship the Mayor made his statutory declaration, witnessed by the Chief Executive, and assumed the chair.

His Worship the Mayor then called on each of the Councillors to make their statutory declarations.

2. Apologies (Agenda item 1)

Resolved CL/2022/244

That the Council

1. Receives and accepts an apology from Councillor-elect R Sanson.

His Worship the Mayor/Courtney Carried

3. Confirmation of Order of Business (Agenda item 2)

The order of business was amended to consider business items prior to Inaugural speeches.

4. Interests (Agenda item 3)

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

5. Public Forum (Agenda item 4)

There was no public forum.

6. Confirmation of Minutes (Agenda item 5)

There were no minutes to be confirmed.

7. Legislation Affecting Elected Members - General Explanation

Document number R27117, agenda pages 7 - 12 refer.

Chief Executive, Pat Dougherty, noted the requirement under the Local Government Act 2002 to provide explanations of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and other laws affecting elected members. Mr Dougherty summarised the information in the report.

Resolved CL/2022/245

That the Council

1. Receives the report Legislation Affecting Elected Members - General Explanation (R27117); and

2. Particularly notes the provisions and requirements outlined by the:

a. Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987

b. Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968

c. Crimes Act 1961 sections 99, 105 and 105a

d. Secret Commissions Act 1910

e. Financial Markets Conduct Act 2013

as required under Schedule 7 clause 21 Local Government Act 2002

3. Further note the provisions and requirements of the

a. Health and Safety at Work Act 2015

b. Privacy Act 2020

c. Local Government (Pecuniary Interests Register) Amendment Act 2022

Brand/Rainey Carried

8. Fixing of the Date and Time of the First Ordinary Meetings of Council

Document number R27118, agenda pages 13 - 15 refer.

His Worship the Mayor N Smith proposed an amendment to the officers recommendations to remove the reference to a second Council meeting on 8 December 2022, noting the date for December meeting was not yet confirmed.

Resolved CL/2022/246

That the Council

1. Receives the report Fixing of the Date and Time of the First Ordinary Meetings of Council (R27118); and

2. Authorise the Chief Executive to call the first Ordinary meeting of Council for 9.00am, 10 November 2022.

Skinner/Paki Paki Carried

9. Members' Introductory Speeches

Document number R27306

First term members delivered introductory speeches, which were tabled on request.

Attachments

1 1982984479-5236 Councillor Matty Anderson Introductory Speech

2 1982984479-5257 Councillor Mathew Benge Introductory Speech

3 1982984479-5234 Councillor Kahu Paki Paki Introductory Speech

4 1982984479-5233 Councillor Campbell Rollo Introductory Speech

5 1982984479-5223 Councillor Aaron Stallard Introductory Speech

10. Mayor's Speech

Document number R27307

Under Section 41A of the Local Government Act 2002 His Worship the Mayor N Smith used his discretionary power to appoint Councillor R O’Neil-Stevens as Deputy Mayor.

Deputy Mayor O’Neil-Stevens delivered his introductory speech, which was tabled.

His Worship the Mayor N Smith delivered his introductory speech, which was tabled.

Attachments

1 1982984479-5235 Deputy Mayor Rohan O'Neil-Stevens Introductory Speech

2 1982984479-5239 Mayor Nick Smith Introductory Speech

The meeting concluded with a waiata by Elected Members

There being no further business the meeting ended at 2.21p.m.

Confirmed as a correct record of proceedings by resolution on (date)

Resolved

Item 8: Mayor's Report - Governance Structures

Council

10 November 2022

REPORT R27322

Mayor's Report

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To outline direction setting for the early 2022-25 triennium.

2. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Mayor's Report (R27322); and

3. Discussion

3.1 Note the separate agenda item to establish a Library Re-opening taskforce with the purpose of urgently resolving the tile and any other building issues to enable the current facility to be fully reopened to the public.

Library Development Project

3.2 There is significant opposition to the proposed new Halifax Street library, both because of the cost of $46 Million and concerns from some that the site on the banks of the Maitai River is too risky.

3.3 The financial pressures on households and businesses have increased significantly since the Library Development project was proposed. The impacts of high inflation and the sharp rise in interest rates has seen the cost of living pressures become the top concern of households. Business confidence surveys have fallen sharply in the last year to the lowest levels since the Global Financial Crisis. This is not an environment in which the community is likely to have an appetite for such large expenditure on this project.

3.4 The Council, since the Library Development project was proposed, also now has additional costs of between $40 and $60 Million to fix infrastructure from the devastating August weather event.

3.5 While a portion of these costs may be offset from Government support and insurance, the bulk of this will need to be funded from rates. This calls into question Council expenditure on a project of this size.

3.6 I am further satisfied on reading the detailed assessments on the current Elma Turner Library that it can be made safe at a reasonable cost and that the need for a new library is not an urgent one.

3.7 Below are the costs paid for the Library Redevelopment Project over this and last year since the Council decision to proceed in its Long Term Plan:

Items	Cumulative Total
Community engagement	$95,147
Communications	$53,178
Flooding advice	$43,158
Negotiations	$138,546
Project management and consultancy	$235,570
Legal advice	$17,611
Sundry items	$1,393
Cultural and iwi	$18,173
Geotech	$49,103
	$651,879

3.8 Note that, in addition, in the previous year 202/21, the old warehouse building adjacent to the current library building as deconstructed and that cost has been allocated against the Library project, per the plan at the time. The cost of this deconstruction was $716,204.66.

3.9 I took the view in the recent local elections that there was not sufficient public support to proceed with the proposed new library and that continuing to spend significant ratepayer monies on furthering the project to detail design was not prudent.

3.10 In light of the situation the community is in and the need to reconsider Council expenditure, I propose that a review of the Library Redevelopment Project be undertaken and that there is no further expenditure on progressing the Library Redevelopment Project pending Council direction following the review.

Impacts of August 2022 rain event

3.11 The impacts of the August 2022 rain event cannot be overstated. Working with our community on recovery and resilience-building is the top priority for Council.

3.12 There are instances where repair work is creating its own pressures on the ability of Nelsonians to live and work. An important example of this is the closure of SH6 between Nelson and Marlborough between 1 November to 18 December to allow Waka Kotahi to undertake much needed permanent remedial works. The impact of this closure on thousands who travel this route daily and the direct implications for the rural remote residents of Kokorua Road are significant.

3.13 I want to acknowledge central government Ministers Kieran McAnulty and Rachel Boyack for assisting with the addition of $90,000 towards the Mayoral Relief Fund to be used specifically to aid the Kokorua residents, and others impacted by the closure

3.14 I have put considerable time into meeting Kokorua residents and finding practical solutions to their specific problems, which has resulted in additional river works, a six-times-a-day escorted access through forestry roads during the SH6 closure, and facilitated access to the Mayoral Relief Fund for specific needs. One outstanding issue to resolve is getting post through to these residents.

3.15 I take the opportunity to thank the Kokorua community for the hospitality they afforded me, Council staff and Waka Kotahi during recent visits.

3.16 I extend my appreciation to Originair for its commitment to providing a full seven weeks of air service between Nelson and Blenheim during the closure of State Highway 6. The provision of this air service is particularly important for minimising the disruption to important public services like health while major repairs are completed following the devastating weather event in August. I am also grateful to Nelson and Marlborough airports and Te Whatu Ora Nelson Marlborough for supporting the air service. A contribution of $10,000 from the Mayoral Relief Fund has also been critical to securing this temporary service.

Long Term Plan (LTP) Amendment

3.17 The changes to the capital programme that will be required as a result of the recovery from the September weather event are of a size that staff consider is material. Staff therefore recommend that Council undertake an LTP amendment as part of the Annual Plan 2023/24 process and in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002 section 95B. As an audit of the amendment will be required, and it is expected that Audit NZ resourcing will continue to be under pressure, it is important that Council make an early request to Audit NZ. In order to be included in the Audit NZ work programme a resolution of Council is required and a recommendation to that effect is included in this report.

3.18 There is low risk associated with this recommendation as the amendment will be assessed by Audit NZ. It does not commit Council to any particular action or expenditure as these are decisions that will be taken during the Annual Plan process. Council can decide to defer a decision on an LTP amendment, but this would introduce a risk that Audit NZ would not be available to audit the amendment when required.

Author: Nick Smith, Mayor

Attachments

Nil

Council

10 November 2022

REPORT R27326

Mayor's Report - Governance Structures

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To present the initial governance structure, appointments and associated information for the 2022 – 2025 triennium.

2. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Mayor's Report - Governance Structures (R27326) and its attachments (1982984479-5247 and 1982984479-5241); and

3. Endorses the allocation of the post-election 2022/23 councillor remuneration pool as follows:

Deputy Mayor $65,000.00

Councillor $49,484.82; and

5. Endorses the Terms of Reference for the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee (1982984479-5241); and

7. Notes the Nelson City Council membership of the Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee has been included in the governance appointments for the 2022 triennium; and

8. Notes the initial governance structure and roles for the 2022 triennium, including the appointment of Councillor Mel Courtney as Interim Chair of the Audit Risk and Finance Committee

Group 1: Representation Appointments:

*Name of Organisation*	*Appointees*
*Whakatu Marae*	*Mayor Nick Smith*
*Cawthron Institute Board*	*Mayor Nick Smith*
*Mayoral Taskforce for Jobs Steering Group*	*Mayor Nick Smith*
*Mayoral Taskforce for City Futures*	*Mayor Nick Smith*
*Nelson Mayoral Relief Trust*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *Cr Matty Anderson* *Cr Trudie Brand*
*Sister Cities Coordinating Group*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *Cr Trudie Brand*
*Tasman Bays Heritage Trust Appointments Committee*	*Cr Mel Courtney* *Cr Kahu Paki Paki*
*Nelson Youth Council*	*Cr James Hodgson* *All other councillors attend via rotation*
*Urban Design Champion*	*Cr Pete Rainey*
*Youth Nelson (The Young Nelson Trust)*	*DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens*
*Sport Tasman (Tasman Regional Sports Trust)*	*Cr Tim Skinner*
*Nelson Tasman Business Trust*	*Cr Matthew Benge*
*Accessibility for All*	*Cr Campbell Rollo*
*Arts Council Nelson Incorporated*	*DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens* *Cr Matty Anderson*
*Positive Ageing Forum*	*Cr Rachel Sanson*
*Heritage Houses: Broadgreen Facility, Melrose House*	*Cr Mel Courtney (Broadgreen)* *Cr James Hodgson (Melrose)*
Tāhunanui Liaison Councillor*	*Cr Campbell Rollo*
Nelson North Liaison Councillor*	*Cr Aaron Stallard*
Pacific and Ethnic Communities Liaison Councillor*	*Cr Matty Anderson*

*These are new roles for which the Terms of Reference will be brought to the December 2022 Council meeting

Group 2: Joint Nelson Tasman Committee Appointments:

Committee

Members

Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee

Two elected members (and two alternates)- Nelson City Council

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Cr Mel Courtney (alternate)

Cr James Hodgson (alternate)

Two Elected Members (and two alternates )Tasman District Council

Waka Kotahi representative

Joint Committee

All elected members Nelson City Council

All elected members Tasman District Council

Joint Shareholders Committee

Mayor and 5 councillors Nelson City Council

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Cr Mel Courtney

Cr Matthew Benge

Cr Kahu Paki Paki

Cr Rachel Sanson

Mayor and 5 councillors Tasman District Council

Saxton Field Joint Committee

Nelson City Councillor x 2

Cr Campbell Rollo

Cr Tim Skinner

Tasman District Councillor x 2

Independent Chair TBC

Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group

Mayor Nelson City Council

Mayor Tasman District Council

Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit

Nelson City Councillor x 2

Cr Mel Courtney

Cr Aaron Stallard

Tasman District Councillor x 2

Iwi Representative

Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit

Nelson City Councillor x 2

Cr Kahu Paki Paki

Cr Tim Skinner

Tasman District Councillor x 2

Independent Member

Regional Pest Management Joint Committee

Nelson City Councillor x 3

Cr Matthew Benge

Cr Rachel Sanson

Cr Aaron Stallard

Tasman District Councillor x 3

Joint Regional Cemetery Working Group

Nelson City Councillor x 2

Cr Trudie Brand

Cr Tim Skinner

Tasman District Councillor x 2

Iwi Representative

Nelson Tasman Joint Waste Review Working Party

Cr Matthew Benge

Cr Rachel Sanson

Cr Aaron Stallard

Waimea Inlet Coordination Group

Nelson City Councillor x 1

Cr Rachel Sanson

Group 3: Nelson City Council Committee Appointments:

Chief Executive Employment Committee

Mayor Nick Smith (Chair)

DM Rohan O’Neill-Smith

Cr Trudie Brand

Cr Pete Rainey

Paul Bell (external advisor, no voting rights)

Audit, Risk and Finance Committee

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Cr Mel Courtney (Interim chair)

Cr Rachel Sanson

Shanell Kelly (direct Māori re-appointment proposed)

One or two independent appointees – to be sought

Tenders Committee

Mayor Nick Smith (Chair)

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Cr Mel Courtney

Cr Kahu Paki Paki

Eelco Boswijk Civic Awards Committee

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Cr Trudie Brand (Chair)

Councillor Matty Anderson

Councillor Pete Rainey

Hearing Panel

All elected members

Rotating attendance in panels of three

District Licensing Committee

Oke Blaikie (external appointee)

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens (Deputy Chair)

Cr Trudie Brand

Group 4: Forum Appointments:

Iwi Council partnership hui

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens

Councillor Kahu Paki Paki

Councillor Rachel Sanson

Councillor Tim Skinner

Climate Change Forum

Mayor

Deputy Mayor

Community and Whanau

Mayor

Councillor Matty Anderson

Councillor James Hodgson

Nelson Biodiversity Forum

Councillor Rachel Sanson

Councillor Aaron Stallard

Councillor Matthew Benge

City Centre Business Forum

Mayor Nick Smith

DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens (Chair)

Councillor Pete Rainey

Councillor Tim Skinner

Representatives to include:

· Uniquely Nelson

· Hospitality sector

· Retail sector

· Property owners

Group 5: Taskforce Appointments:

*Elma Turner Library Reopening Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith (lead)* *Councillor Kahu Paki Paki* *Councillor Tim Skinner* *Councillor Aaron Stallard*
*Civic House Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *Councillor Pete Rainey (lead)* *Councillor Mel Courtney* *Councillor Campbell Rollo*
*Local Government Reform Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith (lead)* *DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens* *Councillor Matthew Benge* *Councillor Trudie Brand* *Councillor James Hodgson* *Councillor Aaron Stallard*
*Community Housing Acceleration Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens* *Councillor Rachel Sanson (lead)* *Councillor James Hodgson* *Councillor Kahu Paki Paki* *Councillor Pete Rainey*
*Storm Recovery Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith (lead)* *Councillor Matty Anderson* *Councillor Trudie Brand*
*Sports Facilities Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *Councillor Tim Skinner (lead)* *Councillor Matty Anderson* *Councillor Mathew Benge* *Councillor Campbell Rollo*
*Annual Plan 2023/24 Taskforce*	*Mayor Nick Smith* *DM Rohan O’Neill-Stevens* *Councillor Mel Courtney (lead)* *Councillor Trudie Brand* *Councillor Rachel Sanson* *Councillor Aaron Stallard*

; and

· 15 December 2022

· 2 and 3 February 2023 – Annual Plan workshops

· 9 February 2023

· 9 March 2023

· 13 April 2023

· 11 May 2023

· 8 June 2023

· 22 June 2023 – adoption of Annual Plan/setting rates.

3. Discussion

Overview

3.1 In line with the powers provided under section 41A Local Government Act 2002, I am establishing an initial governance structure and appointments to ensure decision-making can progress for the 2022 – 2025 triennium.

3.2 A key factor in the structure is an even apportionment of workload across councillors.

3.3 In May 2023, it is intended to complete a full review of the committee structure and allocation of roles in consultation with councillors, with any changes then coming into effect on 1 July 2023.

Remuneration

3.4 The Remuneration Authority is responsible under the Local Government Act 2002 to determine and monitor elected member remuneration.

3.5 Mayoral remuneration is set by the Remuneration Authority as a total remuneration package. The level of honorarium received by councillors must be allocated by a Council within the limits of a funding pool, the amount of which is set for each financial year by the Authority.

3.6 For the post-election period of the 2022/23 financial year, defined as the day that Council came into office (15 October 2022) until 30 June 2023, the funding pool is $609,333. Council must allocate the whole funding pool and may not exceed it. The Remuneration Authority has set that the minimum base salary that can be paid a Nelson City Councillor is $40,083.

In further recognition of the commitment to evenly allocated roles and responsibilities, it is proposed that the funding pool be allocated evenly across councillors, with a premium for the role of Deputy Mayor in recognition of the particular demands and responsibilities of the role. The resulting breakdown being as follows:

Deputy Mayor	$65,000.00
Councillor (11)	$49,484.82

3.7 Once resolution has been reached on allocation of the funding pool, the Remuneration Authority is notified for its determination on the allocation. The Authority takes into account the allocation of roles and the appropriateness of remuneration in their determination. Following gazetting of the determination, payment to councillors is adjusted to the determined level.

Joint Regional Transport Committee

3.8 Agreement in principle has been reached with Tasman District Council and Waka Kotahi for the establishment of a Joint Nelson Tasman Regional Transport Committee, as provided for under section 105(9) of the Land Transport Management Act 2003.

3.9 I noted in my six governance reset points of my ambition for extending the areas of joint work with the Tasman District Council. There are two specific areas on which this has been advanced.

3.10 I have discussed with Environment Minister David Parker the areas of planning and resource management – a letter from Hon Parker is shown at Attachment 1. We agreed that Nelson and Tasman will have a joint Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) under the proposed Spatial Planning Act and a joint Natural and Built Environment Plan (NBA) under the proposed National and Built Environment Act. The bills to enable this decision are expected to be introduced to Parliament prior to Christmas and will be subject to public submissions.

3.11 I have proposed with Waka Kotahi and Mayor Tim King that we have a joint Regional Transport Plan as provided for under the Land Transport Act. This has been agreed in principle and is included as part of the governance paper in today’s agenda.

3.12 Transport, as with many sectors, can only benefit from a united approach across our region with the same expectations and provisions for all users.

3.13 If established, the Joint Committee must prepare the Regional Land Transport Plan and will also be responsible for other plans and advice relating to transport for the Nelson Tasman Region.

3.14 The draft Terms of Reference for the Joint Committee is shown at Attachment 2.

Governance structure and appointments

3.15 The initial governance structure for the 2022 – 2025 triennium will be comprised of

· Nelson City Council Committees

· Forums

· Nelson City Council Taskforces

as well as participation in joint committees with Tasman District Council, and representation appointments to community organisations.

3.16 The full schedule of governance bodies and appointments is covered in the recommendation.

Monthly Council meetings

3.17 It is intended that Council meet monthly on a Thursday to conduct its business.

3.18 The following dates for Council meetings are proposed for the period to the end of the 2022/23 financial year:

· 15 December 2022

· 9 February 2023

· 9 March 2023

· 13 April 2023

· 11 May 2023

· 8 June 2023

· 22 June 2023 – for the adoption of the Annual Plan and setting rates

3.19 It is also intended to hold workshops on 2 and 3 February 2023 to progress the Annual Plan.

3.20 A full draft meeting schedule, including committee and joint committee dates where these have been set, will be brought to the December Council meeting.

Author: Nick Smith, Mayor

Attachments

Attachment 1: Letter - Hon D Parker 1982984479-5247 ⇩

Attachment 2: Draft Terms of Reference - Joint Regional Transport Committee -1982984479-5241 ⇩

Item 9: Elma Turner Library - Library Reopening Taskforce

Council

10 November 2022

REPORT R27308

Elma Turner Library - Library Reopening Taskforce

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To propose the establishment of an Elma Turner Library – Library Reopening Taskforce to enable a rapid response which will assist the timely return to full delivery of library services in Nelson’s central city.

2. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Elma Turner Library - Library Reopening Taskforce (R27308) and its attachment (1982984479-5255); and

2. Approves the establishment of an Elma Turner Library – Library Reopening Taskforce with the following membership which is to be made up of

· Mayor Nick Smith (Chair)

· Councillors Kahu Paki Paki, Tim Skinner and Aaron Stallard

To be supported by such staff as assigned by the Chief Executive to enable a return to full provision of library services for Nelson City Centre; and

3. Approves the Terms of Reference for the Library Reopening Taskforce (1982984479-5255).

3. Background

3.1 An update report (R27194) on the ceilings at the Elma Turner Library (ETL) was provided to Council at the meeting held 22 September 2022.

3.2 It was resolved [CL/2022/215] at that meeting that the Council:

1. Receives the report Elma Turner Library - Ceiling Tiles (R27194) and its attachments (714127617-7600 and 714127617-7774).

2. Requests officers to review the events leading to the closure of Elma Turner Library and report to the Audit Risk and Finance Subcommittee (or its successor); and

3. Requests officers to report back, with urgency, a full options analysis for the Elma Turner Library building, including Library service delivery options.

3.3 The next steps as advised in the report was that a new structural Detailed Seismic Assessment (DSA) had been commissioned, with the draft assessment report due to be received by Council by the end of October 2022.

3.4 There is a risk that the %NBS (New Building Standard) for the structure of the building may decrease from the 42%NBS result of the earlier 2013 DSA due to changes brought about by the July 2017 Ministry of Business, Employment and Innovation guidelines “The Seismic Assessment of Existing Buildings”. Geotechnical information that was not included as part of the 2013 DSA but is now known may also impact negatively on the current structural %NBS outcome.

4. Discussion

4.1 To enable rapid decision making once the final version of the structural DSA for the ETL has been received, it is recommended that an Elma Turner Library – Library Reopening Taskforce (Taskforce) be established.

4.2 The purpose of the Taskforce would be to work through the results of the structural DSA and determine the best pathway to the timely reopening of the ETL so that full library services can be resumed. Recommendations from the Taskforce would be brought back to full Council for a decision.

4.3 The Taskforce would make recommendations on the optimal %NBS to strengthen the ceiling and structure (if necessary) to, based on an options analysis.

5. Options

5.1 There are two options identified, with Option 1 being the preferred option.

Option 1: Establish Elma Turner Library – Library Reopening Taskforce (Recommended Option)
Advantages	· Enables more rapid decision making · Reduces the length of time that the community is lacking library services
Risks and Disadvantages	· Smaller group makes recommendations for the future of provision of library services
Option 2: Do not establish Elma Turner Library – Library Reopening Taskforce
Advantages	· None
Risks and Disadvantages	· Timeframes will likely extend the length of time that the community does not have access to full library services

Author: Rebecca Van Orden, Manager Property Services

Attachments

Attachment 1: 1982984479-5255 Terms of Reference for Elma Turner Library - Library Reopening Taskforce ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The provision of library services is a core function of local government which supports the cultural and social wellbeing of the community.

Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

This report fits with the following Community Outcomes:

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

We are proud of and celebrate our history and heritage and how that contributes to our identity. We have a strong sense of community, enhanced by the wide range of arts, cultural and sporting opportunities on offer.

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

Nelson has developed high quality sports and recreation facilities for all ages. There are educational and leisure opportunities for the whole community to enjoy. We protect, enhance and celebrate Nelson’s human heritage and historic sites.

Risk

Council faces reputational risk from long term closure of the City’s largest library facility.

There is a risk that the structural DSA will result in a score of less than 34%NBS, and Council will need to be prepared to make further decisions on expenditure or closure of the facility based on the outcome of the DSA.

Financial impact

There will be a shortfall for recommended works that will require a decision from Council to fund.

Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance and no engagement has been undertaken. The pop-up library and extended hours at branch libraries are providing a library service to the community but not the extent that the community is used to or expects. No engagement will be required, however the public and stakeholders will be kept informed about the progress of this project through the Council’s communication channels, including Our Nelson, social media and regular media releases.

Climate Impact

There is no direct climate impact from the matters in this report.

Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

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

Delegations

This decision is a matter for full Council.

Item 10: Extreme Weather Event - August 2022

Council

10 November 2022

REPORT R27296

Extreme Weather Event - August 2022

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To retrospectively approve unbudgeted expenditure incurred to date following the August 2022 extreme weather event.

1.2 To approve changes to the Nelson City Council Procurement Policy for work up to $2M.

1.3 To note the recovery structure to address ongoing recovery matters.

1.4 To note the waiving of regulatory fees as part of the event and to set an end date for the waiver of regulatory fees going forward.

1.5 To approve the establishment of a Storm Recovery Taskforce.

1.6 To note the assistance offered to rural communities with river flood damage works.

1.7 To note the implications on Council resources required to give priority to the August 2022 event recovery.

2. Summary

2.1 The region experienced an extreme weather event in August 2022 that caused substantial damage to the region.

2.2 Clean up work is well underway (and continuing) and costs to undertake this have been incurred. Work on addressing the full scope of all recovery projects is well underway and the costs of this are being assessed in the context of the current work programme and the Council’s debt cap.

2.3 The Mayor has made Nelson’s recovery a top priority and this report covers a number of issues including the retrospective approval of unbudgeted costs to date, changes to the NCC Procurement Policy, waiver of regulatory fees and the establishment of a taskforce.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Extreme Weather Event - August 2022 (R27296) and its attachments (1590798627-103 and 1982984479-5256); and

2. Approves retrospectively unbudgeted expenditure incurred to 30 September 2022 on the clean-up and remedial works following the August 2022 extreme weather event of $6.1M; and

3. Approves the establishment of a Storm Recovery Taskforce with the following membership

· Mayor Nick Smith (Chair)

· Councillors Matty Anderson and Trudie Brand

to be supported by staff as assigned by the Chief Executive to liaise on all matters relating to the August 2022 weather event; and

4. Approves the Terms of Reference for the Storm Recovery Taskforce (1982984479-5256), and

5. Notes that the recovery effort will continue with reporting to Council on a quarterly basis; and

6. Approves that expenses incurred to the end of June 2023 with be brought to the Council via Quarterly reports for retrospective approval; and

7. Approves changes to the Nelson City Council Procurement Policy, as detailed in Report R2729, for projects up to $2M; and

8. Notes the structure to address the ongoing issues relating to the extreme August 2022 weather event; and

4. Background

4.1 The region experienced an extreme weather event in August this year, that was unprecedented in nature and saw substantial damage and disruption to the Nelson region as well as its neighbouring Council’s.

4.2 A Civil Defence Emergency was declared on 18 August 2022 (lifted on 31 August 2022) and saw at its peak around 1,200 residents evacuated and 89 red placards and 89 yellow placards issued. At time of writing those figures are 29 and 90 respectively.

4.3 Nelson transitioned from Response to Recovery on 31 August 2022 for a period of 28 days with that extended again for a further 28 days ending 26 October 2022.

4.4 Expenses have been incurred on the response and recovery (clean-up, ongoing remedial works and setting up the Recovery Office), for which Council retrospective approval is required.

4.5 Officers have put in place a structure that will transition from the Transitional Recovery phase to a Nelson City Council Recovery phase that will manage ongoing relationships with landowners as well as delivery of recovery projects.

5. Discussion

Costs incurred to date

5.1 Costs incurred by Council as part of the clean-up and remedial works undertaken to date are as shown below and include river protection assistance provided to the rural Kokorua road settlement (refer to section 8 for more detail).

5.2 These costs exclude the geotechnical costs of $700,000 incurred during the Civil Defence Response. Recovery of these costs is being worked through with the National Emergency Management Agency (NEMA).

Item	Amount
Transport	$2.3M
Utilities	$3M
Parks & Reserves	$0.6M
Recovery Office	$0.048M
Rural area assistance	$0.1M
TOTAL	$6.05M

Anticipated Costs

5.2 The anticipated high level costs of the recovery programme, in addition to the cost incurred to date, as a result of the weather event are estimated below. Officers are working on the programme of works in relation to the 2023/24 Annual Plan revision. It is likely that the recovery work could take up to five years to complete.

Item	Range
Transport	$15 to $20M
Utilities	$20 to $30M
Parks & Reserves	$4M to $6M

5.3 It is estimated that $10M will be spent to the end of June 2023 (end of the financial year) as recovery work continues.

Item	Estimate expenditure to June 2023
Transport (will be eligible for Waka Kotahi subsidy)	$4M
Utilities	$5M
Parks & Reserves	$1M

Funding

5.4 The first $150,000 of unbudgeted expenditure in any activity is expected to be funded by reducing programmed expenditure within that activity. The balance of unbudgeted expenditure incurred in the current year (2022/23) which hasn’t been rated for – whether operating expenditure or capital expenditure will need to be borrowed. The expenditure in the closed accounts (water, wastewater, stormwater and flood protection) will be borrowed in those activities after the offset of any recoveries through grants and insurance payments. For any expenditure in the general rate activities (parks, reserves etc), these borrowings will be transferred to the Emergency Fund once offset against any recoveries.

5.5 For 2023/24 the recovery expenditure will be included in the 2023/24 Annual Plan in the activities where it will be incurred. Potentially, depending on the quantum, this additional expenditure may trigger a Long Term Plan 2021-31 amendment. The intention would be that the net recovery expenditure is funded through borrowings and repaid over time.

5.6 Underground infrastructure assets (three waters assets) are insured through Aon for Council’s 40% share (60% is covered by Central Government via NEMA). The excess is $1.8M and Council is working with insurers on claims, but this will take some time. The NEMA claim is likely to take longer. Some above ground assets (parks assets – eg mountain bike hub) are insured however most of the damage to land is not covered by insurance.

5.7 Emergency work on roading network assets are subject to a Waka Kotahi subsidy. The rate depends on the quantum and is likely to be 70%. This does not apply for work to be undertaken over the next several years.

5.8 The recovery works programme will need to be considered in relation to Year 3 of the Long Term Plan and will be discussed as part of the 2023/24 Annual Plan workshops in December this year.

5.9 There are a number of issues still to work through that are complex in nature and will potentially take some time to work through to resolution. These may involve discussions with third parties - by way of example slips from Council land on to private property and vice versa. A structure to work through these is discussed further in section 7. What this does mean is that the costs surrounding these are as yet unknown (and excluded from the figures above) and will come to fruition as-and-when suitable solutions are agreed.

6. Physical works Procurement Process

6.1 As part of this Council’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic, it implemented a streamlined procurement policy that enabled a rapid yet transparent and accountable response to appointing contractors for physical works that was essential to stimulate the region’s economic recovery.

6.2 This streamlined procurement process has been highly successful and was and continues to be fully endorsed by the Civil Contractor’s Federation. The process has been independently audited and shows that the processes in place are robust and that the residents of Nelson are receiving good value for money. The Senior Leadership team supported the use of this streamlined process up to the end of June 2023, pending a decision by the new Council.

6.3 However, the extreme weather event and the new Council has provided the opportunity to formalise this as part of the way Council does business. The streamlined process in summary includes assigning works equitably across competent local contractors considering previous track record for water, wastewater, stormwater & flood protection and roading projects, up to a limit of $2M for any single contract.

6.4 This streamlined process still maintains stringent quality control through high quality drawings and schedule of quantities that contractors need to price. It also does not preclude other contractors (at their request) from pricing and participating in projects in which they are interested.

6.5 All projects that receive Waka Kotahi subsidy will follow all Waka Kotahi procurement policies without exception.

7. Recovery Structure

7.1 As noted previously, following the Civil Defence Response the event entered into the Transitional Recovery period. That had a finite life and ended on the 26 October. The time has come to transition into business-as-usual (BAU).

7.2 Officers have been working with Civil Defence, NEMA and the Chief Executive and have arrived at a structure that will maintain relationships with the landowners and provide a mechanism to manage the recovery. Refer to attachment 1. A separate team within the Infrastructure Group will manage the delivery of the recovery projects.

8. Storm Recovery Taskforce (taskforce)

8.1 The establishment of a taskforce comprising elected members to assist in the City’s recovery is recommended. Whilst the taskforce would have no delegated authority to spend money, as that responsibility remains with Council, the taskforce will be provided with updates on the progress and challenges of the recovery.

8.2 Officers will continue with the recovery effort and will report to Council on a quarterly basis seeking retrospective approval of expenses incurred. It is anticipated that $10M will be expended by the end of June 2023.

9. Kokorua Road

9.1 Nelson’s Kokorua rural community has been particularly hard hit by the extreme rainfall event. Damage includes silt and gravel deposited on paddocks from the Whangamoa River. The amount of gravel has also changed the natural course of the river and the build-up has posed potential issues to the existing stopbanks and properties.

9.2 Currently all rural residents (from Hira northwards) do not pay water, wastewater, stormwater or flood protection rates, as none of these services are available to them. As a result, no work is undertaken by Council on preventative or reactive maintenance on any rural streams as per current Council policy. Council does however attend to road and culvert maintenance.

9.3 The community, being a rural community, also struggle with communications with no internet or cell phone connection with most either using satellite phones or relying on neighbours with satellite phones.

9.4 Officers recently attended a community meeting and noted that the community, whilst self-sufficient and resilient, were definitely in need of assistance as most have exhausted their energy, resources and funding to protect their properties and bring their farms back to full production. Council has provided assistance and that is ongoing.

9.5 In addition to this assistance, the community has been encouraged to apply to the Mayoral Relief Fund and many have taken the opportunity to do this.

9.6 Taking a longer view in terms of rating for rural communities, officers support Council, as part of the upcoming 2023/24 Annual Plan, considering rural communities be charged a flood protection rate. This was noted by the community as something they would be open to.

10. Regulatory

10.1 As part of the Civil Defence Recovery stage, regulatory fees for resource consents were waived to some degree to assist Nelson residents in the recovery. Building consent costs were reduced as there are central government levies that cannot be waived.

10.2 Building consents – the requirement for obtaining building consent for repairing wall linings to flooded properties has been waived under schedule 1 part 2 of the NZ Building Act 2004 as part of the event. This is in line with the approach taken by other Councils such as Buller and Marlborough in recent weather events. The waiver allows the homeowner to replace the wall linings including bracing elements however this does not include fire walls, wet area showers (tiled shower wall linings) or commercial properties. Council will waive the $267 fee attached to a notification of exempt work upon receipt of which there are approximately 35 properties that may wish to notify Council for this purpose.

10.3 Resource consents - Only a small number of resource consents associated with the weather event have been lodged to date to repair or replace bridges that provide access to private properties. More consent applications to fix or repair slips and flood damage are anticipated once property owners have worked through insurance claims and designed the repairs.

10.4 It is recommended that these regulatory waivers (other than building consents for wall linings) end on the date the Transitional Recovery period ended.

11. Staffing

11.1 The Mayor has strongly signalled that the August 2022 event recovery is a key Council priority.

11.2 Council’s workload prior to the August 2022 event was challenging and is set to continue with the likes of the Three Waters reforms and the many other governmental initiatives, the Infrastructure Acceleration Funding, Three Waters Better-off funding and the Mahitahi Plan Change to name a few.

11.3 Council will continue to face the challenge of maintaining BAU and in order to ensure that BAU continues along with the August 2022 recovery, additional resources, the use of external consultants to bridge that gap and project deferral are likely to be required.

12. Options

12.1 There are several matters to be considered and each will be discussed in turn hereafter.

12.2 In the matter of costs incurred to date these are as a direct result of attending to the weather event, and having already been spent, require retrospective Council approval.

Setting up a Storm Recovery Taskforce

12.3 Council can either establish a task force or not establish a taskforce. Officers support the establishment of a taskforce.

Option 1: Establish a Taskforce (Recommended Option)
Advantages	· Will keep the recovery front of mind and a priority for the Council · Will allow challenges to be discussed with a small group
Risks and Disadvantages	· Nil
Option 2: Do not establish a Taskforce
Advantages	· Nil
Risks and Disadvantages	· Could potentially slow the recovery

Changes to the Procurement Policy

12.4 Council can either approve the changes or not approve the changes to the Procurement Policy. Officers recommend the changes.

Option 1: Make changes to the Procurement Policy. Recommended option
Advantages	· Has worked successfully for several years since introduced during COVID-19 · Supported by Civil Contractor’s Federation · Has been proven to allow physical works to progress on site with urgency · Has been audited to show good value for money
Risks and Disadvantages	· Nil
Option 2: Do not make changes to the Procurement Policy
Advantages	· Nil
Risks and Disadvantages	· Will slow the recovery delivery

Regulatory fees waiver

12.5 Council can either continue with the waiver or set an end date for when the waiver applies. Officers support setting an end date.

Option 1: Continue with waiver
Advantages	· Property owners affected by the weather event have reduced processing costs
Risks and Disadvantages	· Ratepayers are covering costs that are normally covered by insurance
Option 2: Set an end date for waiver of fees. Recommended option
Advantages	· Ratepayers are not covering costs met by insurance – those without insurance can apply through the Mayoral relief fund
Risks and Disadvantages	· Potential reputational damage as have communicated that processing costs will be waived or reduced during the event

13. Conclusion

13.1 The extreme August 2022 weather event caused widespread damage to the Top of the South Island and the Nelson region.

13.2 Expenses have been incurred to date and require Council retrospective approval.

13.3 Changes to the Council Procurement Policy are also required to allow recovery works to progress efficiently and with urgency.

13.4 A decision is required on when and if waivers of regulatory fees should apply.

13.5 The establishment of a Taskforce is recommended.

14. Next Steps

14.1 Recovery works will continue as a priority.

Author: Alec Louverdis, Group Manager Infrastructure

Attachments

Attachment 1: 1590798627-103 - Recovery Structure ⇩

Attachment 2: 1982984479-5256 Terms of Reference for Storm Recovery Taskforce ⇩

Item 12: Nelson Local Body Elections 2022 Professionally Conducted Random Poll

Council

10 November 2022

REPORT R27316

Nelson Local Body Elections 2022 Professionally Conducted Random Poll

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To consider commissioning a professionally conducted random poll of the community’s views on the new voting system used in Nelson local body elections in 2022.

2. Summary

2.1 This report outlines the recommendations on reviewing the response and turnout of the 2022 Nelson Local Body Elections, summarises changes to the process since the 2019 elections and makes some comparisons to how Nelson compares to national averages.

2.2 Nelson’s voter turnout was 51.14% in 2022, which was slightly less than the 53.4% turnout in 2019. This compares favourably with the national voter turnout of 40.44% in 2022, which was slightly less than the 42.2% turnout in 2019.

2.3 The changes to the voting system in Nelson for the 2022 local body election were:

2.3.1 The voting system changed from First Past the Post (FPP) to Single Transferable Vote (STV).

2.3.2 Central, Stoke-Tāhunanui and Māori Wards were established, alongside the opportunity to vote for three “at large” councillor vacancies and the mayor.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Nelson Local Body Elections 2022 Professionally Conducted Random Poll (R27316) and its attachment (839498445–13186); and

2. Approves the commissioning of a professionally conducted random poll on the Nelson 2022 Local Body Elections.

4. Background

4.1 Three changes to the voting system were made between the 2019 and 2022 elections, as described below.

Changing the voting method

4.2 In the past, Nelson City Council voters ticked the boxes for their preferred candidates. In 2022 this changed to ranking candidates in order of preference, from one onwards.

4.3 This change occurred as a result of a Council decision in August 2020 to adopt a STV system. This decision was based on a report (R18153) which considered the merits of the FPP and STV approaches. In summary the FPP system is simple, and voters are familiar with it; and the STV system more accurately reflects overall voter preferences and is more likely to lead to more equitable minority representation.

4.4 Section 27 of the Local Electoral Act 2001 states that Council can resolve to use a particular electoral system for the next two triennial elections. This means the STV approach will also be used for Nelson City Council’s 2025 election unless Council resolves to hold a formal binding poll on the matter by 21 May 2024, or if a minimum of 5% of the voting population requests a formal binding poll on this matter by 21 February 2024 (if a valid demand is received after this date the results of the poll would be valid for 2028).

4.5 The 2020 report noted that a formal, binding poll would cost approximately $110,000.

Establishing a Māori Ward

4.6 Prior to 1 March 2021, any decision by a council to set up a Māori Ward would trigger a binding public poll where the decision could be overturned by 5% of electors. However, the passing of the Local Electoral (Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Act 2021 means that councils can establish Māori wards without triggering the mandatory and binding poll.

4.7 Section 19Z of the Local Electoral Act 2001 states that once a Māori Ward is in place, it must stay in place for two election cycles – and any changes after that time can be made by Council resolution.

4.8 In 2021 Council adopted a Māori Ward. Based on Nelson’s population, one Māori councillor position is available. Only those who are on the Māori electoral roll can vote for candidates standing in a Māori ward.

4.9 Where a Māori ward exists, those on the Māori roll can only vote for candidates standing in the Māori Ward and any at large positions (including the mayor).

4.10 The Local Electoral (Māori Wards and Māori Constituencies) Amendment Act 2021 allows for non-binding polls to be undertaken, if Council wishes to canvas the views of their community at any time, but there is no obligation to do so.

Establishing a ward system

4.11 A Māori ward must be part of a larger ward system because section 19H and Schedule 1A of the Local Electoral Act 2001 provide for Māori wards to exist only where there are other general wards.

4.12 Council considered a range of options as part of a representation review in August 2021 (Report R25896). The two main options were to be fully ward-based, or to have a mixed system (where some candidates are voted for “at large” and everyone can vote for them, and some general candidates are voted for in specific wards, alongside the Māori Ward).

4.13 It would theoretically be possible to create a single General Ward alongside a single Māori Ward; but this would mean that those on the Māori electoral 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. The May 2021 report (R22653) noted that while this was an option, it would create an imbalance.

4.14 In 2021 Council adopted a representation proposal comprising: two General Wards (a Central Ward with four councillor vacancies and a Stoke-Tāhunanui Ward with four vacancies) alongside the Whakatū Māori Ward (with one vacancy); with all voters being eligible to vote for three “at large” councillors and the mayor.

5. Discussion

Voter turnout in 2022

5.1 Nelson’s local body election voter turnout was 51.14% in 2022 which was slightly less than the 53.4% turnout in 2019. This compares favourably with the national voter turnout of 40.44% in 2022, which was slightly less than the 42.2% turnout in 2019.

5.2 Council officers went to considerable effort to encourage voting, including: understanding barriers to participation, providing advice for candidates, explaining the STV and ward systems and making it easy to vote. More details are provided in Attachment 1 – 839498445–13186 Communication and engagement actions to promote participation in the 2022 election.

Blank/informal votes

5.3 “Blanks” is the term used for voting papers where no preferences are indicated for any candidates within a voting category. For example, someone may have noted their preferences for the mayor and councillors in their Ward but failed to indicate a preference for “at large” councillors.

5.4 Informal votes (which can’t be counted) relate to errors on the voting paper, such as putting a tick beside the names of preferred candidates rather than numbering them in order of preference.

5.4.1 In the mayoral race there were 31 informal votes and 102 blank votes.

5.4.2 In the “at large” category there were 334 informal votes and 1,039 blank votes.

5.4.3 In the Central Ward there were 326 informal votes and 689 blank votes.

5.4.4 In the Stoke–Tāhunanui Ward there were 271 informal votes and 533 blank votes.

5.4.5 In the Whakatū Māori Ward there were six informal votes and 33 blank votes.

5.5 These numbers indicate that some voters didn’t understand which categories of candidates they were eligible to vote for, and others didn’t realise they needed to follow the STV voting process (numbering the candidates) instead of the FPP process (ticking the candidates).

5.6 However, it is likely that some of these voters understood the options but chose not to vote in all eligible categories. For example, they may have decided to vote for a mayor but not for councillors.

Single Transferable Vote (STV) system

5.7 As noted in clause 4.4 of this report, the STV system is in place for at least two elections unless Council resolves to hold a formal binding poll on the matter by 21 May 2024 or receives a request supported by 5% of the voting population for a formal binding poll by 21 February 2024. This type of poll is governed by the Local Electoral Act 2002 in terms of how it is conducted and would cost approximately $110,000.

Wards system

5.8 Council is not required to complete a further representation review until 2027 but could request a review before this time if it wished to propose a change to the 2022 combination of three “at large” councillors and four councillors in each of the two geographical wards (Stoke–Tāhunanui and Central). The representation review could propose a different approach to the General Wards. For example, Nelson could move to a single General Ward alongside the Māori Ward. (The Māori Ward must be in place for two elections, as required by section 19Z of the Local Electoral Act 2001).

5.9 A single General Ward would be a simpler approach, but it would limit people on the Māori roll to voting for only one councillor and the mayor.

Voting in the Māori Ward

5.10 There was a low vote count in the Māori Ward compared to the General Wards. This indicates work needs to continue to encourage people who are on the Māori roll to participate in local elections.

Feedback from a professionally conducted random poll

5.11 A professionally conducted random poll of the community’s views on this year’s election could be carried out to ask:

- Whether people voted – and if not, why not

- Their views on the move from a FPP to a STV voting system

- Their views on the current ward structure.

5.12 Feedback on people’s reasons for not voting could inform communication and engagement planning for the 2025 election.

5.13 Feedback on the STV system could be used to inform a Council decision on whether or not to initiate a formal binding poll (at a cost of $110,000). It may also assist with public communications on the current STV system, if this is retained.

5.14 Feedback on the ward system could be used by Council to consider whether or not to initiate a representation review that would take effect for the 2025 election. It may also assist with public communications on the current ward system, if this is retained.

National review of local body elections

5.15 It is possible that central government may initiate nationwide changes to how future local body elections are run to encourage greater participation in local elections, and to take a more consistent approach across New Zealand.

6. Options

Option 1: Do nothing (status quo)

6.1 Do not seek feedback from the community on whether or not they voted, any reasons for not voting, and their views on the STV and ward voting systems.

Option 2: Carry out a professionally conducted random poll

6.2 Carry out a professionally conducted random poll of a representative sample of the community on whether or not they voted, any reasons for not voting, and their views on the STV and ward voting systems. Staff recommend Option 2.

Option 1: Do nothing (status quo)
Advantages	· No cost or time required. · Nelson may still benefit from any national reviews of how local body elections are run.
Risks and Disadvantages	· Lack of feedback on local reasons for not voting, and on Nelson’s STV and ward voting systems relatively soon after the election.
Option 2: Carry out a professionally conducted random poll [recommended option]
Advantages	· Demographically representative feedback on obstacles to voting, and the STV and ward voting systems. · All people who wish to provide their feedback would be able to do so
Risks and Disadvantages	· The unbudgeted cost for a professionally conducted random poll of a representative range of residents. · Any confusion about the new STV and ward systems in the 2022 election might be resolved after these systems have been used for two election cycles. · Any local feedback and changes proposed by Council might be subsumed by a nationwide review of local body elections.

6.3 Option 2 would provide useful, representative feedback on the community’s responses to the changes to the voting system, and the range of reasons for not voting.

7. Conclusion

7.1 The results of a professionally conducted random poll could be used to inform Council’s decision on whether or not to invest in a binding poll on use of the STV voting system, or to initiate a representation review to propose a change to the general ward structure. It may also generate new ideas on how to encourage participation in the 2025 local body election.

8. Next Steps

8.1 If Council adopts Option 2, staff would procure a suitable research firm to undertake a professionally conducted random poll of a representative sample of residents about the local body election system. This would be reported back to Council along with recommendations for the 2025 local body elections.

Author: Pip Jamieson, Manager Strategy

Attachments

Attachment 1: 839498445-13210 Communications and engagement actions to promote participation in the 2022 elections ⇩

Important considerations for decision making

Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The Local Electoral Act 2001 establishes the framework for local body elections, including the required approach to take when considering changes to the local voting system.

While voting systems are most directly related to the Local Electoral Act 2001, they are a fundamental process supporting democratic decision-making and action by, and on behalf of, the community.

Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

Decisions on Nelson City Council’s electoral voting system have the potential to affect levels of participation in local elections. While the outcome of elections has an impact on every community outcome of Council, it most directly aligns with: “Our Council provides leadership and fosters partnerships, a regional perspective, and community engagement.”

Risk

Carrying out a professionally conducted random poll to understand voter behaviour and voter preferences is a medium risk activity.

It relates to decisions on whether to maintain or change the status quo of the STV electoral system and whether to make any changes to the current ward structure. Both options are allowed for in the Local Electoral Act provided the steps outlined in the Act are followed, and no changes are made to the Māori Ward, which must remain in place for two election cycles.

There are potential sensitivities from some respondents regarding questions about the ward structure.

Financial impact

The cost of a professionally conducted random poll is currently unbudgeted and would require cost moves within existing operational budgets.

Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance. It relates to a decision on whether or not to gather further information to support future decision making about Nelson’s voting system.

Climate Impact

This decision will have no impact on the ability of Council to proactively respond to the impacts of climate change now or in the future.

Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

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

Delegations

This is a decision of Council.

Item 13: Annual Report 2021/22

Council

10 November 2022

REPORT R27288

Annual Report 2021/22

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To adopt the Annual Report for the year ending 30 June 2022 in accordance with section 98 of the Local Government Act 2002.

2. Summary

2.1 The Local Government Act usually requires Council to adopt the final Annual Report within four months of the end of the financial year (i.e. by 31 October). Due to the impacts of COVID-19, the Annual Reporting and Audit Time Frames Extensions Legislation Bill 2021 extended the deadline for the 2021/22 Annual Report to 31 December 2022.

2.2 Audit New Zealand commenced auditing of the draft Annual Report 2021/22 in September 2022, and audit work will be complete by the date of this meeting. The Audit report will be tabled at the meeting. No significant issues have been identified during the audit.

2.3 The Annual Report 2021/22 presents a positive picture of the financial performance of the Council over the previous year. Council recorded an accounting surplus before revaluations for the year ended 30 June 2022 of $23.6 million which was $21.2 million more than budget. Borrowings net of cash and deposits were $111.6 million, compared to a budget of $124.1 million.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report Annual Report 2021/22 (R27288) and its attachment (839498445-13184); and

2. Adopts the Annual Report for the year ended 30 June 2022 in accordance with S98 of the Local Government Act 2002; and

3. Receives the Audit New Zealand Opinion as tabled; and

4. Delegates the Mayor and Chief Executive authority to approve minor editorial changes to the Annual Report 2021/22 (83948445-13184), as necessary.

4. Background

4.1 The purpose of the Annual Report is to compare the actual activities and performance of Council with those set out in the Annual Plan 2021/22. It is also a means to promote accountability to the community for the decisions Council has made throughout the year.

4.2 Progress was made across a range of projects in line with Council’s Long Term Plan priorities of infrastructure, environment, City Centre development, housing affordability and intensification, Maitai River Precinct and creating a sustainable transport culture. Council achieved 83% of its performance measures in a year that was again impacted by COVID-19. This is an improvement over the 2020/21 result of 66%.

4.3 An initial draft of the Annual Report 2021/22 was presented to the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee on 13 September 2022 in order to provide an opportunity for any feedback.

4.4 The Annual Report includes both the parent (Nelson City Council) and the Nelson City Council Group – which consists of Nelson City Council, its subsidiaries (Nelmac Limited, Nelson Civic Trust, Bishop Suter Trust, Nelson Regional Development Agency) and its associates and joint ventures.

4.5 As Council does not have a controlling interest in its associates (Nelson Airport Limited, Tasman Bays Heritage Trust and Port Nelson Limited) these are equity accounted. Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unit, Nelson Tasman Regional Landfill Business Unit, and the Nelson Tasman Combined Civil Defence Organisation are proportionately consolidated as these are not separate legal entities. Further detail of the accounting treatment is included in Note 1 to the accounts.

5. Discussion

Highlights for 2021/22

Climate Change

5.1 Council continued to undertake a wide range of climate actions across all of its activities. Te Mahere Mahi a te Āhuarangi, the Climate Action Plan, was adopted in November 2021 and brings together initiatives and actions for mitigation, adaptation, innovation and resilience across the ten years of the Long Term Plan 2021-31. Council also agreed in June to the proposed structure and content of the Climate Change Strategy which is under development.

Housing Affordability and Intensification

5.2 Council was successful in its application to the Infrastructure Acceleration Fund to establish four projects. The funding will support the upgrade of water, wastewater and stormwater services in the city centre as well as upgrades to transport.

5.3 Council approved two grants totalling $1.85 million from its Housing Reserve to the Nelson Tasman Housing Trust and Habitat for Humanity Nelson. This funding will contribute to projects that will deliver 19 new affordable homes in Nelson.

5.4 The Nelson Tasman 2022-2052 Future Development Strategy (FDS) was developed during 2021-22 and adopted in August 2022. It is a joint project with Tasman District Council seeking to respond to population growth and housing affordability challenges. The FDS will help inform both councils’ 2024-2034 Long Term Plans.

Infrastructure

5.5 Water mains were upgraded and renewed in several locations around the City in 2021/22. The three-year city-wide renewal programme of its residential water meters was completed in June 2022. Council continued to invest in improved wastewater management infrastructure and upgrade stormwater infrastructure. Work began in 2021 on the final stage of Council’s multi-million-dollar flood protection investment in upgrading Saxton Creek.

5.6 The Rethink Waste Whakaarohia programme continued in 2021/22 with many new initiatives. Council ran a trial of kerbside collection of residential kitchen waste which will help to determine whether long term food waste collection is viable. Council received funding from the Ministry for the Environment for a new sorting area at the Nelson Waste Recovery Centre.

Environment

5.7 Coastal restoration projects have been a focus of Council’s science and environment work in 2021/22. Additionally, the first phase of a new online state of the environment reporting tool has been completed. Four Jobs for Nature projects were delivered in 2021/22. Through Council’s Environmental Grants programme, 91 applications were received in 2021/22 with two-thirds being successful.

5.8 Council has focused on improving the provision of natural hazard information and on increasing community understanding of natural hazard risks.

City Centre Development

5.9 Nelson’s City Centre Spatial Plan, gifted the name Te Ara ō Whakatū - The Pathway of Nelson, was adopted by Council in 2021/22.

Maitai River Precinct

5.10 Council is investigating opportunities to develop the Maitai River Precinct. In 2021/22, work to advance a multi-use development with a library at its heart continued. Council approved a number of key steps including the project management and governance structures and a flood mitigation plan.

Creating a Sustainable Transport Culture

5.11 Council made progress in a number of areas that support a sustainable transport culture. It endorsed the final Waka Kotahi business case for the Nelson Future Access project, the Active Travel Strategy and the new Parking Strategy were adopted, and Council’s Innovating Streets project in Nelson South received a further award.

Partnerships with Māori and iwi

5.12 Council is committed to strengthening partnerships with iwi and Māori of Whakatū. During 2021/22, Council took several actions to enhance Māori involvement in the decision-making process including establishing a Māori ward for the 2022 elections, hosting partnership hui with iwi, appointing iwi endorsed Māori representatives to sit on committees, and working collaboratively to develop the draft Taonga Tuku Iho, Heritage Strategy 2022-2032.

Three Waters Reform

5.13 In June 2022 Council made a submission on the Water Services Entities Bill which is the first Bill in a suite of Three Waters Reform legislation. The submission was informed by significant community consultation.

Non-financial performance

5.14 Council measures its non-financial success against performance measures that are set through the Long Term Plan. The Long Term Plan 2021-2031 established 66 performance measures across Council’s eleven activity areas. The measures are recorded as ‘achieved’, ‘not achieved’, or ‘not measured’ (where insufficient data is available to determine a result) at the end of the year.

5.15 Council achieved 55 of its non-financial performance measures (83%) in 2021/22, which surpasses its performance in 2020/21 (66%). Commentary on all measures is provided in the activity sections of Attachment 1.

Surplus

5.16 The Annual Report shows that Council recorded a net surplus before revaluations for the year ended 30 June 2022 of $23.6 million which was $21.2 million more than budget. The surplus was $9.8 million for the 2020/21 financial year. More detail for the variance is explained in the Annual Report Note 40, however the reasons for this variance are mainly due to:

5.17 Fees and charges are $7.0 million lower than budget, which is mainly due to the budget including $5.5 million of forestry income, whereas the actual gain on forestry was $0.9 million and was recognised under other gains or losses.

5.18 Subsidies and grants are $2.0 million lower than budget mainly due to Waka Kotahi capital grant income being lower than budgeted.

5.19 Development/financial contributions are $2.9m greater than budget due to more development activity than budgeted.

5.20 Other revenue is $5.0 million greater than budget. The main contributor to this variance was vested asset income, which was $1.5 million more than budgeted for.

5.21 Other gains/losses are greater than budget by $15.0 million mainly due to a higher than budgeted gain on derivatives ($15.3 million) due to the upward movement in interest rates.

5.22 Total operating expenditure was $6.5 million less than budget due to many savings across the board. Major variances are:

· $0.8 million savings in the Nelson plan costs due to a change in the program of work.

· $2.7 million of capital grant saving in Economic Development for Strategic land allocation funding for the Science and Technology Precinct not being spent and carried forward to 2022/23.

· $1.4 million grant funded from the Housing Reserve not being budgeted for.

5.23 The final Land and Infrastructure Revaluations was $251.1m; $213 million over budget:

· Infrastructure assets are revalued every year to smooth out the large fluctuations and accounted for all of the overall revaluation. This is against a budget of $38.1 million.

· Land is revalued every five years or when its fair value diverges materially from its carrying value. The movement for 2021/22 is not deemed to be material and land was not revalued in this financial year. Land was last revalued in 2020/21.

External Debt

5.24 At 30 June 2022 Council’s borrowings, net of deposits, cash and LGFA borrower notes were $111.6 million compared to a budget of $124.1 million. This variance is mainly due to the Capital Expenditure not reaching the full programme and ending less than forecasted by $11 million against Annual Plan budget of $67.1 million. Detail relating to variances in the Capital Programme can be seen in the section of “Summary of Capital Expenditure over $100,000”.

Rating Surplus (Deficit)

5.25 The Rates surplus was $1.5 million and was used to reduce the overdrawn balance in the Emergency Response Fund.

Financial prudence results

5.26 Council is required to include information on financial performance in relation to various benchmarks in the Annual Report.

5.27 A summary of this information in the Annual Report is included in the following table:

Measure	Result	Benchmark
Rates (increases) affordability	5.7%	<6.2%	Achieved
Balanced Budget (revenue:expenditure)	101%	>100%	Achieved
Debt affordability (% of revenue)	94%	<150%	Achieved
Essential services (capital expenditure:depreciation)	189%	>100%	Achieved
Debt Servicing (interest:revenue)	2.87%	<10%	Achieved
Debt Control (actual:budget)	81%	<100%	Achieved
Operational Control (actual:budget net cashflow from operations)	127%	>100%	Achieved

Material differences from the draft Annual Report presented to the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee

5.28 The draft Annual Report went to the Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee on 13 September. Since that time, the audit has been completed.

5.29 Land and Infrastructure revaluations reported to Audit, Risk and Finance Subcommittee on 13 September was $135 million whereas it is $251 million in the final Annual Report. This is mainly due to the full valuation details were not available by the time the draft Annual report was provided to the Subcommittee on 13 September.

5.30 Other than that there have been no material changes to the draft Annual Report presented. There have been some minor changes to the results in the statement of comprehensive revenue and expense and in the statement of financial position (and associated notes).

6. Options

6.1 Option 1 is the recommended option.

Option 1: Adopt the Annual Report 2021/22 and accept the supporting recommendations
Advantages	· Meets statutory timeframes. · Allows timely production and distribution of the Annual Report.
Risks and Disadvantages	· No further opportunity for Council to review minor amendments prior to publishing.
Option 2: Not accept the recommendations
Advantages	· None identified
Risks and Disadvantages	· Adoption of the Annual Report will not meet statutory timeframes. · Not meeting statutory timeframes may be a consideration by Standard and Poor’s for the Council credit rating. · The Annual Report will not be available to the public in a timely manner.

7. Conclusion

7.1 It is recommended that Council adopt the Annual Report for the 2021/22 year.

8. Next Steps

8.1 Following adoption by Council the Annual Report 2021/22 will be made available online, and printed copies provided for reference at Council’s public libraries and the Customer Service Centre. An article on the Annual Report will be included in an upcoming edition of Our Nelson.

8.2 Council is required to make publicly available a summary of the information contained in the Annual Report within one month of its adoption. An audited Summary Annual Report 2021/22 will be made available online, as well as at Council’s public libraries and the Customer Service Centre.

Authors: Nicky McDonald, Group Manager Strategy and Communications and Nikki Harrison, Group Manager Corporate Services

Attachments

Attachment 1: 839498445-13184 Draft Annual Report as at 7 November 2022 (Circulated separately) ⇨

Important considerations for decision making

Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The Annual Report 2021/22 is a requirement of the Local Government Act 2002 and fits the purpose of local government by providing information about Council’s performance during 2021/22 – this contributes to democratic local decision-making.

Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The decision to adopt the Annual Report aligns with the following community outcome:

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

Risk

The content of the Annual Report is prescribed by statute so there is a very low risk that it will not achieve the required outcome.

The Local Government Act 2002 normally requires Council to adopt the final Annual Report within four months of the end of the financial year (31 October). Under the Annual Reporting and Audit Time Frames Extensions Legislation Bill 2021, the new date for councils to meet reporting timeframes is 31 December 2022. There is low risk that the Annual Report will not be adopted by this date.

Financial impact

There is no immediate financial impact from this decision - preparation and publication of the Annual Report can be achieved within existing budgets. If Council does not adopt the Annual Report before the statutory deadline of 31 December 2022, it may be a consideration for Standard and Poor’s in its annual credit rating assessment. The Annual Report itself outlines the financial position of Council at the end of the 2021/22 financial year.

Degree of significance and level of engagement

This decision is of low significance and does not require engagement.

Climate Impact

The Annual Report (Attachment 1) contains a summary of Council’s climate change actions in 2021/22, promoting awareness of Council’s work in this area.

Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

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

Delegations

The adoption of the Annual Report is a decision of Council.

Item 14: IRIS NextGen shared environmental data platform

Council

10 November 2022

REPORT R27278

IRIS NextGen shared environmental data platform

1. Purpose of Report

1.1 To provide information on the IRIS NextGen shared environmental data platform and Good Practice Operating Model.

1.2 To seek approval for unbudgeted expenditure of $210,635 ($164,671 capital expenditure and $45,964 operating expenditure) in 2022/23 to progress Council’s participation in this project.

2. Summary

2.1 The MagiQ data system currently used by Council is a territorial authority system that is not meeting Council’s regional regulatory compliance needs.

2.2 Councils are facing expectations that regulatory and environmental data be more readily available than is possible currently.

2.3 Regional Software Holdings Limited (RSHL) are developing the IRIS NextGen shared environmental data system in conjunction with ten regional councils including Nelson City Council. It provides an opportunity for Council to obtain a system that will be used across the regional sector to meet data needs.

2.4 There is no off-the-shelf solution and the alternatives are to do nothing or develop a bespoke and more expensive solution.

2.5 To benefit from this collaborative opportunity at current costings, Council needs to sign a partnership agreement with other participating councils before 24 December 2022.

2.6 It might still be possible to join the collaboration at a later date, however the other consortium partners would increase Nelson’s financial contribution (currently at around 3% of the total cost of the system development) and we would move to the end of the implementation schedule, significantly reducing the benefits under the agreement.

2.7 If Council signs the partnership agreement and then decides not to proceed to implement IRIS NextGen, Council would incur non-refundable costs of $433,674 under the terms of the partnership agreement.

2.8 This report seeks Council approval to incur unbudgeted expenditure of $210,635 ($164,671 capital expenditure and $45,964 operating expenditure) in 2022/23.

3. Recommendation

That the Council

1. Receives the report IRIS NextGen shared environmental data platform (R27278); and

2. Approves unbudgeted expenditure of $210,635 in 202/23 ($164,671 Capex and $45,964 Opex) to progress Council’s participation in the Iris NextGen shared environmental data platform.

4. Background

4.1 Council’s regional resource consent and compliance data is currently held in the MagiQ database and within documents in SharePoint.

4.2 Regional councils throughout New Zealand use several different software packages to store and use environmental data.

4.3 One of these is IRIS (Integrated Regional Information System), which is a core enterprise resource planning system used for many of the functions undertaken by regional councils. It is over ten-years old and is reaching end-of-life. NCC has not been using IRIS, instead relying on MagiQ.

4.4 Regional Software Holdings Limited (RSHL), owned by seven regional councils (not including Nelson), develops solutions for councils wanting sector collaboration to standardise their approach to regulatory activities.

4.5 Since 2019, RSHL has been undertaking a comprehensive needs analysis, procurement process and discovery exercise ahead of seeking the support of the sector to commit to the development and deployment of IRIS NextGen.

4.6 The objective of IRIS NextGen is to align the regional sector around consistent good practice processes supported by fit-for-purpose software.

4.7 IRIS NextGen will be a cloud-based solution based on a platform developed for the New Zealand and Australian local government sector. The tender to develop and implement it was won by Datacom, with whom Council has an existing business relationship.

4.8 Iris NextGen focusses on community engagement, environmental stewardship and regulatory requirements. The key areas are consenting, compliance monitoring, enforcement, state of the environment monitoring, land management, biosecurity and biodiversity data.

4.9 Ten regional councils and unitary authorities have so far participated in the procurement and design process. These are Nelson, Northland, Waikato, Bay of Plenty, Taranaki, Hawke’s Bay, Horizons, West Coast, Otago and Southland. It is noted that Tasman District Council have decided not to proceed with the platform on the basis that they have other priorities.

4.10 The Manager Science and Environment, Manager Consents and Compliance, and the Chief Information Officer have been closely involved in the design and selection of this programme.

4.11 The next phase of the project is the confirmation of the commitment of participating councils in the sector (signature of partnership agreements). Datacom, RSHL and the participating councils will then move into the development and implementation phases.

4.12 RSHL and Datacom will manage overall programme implementation and participating councils will be responsible for specific implementation including organisational change and data migration.

5. Discussion

Opportunities and benefits of IRIS NextGen

5.1 The system supports:

· Council’s IT Digital Strategic Plan 2022 Mission:

o To understand the business need, then provide easy to use, sustainable and secure solutions, through partnership, leadership and focus on value for money and our environment

· Development of a good practice framework to inform policy development

· Improved data quality

· Productivity gains e.g. automated processes

· Sector collaboration

· Staff sharing opportunities in a tight work market by using the same system across the regional sector

· Improved regulatory processes:

o More accurate and timely environmental monitoring to ensure consent compliance

o Meeting Ministry for Environment CME best practice guidelines (Compliance, Monitoring and Enforcement)

· Simpler sharing of data with government and the public

· Improved capability to meet data requirements of proposed legislative reform RMA reforms

5.2 The Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment, Simon Upton, published a report in October 2022, “Environmental reporting, research and investment: Do we know if we’re making a difference?”. This report calls for:

• foundational investments in environmental information

• clarity about why we are prioritising certain environmental issues (and not others)

This system would assist Council in meeting these expectations.

Timescale

5.3 Once the commitment of councils has been reached and contractual negotiations are completed, the development phase will take approximately 18 months. The implementation phase will take a further two to three years.

5.4 The indicative schedule for Nelson, subject to readiness (RSHL will determine this), is 2024/25 (data readiness and migration), with implementation in 2025/26. Nelson is not scheduled to be one of the first to implement the programme.

Budget

5.5 The total cost of ownership (TCO) for the IRIS NextGen Programme over 10 years is estimated at $34 million combined for the partner councils. The project requires a critical mass of councils before the economies of the project result in a sustainable project.

5.6 The allocation of costs between the participating councils is based upon well-established and understood protocols within the regional sector. Nelson is considered a small council and it’s share (3%) of the TCO estimate over the ten-year timeframe is based on all ten current councils signing the agreement. Eight councils have signed at the time of preparing this report.

5.7 There will be additional implementation costs to Council if it proceeds, including in-house project management, data migration and integration, an in-house support component, change management costs and ongoing licence costs.

5.8 Unbudgeted expenditure for 2022/23 is estimated at $210,635 (capital expenditure $164,671 and operating expenditure $45,964). This includes IRIS NextGen project costs and internal project staffing and operating fees. Costs for 2023/24 will be presented in the draft Long Term Plan 2024-2034.

5.9 The ten-year cashflow for the project is shown below:

Ten Year Cost of Ownership – Nelson City Council

Risk

5.10 If Council signs the Partnership Agreement and then decides not to proceed to implementation within 18 months, it will incur a non-refundable cost of $433,674.

6. Options

6.1 Council has three choices at the present time:

Option 1: Preferred – Proceed with participation in IRIS NextGen data platform
Advantages	· Collaborate with the regional sector to achieve a shared best practice solution · Risk and investment are shared.
Risks and Disadvantages	· If Council decides not to proceed to implementation after signing the Partnership Agreement, it will incur costs of $433,674.
Option 2: Find alternative to Iris NextGen data platform to meet requirements
Advantages	· Low investment now · Potential for bespoke solution
Risks and Disadvantages	· RSHL procurement process has clearly identified that there is no other feasible off-the-shelf option · To develop a standalone solution would expose Council to significantly higher development risk and cost · Benefits of working collaboratively and implementing sector-developed best practice lost
Option 3: Do nothing
Advantages	· Low investment
Risks and Disadvantages	· Current system not fit for purpose · Benefits of working collaboratively and implementing sector-developed best practice lost

7. Conclusion

7.1 Working collaboratively with other regional sector councils to develop and implement a fit-for-purpose shared environmental data platform means that project risks are mitigated and costs are shared.

7.2 The Council may not be able to afford an equivalent solution without working collaboratively, and would not necessarily have sector-consistent best-practice processes if it acted on its own or adopted another solution.

7.3 There are no viable alternatives currently operating in the market. The RSHL RFP process identified that there are no off-the-shelf solutions that are available for implementation.

7.4 Council needs to act promptly if it wishes to participate in this collaborative regional sector programme and sign the partnership agreement before 24 December 2022. To do so requires this Council’s approval of unbudgeted expenditure in 2022/23 of $210,635 (capex and opex) .

7.5 If Council decides not to proceed with this project after the partnership agreement has been signed, a non-refundable cost of $433,674 will be incurred.

7.6 The Group Manager Environmental Management, Manager Science and Environment, Manager Consents and Compliance and Chief Information Officer all support the recommendation.

8. Next Steps

8.1 If the unbudgeted expenditure is approved, the partnership agreement will be signed by 24^th December 2022, and more detailed planning will begin for the next phase, in collaboration with the IRIS NextGen Project Steering group and Advisory Group.

Author: Sarah Holman, Policy Coordinator - Contractor

Attachments

Nil

Important considerations for decision making

Fit with Purpose of Local Government

The IRIS NextGen data platform supports environmental wellbeing of our community by enabling environmental compliance and reporting best practice.

Consistency with Community Outcomes and Council Policy

The IRIS NextGen data platform supports these Community Outcomes:

· Our unique natural environment is healthy and protected

· 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

Risk

Budget has not been allocated in the LTP or Annual Plan 2022/23 for this programme.

If Council signs the partnership agreement and decides not to proceed to implementation, a non-refundable cost will be incurred.

Risk is reduced by joining with partner councils to procure a sector solution to regional environmental data needs. RSHL have worked since 2012 to develop solutions for councils wanting to standardise regulatory systems. Ten councils have participated in the procurement of IRIS NextGen and the programme has been the subject of extensive investigation and discovery.

Financial impact

By working with other regional councils, project cost and risk are reduced.

The IRIS NextGen programme focusses on best practice processes through regional sector collaboration. Sharing staff in a tight labour market is one of the potential ways this decision can result in financial efficiencies.

Degree of significance and level of engagement

This matter is of low significance because the addition of the system will enhance existing services rather than change the services, and the additional expenditure overall has a minor value compared to rates revenue.

Climate Impact

The IRIS NextGen shared environmental data platform will assist Council by improving the quality of its reporting data in respect of proposed RMA reforms, State of the Environment and compliance monitoring.

Inclusion of Māori in the decision making process

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

Delegations

This is a matter for Council.