Agenda of Council Meeting - 26 September 2019

MINUTES OF Central Hawkes Bay District Council
Council Meeting
HELD AT THE Council Chamber, 28-32 Ruataniwha Street, Waipawa
ON Thursday, 29 August 2019 AT 9.00am

PRESENT: Mayor Alex Walker

Cr Ian Sharp (Deputy Mayor)

Cr Kelly Annand

Cr Tim Aitken

Cr Tim Chote

Cr Gerard Minehan

Cr Brent Muggeridge

Cr David Tennent

Dr Roger Maaka

IN ATTENDANCE: Joshua Lloyd (Group Manager, Community Infrastructure and Development)

Bronda Smith (Group Manager, Corporate Support and Services)

Doug Tate (Group Manager, Customer and Community Partnerships)

Nicola Bousfield (People and Capability Manager)

The meeting opened at 9.05am

1 Prayer

Dr Maaka opened the meeting with a karakia.

2 Apologies

Cr Burne-Field approved leave of absence as per June 29th Meeting

3 Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

None

4 Standing Orders

Resolved: 19.78

Moved: Cr Ian Sharp

Seconded: Cr Kelly Annand

THAT the following standing orders are suspended for the duration of the meeting:

20.2 Time limits on speakers

20.5 Members may speak only once

20.6 Limits on number of speakers

And that Option C under section 21 General procedures for speaking and moving motions be used for the meeting.

Standing orders are recommended to be suspended to enable members to engage in discussion in a free and frank manner.

Carried

Item 7.1 was considered as the first item prior to proceedings from committee and council meetings.

5 Confirmation of Minutes

Resolved: 19.79

Moved: Cr Gerard Minehan

Seconded: Cr Ian Sharp

That the minutes of the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 20 June 2019 as circulated, be confirmed as true and correct.

Carried

6 Reports from Committees

6.1 Minutes of the Finance and Planning Committee Meeting held on 15 August 2019

Motion

Moved: Cr Ian Sharp

Seconded: Cr Kelly Annand

1. That the minutes of the meeting of the Finance and Planning Committee held on 15 August 2019 be confirmed as true and correct.

6.1.1 Resolution to apply for funding to Eastern and Central Community Trust

Resolved: 19.80

Moved: Cr Ian Sharp

Seconded: Cr Tim Chote

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

That Finance and Planning Committee recommend to Council to resolve to apply for funding of $250,000 to the Eastern and Central Community Trust Community Assets and Facilities Fund for Ngā Ara Tipuna –Waipukurau Pā site interpretation.

Carried

6.1.2 Remuneration Authority Determination - Childcare Allowance

Resolved: 19.81

Moved: Cr Ian Sharp

Seconded: Cr Tim Aitken

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) That Council receives the information contained in the report.

Carried

RECOMMENDATION

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

b) That Council agrees to approve payment of a Childcare allowance as per the 2019-2020 determination

c) That Council note that if approved, the necessary provisions will be included in the Elected Members Remuneration, Allowances and Reimbursements Policy for Council adoption following the 2019 triennial election.

In Favour: Crs Alex Walker, Ian Sharp, Kelly Annand and Tim Aitken

Against: Crs Tim Chote, Gerard Minehan, Brent Muggeridge and David Tennent

equal

Cr Sharp stated that many barriers exist for people wanting to represent their communities on Council. He determined that providing a child care allowance was an opportunity to remove one of those barriers. Cr Sharp strongly recommended the recommendation be approved.

Cr Aitken concurred with Cr. Sharp in his reasoning for the recommendation to be approved but insisted the recommendation return to the table for deliberation on a capped value amount per eligible councillor.

Cr Muggeridge opposed the recommendation as it would cost the ratepayer and he saw no reason for it. Cr Muggeridge expressed that everyone has barriers in life and that councillors, not the ratepayer, should pay for their childcare.

Cr Tennent voiced reservations in regards to how the fund would be applied, saying that it is a simplistic answer to the challenge of limited representation in councils. The childcare support could be used by anyone with care responsibilities. However, Cr Tennent fully accepts that councils are overrepresented by older males which he agreed is unfortunate and he would like to see a wider spread of representation and is against the policy. Cr Tennant had changed his mind on the matter and voted against the policy.

Cr Annand questioned whether there was a conflict of interest in the matter as she is potentially a person who could utilise the fund going forward? Cr Annand sought advice from the CEO.

CEO Davidson advises Cr Annand that the point of time when the pecuniary conflict of interest would be executed is when the policy is adopted. Because the policy will determine how the funding is allocated. This decision is to provide officers guidance as to whether we should go ahead and prepare a policy. Therefore it is not necessary to declare a conflict of interest at this moment.

Cr Chote reiterated what he had said at the committee meetings. He has not changed his mind and would be voting against the recommendation.

Mayor Walker pointed out that the guidelines from the remuneration authority on the policy are very clear. There are childcare mechanisms that are excluded from the policy. It is tightly described and not an “open slather” mechanism. And based on a councillor’s salary at the table to pay for the childcare required to do a day’s work every week, would leave over $180 per week for the councillor to do the work at this table. Mayor Walker provided perspective as to why the policy has been suggested and promoted by the remuneration authority, and also promoted by the 32 people in local government in New Zealand who are under the age of 40, who identify childcare as a barrier. Mayor Walker stated that she understands this is potentially an additional amount of money that ratepayers would be asked to contribute to. However, we also have a responsibility to seek as wide a representation as we can to ensure the voices and opinions shared at the table represent across the spectrum, and that people are not unfairly excluded. Therefore Mayor Walker will be voting in support of the recommendation.

Cr Sharp addressed the cost to rate payers as mentioned by other councillors, suggesting the ratepayers may get exceptional value for their money because of the quality of representation they would receive, if this barrier was removed. Cr Sharp pointed out that he has no input into his remuneration or terms of employment or contract, and therefore it is not comparable to a contractor who does have such input to their remuneration. Cr Sharp said that councillors currently claim for expenses associated with representing their community, such as travel expenses, and that childcare is in the same category – a barrier to be removed. There are barriers for all sorts of people not currently represented around the table, but that is not a good enough reason to remove the opportunity for this particular barrier to be removed to allow greater representation at the table.

Division was called in voting. There were 4 votes for and 4 against leaving Mayor Walker, as Chair, with the casting vote.

Mayor Walker stated that tradition would say that the casting vote should be cast to maintain the status quo. Though it pained her to have to cast the vote against the recommendation - Mayor Walker passed her casting vote against the recommendation so as to maintain status quo.

6.1.3

Leachate to landfill Irrigation Budget

Resolved: 19.82

Moved: Cr Ian Sharp

Seconded: Cr Tim Chote

a) That, approval is given to option two to approve the use of after-care landfill reserve to fund the additional $333,000 to allow the Leachate to Landfill project to be delivered and refund the reserve over the next 10 years.

b) That the report (without attachments) relating to this item be released as publicly available information following the tender process.

Carried

Cr Sharp said he is glad to see resolution to the ongoing leachate issue of 11 years. Council should be congratulated as they have an obligation and moral responsibility to remove leachate from our wastewater ponds, which eventually ends up in our rivers and countryside. Therefore Cr Sharp was very happy to recommend the resolution.

Cr Chote agreed with Cr. Sharp and is very happy with the funding decisions and to see progression of the project.

Cr Tennent said it is fantastic to see the project finally going ahead. Cr Tennent thanked management and staff for their involvement in the process.

Minehan thanked staff for their work on the project and voiced his approval that the project is going ahead.

Mayor Walker supported the recommendation however expressed disappointment at the lack of robust governance input on the project. Mayor Walker acknowledged that the project was founded on some really important environmental principles, however there was not a robust asset management plan in place nor a process comparable in size to work done on the Big Water Story and wastewater issues. Mayor Walker stated that it is for governors to ensure process is legal and that ratepayers’ money is allocated responsibly. Mayor Walker challenged fellow councillors to reflect on the balance between rigour and pace in getting projects across the line.

Sharp – Congratulated staff on their courage to put the project forward given the barriers.

CEO Davidson clarified that 3 independent reports recommended improvement to the quality of the wastewater treatment process and discharge, concluding that removing leachate from the wastewater facility would indeed have a positive effect.

6.2 Minutes of the Risk and Audit Committee Meeting held on 15 August 2019

Resolved: 19.83

Moved: Cr Tim Aitken

Seconded: Cr Brent Muggeridge

1. That the minutes of the meeting of the Risk and Audit Committee held on 15 August 2019 be received.

Carried

6.3 Minutes of the Community Development Committee Meeting held on 15 August 2019

Resolved: 19.84

Moved: Cr Kelly Annand

Seconded: Cr Ian Sharp

1. That the minutes of the meeting of the Community Development Committee held on 15 August 2019 as circulated, be confirmed as true and correct

.Carried

6.3.1 Adoption of Economic Development Action Plan

Resolved: 19.85

Moved: Cr Kelly Annand

Seconded: Cr Tim Aitken

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) That the Community Development Committee recommend to Council the adoption of the Central Hawke’s Bay Economic Action Plan with noted changes.

Carried

Mayor Walker said that the Economic Development Action Plan is a great step forward, providing clear direction for the economic future of CHB and demonstrates the role council can play whether through action, advocacy or facilitation. Mayor Walker added it is great to see forestry incorporated into the action plan for land use.

Cr Annand agreed with Mayor Walker and was pleased to see the EDAP adopted.

6.3.2 ADOPTION OF PROJECT CHARTER FOR SECTION 17A REVIEW OF RETIREMENT HOUSING

Resolved: 19.86

Moved: Cr Kelly Annand

Seconded: Cr David Tennent

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) That the Community Development Committee recommend to Council that the Project Charter for the Section 17a Review of Retirement Housing be adopted.

Carried

Cr Annand spoke to the motion that this is very exciting and a step in the right direction.

Cr Tennant said it is high time we had a 17a review of retirement housing as we have an underutilised asset that could be developed into something really worthwhile for the district. He wished the incoming council all the best and hoped portfolio growth would result from the review.

6.3.3 Adoption of Libraries Strategic Framework

Resolved: 19.87

Moved: Cr Kelly Annand

Seconded: Cr Ian Sharp

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) That the Community Development Committee recommends to Council to adopt the Libraries Strategic Framework 2019 – 2024.

Carried

6.4 Minutes of the Environment and Regulatory Committee Meeting held on 15 August 2019

Resolved: 19.88

Moved: Cr David Tennent

Seconded: Cr Brent Muggeridge

1. That the minutes of the meeting of the Environment and Regulatory Committee held on 15 August 2019 as circulated, be confirmed as true and correct.

Carried

7 Report Section

Submission on the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2019

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to present to Council submissions and feedback received on the Draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) 2019.

Resolved: 19.89

Moved: Cr Gerard Minehan

Seconded: Cr Tim Chote

a) That the submissions on the WMMP be received.

b) That council receive the late submission on the WMMP

Carried

Representatives from Argyll East School presented their submissions.

Neen Kennedy gave a Powerpoint presentation and spoke to her submission.

Cr Sharp enquired if there was a preferred location for an EnviroCentre as raised in Neen Kennedy’s submission. Ms Kennedy responded that it would be preferable for it to be located somewhere visible and easily accessible to the public.

Abby O’Kane presented a submission on behalf of Jennifer Brown.

Cr Tennent questioned why rubbish/recycling collection fees should be subsidised for farmers but not for urban areas?

Miss O’Keane offered that some farmers may not be utilising the existing recycling facilities and that this could be an opportunity to set a precedent, encouraging farmers to recycle plastic waste.

Harold Petherick spoke to his submission.

7.2 Deliberations on the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2019

Purpose

The purpose of this report is to present to Council analysis of the submissions received in relation to the recent Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) 2019 consultation.

Resolved: 19.90

Moved: Cr David Tennent

Seconded: Cr Kelly Annand

a) That, having considered all matters raised in the report, that Council deliberates on submissions received on the Draft Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

Carried

Resolved: 19.91

Moved: Cr Ian Sharp

Seconded: Cr Kelly Annand

b) That feedback from Councillors having deliberated on submissions is included in the WMMP to be brought back for adoption on 26^th September 2019.

Carried

Cr Annand requested that education and the cost of dumping rubbish be added to the plan for consideration.

Cr Aitken suggested involving schools in the design of responsible waste disposal signs for community placement.

Cr Tennant asked if there are options in the WMMP for the recycling of plastic bale wrap, stating the organisation has a role to play in facilitating, not subsidising a recycling service.

Mayor Walker responded that expansion of rural area provisions is covered in the actions including some practical ideas around recycling bale wrap and other rural waste.

Cr Annand queried whether Enviro Schools reported back to council on a regular basis, as it is important to understand what is happening in this education space, harnessing the next generation’s enthusiasm for environmental sustainability.

Cr Minehan requested in response to Neen Kennedy’s submission that a physical location for an Enviro Centre be explored. Furthermore, that the issue of roadside rubbish dumping be discussed.

Mayor Walker responded that the roadside rubbish issue encompasses a lot of different activities and not just the WMMP but it is feedback that will be noted.

Officers noted an action in the plan’s regulation space to look at the enforcement of littering bylaws.

Mayor Walker requested education be added as a key trend in the plan conclusions.

Cr Sharp congratulated and thanked all involved in the process while expressing his hope that public consultation continues prior to the final plan presentation to Council in September.

Cr Annand thanked all involved and stated that incorporation of public views into the plan is a move in the right direction, paving the way for future development.

Mayor Walker added that it is incredibly powerful how the community has reached out to the Council on the WMMP and ESS. That in aspiring for a waste-free CHB it is important that contributing community members/parties/schools are acknowledged and supported going forward as they are pivotal in plan development. Mayor Walker thanked all involved.

7.3 Adoption of Hawke's Bay Civil Defence Group Annual Report 2017/18.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to procedurally receive the annual report of the Hawke’s Bay Civil Defence Emergency Management (CDEM) Group, covering activities over the 2017/18 year. Ian MacDonald will be attendance for this item where he will speak to local achievements for Civil Defence in Central Hawke’s Bay.

Resolved: 19.92

Moved: Cr Brent Muggeridge

Seconded: Cr Gerard Minehan

That, having considered all matters raised in the report, the report be noted. Carried

Cr Annand asked for an example of what a recovery tool is?

Mr MacDonald answered that forming groups of people from areas such as business, environment and infrastructure who would be involved in recovery would be one tool. Also deciding what the structure of the group (roles etc.) would look like, getting as much pre-planning done as possible before something happens.

Cr Aitken asked about community resilience - how long does Civil Defence remain in affected areas and what is the follow up process?

Mr Macdonald responded that plans will be reviewed after 2-3 years depending on the complexity. Also the plan is to follow up with locals in the community as to whether the plan works - e.g. Kaikoura review.

Mayor Walker added that as community representatives Council should be touching base regularly with community champions, checking in that they are still engaged, supported and motivated.

7.4 Update on Draft District Plan

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to formally update Council on the Draft District Plan and to consider appointees to the Informal Hearings Panel to consider all submissions on the draft District Plan.

Resolved: 19.93

Moved: Cr Brent Muggeridge

Seconded: Cr Kelly Annand

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) That Council receive the minutes of the District Plan Sub- committee meeting of 14 August 2019.

b) That Council adopt the recommendation of the District Plan Subcommittee that the existing District Plan Subcommittee hear the informal submissions and make recommendations on all submissions to Council regarding the draft District Plan.

c) That Officers review the Terms of Reference for District Plan Subcommittee to be brought back and considered by Council prior to the District Plan Submission hearings commencing.

Carried

Cr. Ian Sharp and Cr. Tennant declared a conflict of interest regarding item b). and removed themselves from the table.

Cr. Maaka as the iwi representative on the District Plan Subcommittee commented on the last phases, stating that every aspect had been fully workshopped and debated; that the planning committee recommendation had been thoroughly deliberated; and from an iwi perspective Cr Maaka fully supports the recommendation of the sub-committee.

Cr. Annand asked for clarification on when the District Plan’s budget and on-going costs would be presented to the Council?

Mr Tate intends that the budget would be brought back to the Council table in November.

Mayor. Walker added that remuneration of independent persons on a hearings panel would be tied into the terms of reference to be considered and adopted by present Council, and also into the remuneration policy to be reviewed and adopted by Council post-election.

Tim Chote voiced concerned that elected members not part of the subcommittee and therefore not present at hearings would not have input into recommendations.

Mayor Walker put forward that elected members could opt to observe hearings. Mayor Walker asked how recommendations would come back from a hearings panel to the Council table.

Officers explained that in early 2020, panel members will deliberate on the submissions and take advice from our planning consultants about recommended approaches to address them. Subsequently, another report will be presented to Council for ratification. The final approval or rejection of submissions will be made at the Council table.

Mayor Walker added that at any time the Council could deliberate on recommendations from subcommittee; provide feedback and request further recommendation before final decision.

Cr Muggeridge spoke to point b). of the recommendation pointing out that it would be senseless to remove the people involved thus far from the equation, that he respects their knowledge and the recommendations they will bring to the council.

Cr Annand spoke to the motion and expressed her confidence in the process concurring with Cr Muggeridge that she had confidence in those involved, concluding that the District Plan is a vital strategic document for the community.

Cr Aitken stated that he is comfortable that council will have input into the final decisions on the plan.

Cr Sharp and Cr Tennant returned to the table 10:57am.

7.5 Draft Results and Carry Forwards

PURPOSE

The matter for consideration by the Council is the draft financial results for 2018/19 and for Council to approve the Carry Forwards and additional Loans.

Resolved: 19.94

Moved: Cr Ian Sharp

Seconded: Cr David Tennent

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) Council approve the budget allocations proposed to be carried forward from 2018/19 year to 2019/20 year to enable projects to be completed and future work to be funded.

b) Council approve the District Plan loan of $15,462 for a period of 10 years and Water Supply Loan of $266,951 for Operational expenditure for a period of 10 years to fund the additional expenditure required for the 2018/19 financial year.

Carried

Cr Muggeridge – in regards to District Plan spend - pg. 305 - Council were notified November 2018 there would be $110,000 overspend. $77,000 has been spent to date leaving $33,000. Is there further funds in this year’s budget to supplement the $33,000?

Officers informed Council that there is a bigger budget and any surplus from the 2019 $110,000 overspend budget would be added to the 2020 overall budget.

CEO Davidson clarified that while a potential need to loan fund $110,000 was indicated in November 2018, some sub-activities have spent under-budget or there has been more income. Therefore rather than loan funding the whole $110,000 or $77,000 it is recommended that we only loan fund $15,000.

Cr Tennant voiced his disappointment that the Capital Projects Fund is still sitting in deficit after a number of years, stating that it is contrary to policy.

Mayor Walker asked Cr Tennant for suggestion as to where funds could come from to remedy the deficit?

Cr Tennant suggested it was an operational matter.

Mayor Walker thanked Cr Tennant for reminding Council of the issue and asked Mrs Smith to explain why the Capital Projects Fund is currently in deficit?

Mrs Smith explained the deficit was created because payment for the turf was required before the reserves were sold. Also in the process of selling those assets, the Capital Projects Fund went into deficit when payment was made for land surveying and valuation.

Mayor Walker asked if 6 properties were awaiting DOC Reserve status to be lifted

Mr Tate confirmed there are 6 properties and 5 of those are in the final stages of being declassified. The declassification of the 6^th property has been delayed due to a legal issue.

CEO Davidson added that while the time the DOC process has taken is frustrating, the land value has increased over time resulting in a healthier Capital Projects Fund.

Cr Muggeridge queried the explanation that the re-valuation is the primary reason for the variance of close to 1.9 million in depreciation (pg. 303-305). Could officers please explain?

Officers explained that recommendation of the re-valuation was that depreciation be adjusted this financial year. We write back out the depreciation and then bring in a new depreciation based on the revaluation requirements, which increases the depreciation expectation in this financial year.

Mayor Walker suggested that Cr Muggeridge’s question would be a good question to put to the auditors when they present the audited accounts with the Annual Report.

Cr Sharp spoke to the motion expressing that he is very happy to move the recommendation, having complete faith in the accuracy of the figures presented.

Cr Tennent gave his compliments to the staff involved.

Mayor Walker stated that the responsibility Council has in taking recommendations is important. That it is recognition of an incredibly valuable improvement in process around finances in this Council, and an important part of how we are assure ratepayers money is used respectfully on the appropriate activities. Mayor Walker reminded all present the report is the culmination of 3 years hard work and transparency before thanking all involved.

7.6 Annual Dog Control Policy and Practices Report

PURPOSE

Each year Council reports on the effectiveness of the Central Hawke’s Bay District Council’s dog policy and control practices. This report is required under the Dog Control Act 1996.

The report includes statistics for registrations and complaint investigation, as well as key achievements for the reporting period.

Resolved: 19.95

Moved: Cr Gerard Minehan

Seconded: Cr Kelly Annand

That, having considered all matters raised in the report, the report be noted. Carried

Cr Tennent asked whether the review was useful in for strategic planning going forward.

Officers confirmed the review has been most useful.

Mayor Walker stated that the increase in infringements and prosecutions of those breaking dog control rules is a positive result, as it is our responsible dog owners funding dog control activity via their payment of dog registration fees.

7.7 District Licensing Annual Report

PURPOSE

The Council is required to report annually on the proceedings and operations of the District Licensing Committee under section 199 of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012.

Resolved: 19.96

Moved: Cr Tim Chote

Seconded: Cr Gerard Minehan

That, having considered all matters raised in the report, the report be noted. Carried

Cr Chote stated that everything is going well and he is happy to move the recommendation.

7.8 Outcome of Rating Review Stage 1

PURPOSE

The purpose of the report is for Council to adopt the outcome of the first stage of the Rating Review.

Resolved: 19.97

Moved: Cr Gerard Minehan

Seconded: Cr Tim Chote

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) Council adopts the step one analysis for its activities as per the attached schedule.

b) The Property and Building Activity costs be considered within Libraries, Council Administration and Theatres and Halls.

Carried

Cr Sharp recognised the opportunity for new Council to ensure the rating system is equitable, fair and achievable. Cr Sharp wished the new Council well with the review.

Mayor Walker asked Officers if they would go through the funding needs analysis to ensure it is consistent and robust?

Mrs Smith responded it prudent that the new council consider the results of Stage 1 before considering Stage 2.

Cr Muggeridge queried whether Stage 1 could be revisited if necessary.

Mrs Smith confirmed yes.

8 Chief Executive Report

8.1 Organisation Performance and Activity Report June - July

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to present to Council the organisation report for June/July 2019.

Resolved: 19.98

Moved: Cr Tim Aitken

Seconded: Cr Ian Sharp

That, having considered all matters raised in the report, the report be noted. Carried

Cr Aitken voiced concern over the impact Central Government’s 8 new projects would have on the District Plan.

Cr Tennant congratulated staff on an excellent report.

Mayor Walker acknowledged the high level of transparency presented by the organisation and also commended the visible progress on The Big Water Story.

9 Public Excluded Business

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Resolved: 19.99

Moved: Cr Tim Chote

Seconded: Cr David Tennent

That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

The general subject matter 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 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Ground(s) under section 48 for the passing of this resolution

9.1 - Land Transport Contract Procurement

s7(2)(b)(ii) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information

s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7

9.2 - Land Transport Section 17(a) Report

s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)

Carried

Resolved: 19.100

Moved: Cr Tim Aitken

Seconded: Cr Ian Sharp

That Council moves out of Closed Council into Open Council.

Carried

10 Date of Next Meeting

Resolved: 19.101

Moved: Cr David Tennent

Seconded: Cr Ian Sharp

That the next meeting of the Central Hawke's Bay District Council be held on 26 September 2019.

Carried

11 Time of Closure

The Meeting closed at 12:42pm.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed at the Council Meeting held on 26 September 2019.

...................................................

CHAIRPERSON

Council Meeting Agenda 26 September 2019

MINUTES OF Central HAwkes Bay District Council
Risk and Audit Committee Meeting
HELD AT THE Council Chamber, 28-32 Ruataniwha Street, Waipawa
ON Thursday, 19 September 2019 AT 9.00am

PRESENT: Cr Tim Aitken (Chair)

Mayor Alex Walker

Cr Gerard Minehan

Cr David Tennent

IN ATTENDANCE:

Cr Ian Sharp (Deputy Mayor)

Cr Kelly Annand

Mr David Borrie (Auditor - EY)

Monique Davidson (CEO)

Bronda Smith (Group Manager, Corporate Support and Services)

Nicola Bousfield (People and Capability Manager)

Kim Parker (Communications and Engagement Manager)

Bridget Gibson (Governance Support Officer)

1 Apologies

Cr Brent Muggeridge

2 Declarations of Conflicts of Interest

Nil

3 Standing Orders

Committee Resolution

Moved: Cr David Tennent

Seconded: Cr Tim Aitken

THAT the following standing orders are suspended for the duration of the meeting:

· 20.2 Time limits on speakers

· 20.5 Members may speak only once

· 20.6 Limits on number of speakers

And that Option C under section 21 General procedures for speaking and moving motions be used for the meeting.

Standing orders are recommended to be suspended to enable members to engage in discussion in a free and frank manner.

.Carried

4 Confirmation of Minutes

Committee Resolution

Moved: Cr Gerard Minehan

Seconded: Mayor Alex Walker

That the minutes of the Risk and Audit Committee Meeting held on 15 August 2019 as circulated, be confirmed as true and correct.

Carried

5 Report Section

5.2 Internal Audit Follow Up Audit

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to update the Risk and Audit Committee of the outcome of the Internal Audit Follow Up Audit.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Cr Gerard Minehan

Seconded: Mayor Alex Walker

That, having considered all matters raised in the report, the report be noted.

Carried

Order of business was amended to address report 5.2 before 5.1 at Chair Aitken’s request.

Mrs Smith presented the report.

Mayor Walker enquired whether Mrs Smith believed that they had the internal resources and capabilities necessary to deliver on the actions, and whether Council could do more to assist in the planning process..

Mrs Smith stated that though perhaps over-optimistic on time frames at the beginning she is pleased with progress. Also the provision of external consultation services would be beneficial in the planning process.

Cr Tennant questioned whether the process was over complicated and should be simplified and if KPI’s were written into contracts.

Officers responded that no the process is not overcomplicated as the last 12 months were dedicated to building the foundations that will make the process simpler and faster in the future, lessening resource dependency.

CEO Mrs Davidson explained that KPIs are included in individual contracts, however the purpose of a strategic suppliers’ programme is about building common and collective rather than individual accountability across all contracts, based on community outcomes rather than typical traditional methods.

Cr Aitken asked who would manage the contracts internally.

Officers responded there are Contract Managers who work collaboratively to manage contracts across the board.

5.1 Annual Report 2018/19

PURPOSE

The matter for consideration by Risk and Audit Committee is the recommendation to Council that the Annual Report 2018/19 be adopted.

Committee Resolution

Moved: Mayor Alex Walker

Seconded: Cr Gerard Minehan

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) The Risk and Audit Committee recommend to Council that the Annual Report for 2018/19 be adopted.

b) That this report be released following the meeting

Carried

Cr Tennant asked for clarification on the overall budget figures for the District Plan.

Officer responded that actual spend to date was $467,000 and the overall budget is between 900,000 and 1.3 million.

CEO Mrs Davidson reminded Councillors they were presented with 3 options in November 2018 and that Council opted for Option 2 which aligned with the budget figures presented by Officers in the report today. CEO Mrs Davidson reiterated that the uncertainty around informal hearings resulting in litigation and mediation costs continues to require monitoring and management.

Mayor Walker asked Mr Borrie how much time was spent by EY on the non-financial performance reporting in comparison to financial performance reporting.

Mr Borrie responded that significant time is spent on the non-financial performance reporting. There is a focus on infrastructure assets as there is a lot of resources such as roading and the three waters included in this area. Other elements of the performance reporting are on a sample basis.

Council then resolved to exclude the public to allow for Council only time discussion with the auditors.

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Committee Resolution

Moved: Cr David Tennent

Seconded: Cr Gerard Minehan

That the public be excluded from the following parts of the proceedings of this meeting.

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

Ground(s) under section

48 for the passing of this

resolution

6.1 - Risk and Audit Committee Briefing

s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons

s7(2)(f)(ii) - the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain the effective conduct of public affairs through the protection of Council members, officers, employees, and persons from improper pressure or harassment

s48(1)(a)(i) - the public

conduct of the relevant part

of the proceedings of the

meeting would be likely to

result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or

section 7

Carried

Committee Resolution

Moved: Mayor Alex Walker

Seconded: Cr Gerard Minehan

That Council moves out of Closed Council into Open Council.

Carried

Council resumed back into public meeting and further questions were asked in public related to the Annual Report 2018/2019.

Mayor Walker stated that there were challenges setting non-financial performance benchmarks in the previous LTP process and asked if potentially auditors could have greater input in the LTP process to help get the non-financial metrics planning right resulting in more realistic benchmarks.

Mr Borrie responded that auditors can assist in this area more.

Mayor Walker asked Mr Borrie whether there is risk associated with the lack of visibility of internal borrowing, where it is not seen publically as public debt. Also how does the balance of CHBDC external debt vs internal debt compare to other councils that are of a similar size to the CHBDC?

Mr Borrie confirmed he believed there is an element of risk. Mr Borrie responded that CHBDC internal and external debt balance is not out of the ordinary in comparison to other councils of similar size.

Cr Aitken queried some information related to assets within the roading activity. This was clarified by Officers.

With reference to the audit process Mayor Walker asked Mrs Smith how she feels the capability is internally to help develop and refine the process?

Mrs Smith stated it is a continuous improvement process with the assistance of internal and external professional consults.

Cr Sharp asked if Councillors needed to upskill in their ability to understand the Council financials.

Mr Borrie affirmed that basic, however not extensive upskilling would be beneficial and offered the support of auditors in help with understanding technical finance reports.

Mayor Walker spoke to the motion thanking Mr Borrie and EY for an excellent report. Mayor Walker stated she is happy to be endorsing a report that covers a considerable body of work for a small Council and is an investment Council has made in the future progress of the District.

Cr Aitken thanked Mrs Smith for her dedicated work for the Risk & Audit Committee.

6 Date of Next Meeting

Recommendation

This is the final meeting of the Risk and Audit Committee for the Council term.

7 Time of Closure

The Meeting closed at 10:06am.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed by Council on 26 September 2019 .

...................................................

CHAIRPERSON

Council Meeting Agenda 26 September 2019

7 Report Section

7.1 Annual Report 2018/19

File Number: COU1-1408

Author: Bronda Smith, Group Manager, Corporate Support and Services

Authoriser: Monique Davidson, Chief Executive

Attachments: 1. EY Audit Closing Report ⇩

2. Draft Annual Report 2018/19 ⇩

3. Draft Annual Summary Report 2018/19 ⇩

PURPOSE

The matter for consideration by Council is the adoption of the Annual Report 2018/19.

· RECOMMENDATION for consideration

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) That the Annual Report and Summary Annual Report for 2018/19 be adopted.

b) That Council delegate responsibility to the Chief Executive and Group Manager – Corporate Support and Services to approve the final edits required to the Annual Report and Annual Summary Report in order to finalise the documents for printing and distribution.


compliance
Significance	This matter is assessed as being of some importance, but does not trigger significance as per Council’s significance and engagement policy.
Options	This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter: 1. That Council adopt Annual Report and Summary Annual Report for 2018/19 be adopted. That Council delegate responsibility to the Chief Executive and Group Manager – Corporate Support and Services to approve the final edits required to the Annual Report and Annual Summary Report in order to finalise the documents for printing and distribution. 2. That Council adopt the Annual Report and Summary Annual Report for 2018/19 not be adopted.
Affected persons	The persons who are affected by or interested in this matter are the ratepayers of Central Hawke’s Bay.
Recommendation	This report recommends option 1 for addressing the matter.
Long-Term Plan / Annual Plan Implications	None
Significant Policy and Plan Inconsistencies	None

BACKGROUND

The two main purposes of the Annual Report are:

(a) To compare the actual activities and the actual performance of Council in the year with the intended activities and the intended level of performance as set out in a Long Term Plan or Annual Plan.

(b) To promote Council’s accountability to the community for the decisions made throughout the year.

According to section 98(3) of the Local Government Act 2002, the Annual Report must be adopted within four months after the end of the financial year to which it relates.

Once the Annual Report is adopted by Council, copies must be made available to the public within one month, and a summary of the Annual Report produced. Copies of both these documents must be sent to the Secretary of Local Government, the Auditor General and the Parliamentary Library.

While the Annual Report to a large extent focusses on the financial performance of the organisation, the report also provides for the reporting of performance of the organisation against non-financial performance measures. These measures were determined through a review of Levels of Services during the development of the 2018-2028 Long Term Plan. It is pleasing to see progress in the achievement of targets.

In some instances where the target has not been achieved, while action has taken place it has not been co-ordinated in such a way where we can accurately measure the progress. More work is required to ensure we can accurately measure and report progress to the community.

overall year end result

Statement of Comprehensive Income

Set out below is a summary of the financial operating results for the 2018/19 financial.

	Budget 2018/19 $000	Actuals 2018/19 $000	Variances $000
Operating Income	30,225	35,754	5,529
Less Operating Expenditure	30,081	34,303	4,222
Net Surplus/(Deficit) from Operating	144	1,451	1,307
Other Expenses		0	0
(Gains)/Losses on Public Debt		(17)	(17)
(Gains)/Losses on Investments		39	39
Operating surplus/(deficit)	144	1,429	1,285
Gains/(losses) on the revaluation of property, plant and equipment	13,777	47,287	33,510
Total Comprehensive Income	13,921	48,716	34,795

It is important to note that the above is based on accounting results and is different from the funding requirements of Council. Funding information is provided in the Funding Impact Statement.

Summaries of the major variances are below:

Operating Income

	Budget 2018/19 $000	Actuals 2018/19 $000	Variances $000
Subsidies and Grants	6,984	11,167	4,183
Fees & Charges	2,946	3,416	470
Other Revenue	376	788	412

· Higher subsidies were received primarily from NZTA for weather event funding - $3.9m

· Higher Fees and Charges across Solid Waste - $272k

· Higher Fees and Charges across Wastewater - $183k

· Higher Other Revenue includes Economic Development Funding - $262K

Operating Expenditure

	Budget 2018/19 $000	Actuals 2018/19 $000	Variances $000
Personnel Costs	4,774	5,147	(373)
Depreciation and Amortisation	12,028	11,946	82
Other Operating Expenditure	13,015	17,037	(4,022)

· Higher Personnel Costs of $373K

· Land Transport cost for maintenance were higher by $712k which is offset by a reduction in renewals approved by NZTA

· Land Transport cost for maintenance were higher by $1.329m due to the flooding events mainly offset by subsidy from NZTA

· Economic Development cost for projects were higher by $301k which is primarily offset from funding from Provincial Growth Fund

· Solid Waste costs were higher by $394K including the increase prices for Carbon Credits for extra waste not anticipated

· Water Supply Costs were higher than budget by $405K due to increased compliance costs and other remedial work required in the network. This was offset by extra Water Meter Rates of $42K and savings for loan repayments. The net deficit of $267K has been loan funded.

Gains/(losses) on the revaluation of property, plant and equipment

Budget 2018/19

$000

Actuals 2018/19

$000

Variances

$000

Gains/(losses) on the revaluation of property, plant and equipment

13,777

47,287

33,510

All asset classes are on a revolving revaluation cycle. This year the revaluation of the Land and Building assets have been the major revaluation activity. The Roading assets have also had a desktop revaluation.

The overall revaluation for the Roading assets showed an increase of $38.8m in value and Land and Buildings (excluding Land under Roads) showed an increase of $8.5m.

External Debt

Council Treasury Management Policy states

“The funds from all asset sales, operating surpluses, grants and subsidies will be applied to specific projects or the reduction of debt and/or a reduction in borrowing requirements, unless the Council specifically directs that the funds will be put to another use.”

As part of the Treasury function, external debt has been managed on an overall Council basis. Council was budgeted to raised $7.707m in External Debt. There was no long term debt raised this year. This is due to the major projects being in the planning stages in 2018/19. The majority of the projects have been scheduled or started. (Council should note that in July a $10m loan was drawn down to fund the capital projects).

The External Debt as at 30 June 2019 is $2.026m against External Debt of $2.737m last year.

transfers to reservers

The Special Funds and Trust accounts are allocated interest annually from the interest received by Council in the way of investments and interest from activities. It is allocated based on the opening balance and in 2018/19 a total of $203k was allocated to the funds.

Also transferred to the Reserves is the following

Reserve	From Activity	Amount	Comment
Landfill Aftercare Reserve	Solid Waste	50,743	Aftercare Provision
Capital Project Fund	Parks & Reserves	(10,957)	Expenses for the sale of reserves
Bridge Replacement Fund	Land Transport	51,000	For future funding of Bridge Replacements
Adverse Events Fund	Solid Waste	8,683	Landfill Fire Costs Repayment as budgeted
Waste Minimisation Levy Fund	Solid Waste	18,625	Surplus Levy Funding
Wastewater Upgrade Reserve	Wastewater	200,000	Funding for upgrade
Retirement Housing Fund	Retirement Housing	216	Surplus from Retirement Housing

changes to reporting standards

There have been no changes to the reporting standards for this annual report.

The Council is required to move to Tier 1 disclosure reporting when the operating expenditure exceeds $30m. As Council exceeded this expenditure limit last year this is the first year Council are reporting under the Tier 1 disclosure requirements.

This has included the following changes being made to the reporting requirements

· On Statement of Cashflows a reconciliation to of Net Operating Surplus/(Deficit) to Cash inflows from operating activities

· Additional breakdown of Revenue and Expenditure in Note 2

· Additional Financial Instruments information in Note 16.

audit Outcome

Following the audit of the Annual Report, the Auditors presented the Audit Closing Report to the Risk and Audit Committee on the 19 September 2019. The auditors have advised that they will issue an unmodified audit opinion for Annual Report 2018/19.

Based on the outcome of the Audit, the Risk and Audit Committee have recommended to Council that the Annual Report 2018/19 be adopted.

SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

In accordance with the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy, this matter has been assessed as of some importance.

OPTIONS

The following analysis applies to all options

a) Financial and Resourcing Implications

There are no financial or resourcing implications identified from this report.

b) Risk Analysis

There are no specific risks associated with the options excluding the requirements under Local Government Act 2014 which is covered under the Statutory Obligations.

c) Alignment to Project Thrive and Community Outcomes

All options align with Project Thrive and will allow us to achieve our key community outcomes

d) Consistency with Policies and Plans

This report is consistent with all policies and plans

e) Participation by Māori

This issue is not identified as requiring specific engagement with Maori.

f) Community Views and Preferences

This issue is not identified as requiring specific engagement with the community.

g) Advantages and Disadvantages

There are no specific advantages or disadvantages associated with the options excluding the requirements under Local Government Act 2014 which is covered under the Statutory Obligations.

Option 1 The Risk and Audit Committee recommend to Council that the Annual Report for 2018/19 be adopted.

a) Statutory Responsibilities

The Council is required to adopt the Annual Report and Annual Summary Report within 4 months of the end of the Financial Year. The Council will meet its statutory obligations with this option

Option 2 The Risk and Audit Committee recommend to Council that the Annual Report for 2018/19 not be adopted.

a) Statutory Responsibilities

The Council is required to adopt the Annual Report and Annual Summary Report within 4 months of the end of the Financial Year. It is possibly that Council will not meet its statutory obligations as the time required to make any adjustments, and any subsequent review required by the auditors, may delay the adoption of the Annual Report until after the statutory deadline of 31 October 2018.

Recommended Option

This report recommends option 1 for addressing the matter.

NEXT STEPS

Once the Annual Report is adopted by Council, copies must be made available to the public within one month. Copies of both these documents must be sent to the Secretary of Local Government, the Auditor General and the Parliamentary Library.

· RECOMMENDATION for consideration

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

c) That the Annual Report and Summary Annual Report for 2018/19 be adopted.

d) Delegate responsibility to the Chief Executive and Group Manager – Corporate Support and Services to approve the final edits required to the Annual Report and Annual Summary Report in order to finalise the documents for printing and distribution.

Council Meeting Agenda 26 September 2019

7.2 Adoption of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2019

File Number: COU1-1400

Author: Darren de Klerk, 3 Waters Programme Manager

Authoriser: Monique Davidson, Chief Executive

Attachments: 1. FINAL - WMMP 2019 ⇩

2. FINAL - Waste Assessment 2019 ⇩

PURPOSE

The matter for consideration by the Council is to adopt the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (WMMP) 2019.

This issue arises from legislative provisions within the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (WMA) requiring Council to review their WMMP every six years.

RECOMMENDATION for consideration

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) Council adopts the WMMP 2019


compliance
Significance	This matter is assessed as being significant importance.
Options	This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter: 1. Adopt the WMMP 2019 2. Reject the WMMP and provide guidance on next steps
Affected persons	The persons who are affected by or interested in this matter are the Central Hawkes Bay community
Recommendation	This report recommends option 1 for addressing the matter.
Long-Term Plan / Annual Plan Implications	No implications on the current LTP or Annual Plan.
Significant Policy and Plan Inconsistencies	Yes – this plan is a new significant plan for council.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The objective of this decision relevant to the purpose of local government is to fulfil the statutory requirements of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 requiring a current WMMP and LGA 2002 in regard to consultation and decision making.

Council underwent a consultation period during July 2019 to receive submissions and feedback on the draft WMMP. Hearings and deliberations were held on the 29 August 2019.

Following this engagement process, council largely heard support for the draft WMMP, and minor changes have been made based on these submissions.

Council is excited to produce a robust WMMP that sets the platform for a work programme to deliver on the actions that will ensure we work towards our vision of a ‘Waste Free CHB’.

BACKGROUND

A Plan is required in the WWMA 2008 (Act). The Act requires territorial authorities (TA’s) to conduct a waste assessment and review their Plan every six years.

A Plan should contain a summary of objectives, policies and targets for waste management and minimisation. The Plan should clearly communicate how the Councils will deliver on these objectives. Plans must be reviewed at least every six years. Not keeping to the statutory timeframe for a Plan review may result in the council’s waste levy funding payments being withheld under section 33 of the Act.

Council implemented an interim WMMP in 2018 to meet statutory requirements, with the understanding an opportunity to deliver a long-term robust WMMP in 2019 following community and key stakeholder involvement.

Council developed the draft WMMP through key stakeholder workshops, and council workshops to understand the important and key issues to raise in this WMMP, in addition council undertook a comprehensive waste assessment (attached) to further inform the draft WMMP and highlight issues.

Additionally, a recently adopted environmental and sustainability strategy provided key contextual information relevant to the CHB environmental aspirations.

Through this input process, council formulated the baseline for our new draft WMMP to take to the community for consultation. This occurred in July 2019 where council spoke with over 100 community members, and received 60 submissions of which 4 were heard.

Largely supportive of this WMMP, and with minor amendments and an additional action, officers present this final WMMP to council for adoption.SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

In accordance with the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy, this matter has been assessed as significant importance as it affects the entire Central Hawkes Bay District and community including businesses.

Central Hawkes Bay District Council implemented an extensive campaign to inform the Central Hawkes Bay community of the opportunity to review the draft Plan and to submit during the consultation via an online or written submission. The consultation was undertaken between 1 July 2019 and 1 August 2019.

The process followed for the draft Plan consultation satisfies the framework in sections 82 and 83 of the LGA 2002 which provides the principles for consultation.

Hearings were held the week of 29 August 2019. Submissions received were heard, or read and considered before alterations were made based on these submissions.

All changes recommended at the conclusion of these hearings have been incorporated into the final version of the Plan (attached).

It must be noted, one submission was missed in the hearings and deliberations report, this was due to a double up when one submission was entered received twice and entered in place of this submission, officers and council staff have spoken with Ms Bayliss, and advised her submission would be raised in this report, with a number of items to note, but no fundamental changes to the WMMP, the analysis of her submission is outlined below.

Submissions:

14 Kathryn Bayliss

Summary of submissions:

Would like to see a review of drop-off centre provision - including consideration of facilities in locations like supermarket carparks. Has experienced full containers at Waipukurau many times.

Has suggested that rural communities could be surveyed to identify service needs more specifically - perhaps a user-pays pick up service?

Submitter believes that out-of-district waste should not be accepted at the district's landfill - or at least reduce this waste. Believes, that this conflicts with the vision, and targets could be met this way, and the landfill wouldn't be filled up as quickly. Believes it would be more economical in the long term to make the present landfill last as long as possible - new cells would not need to be constructed, a possible new landfill site would not be needed, and therefore additional closed landfill monitoring would be avoided. If it is continued, then it should be on a full cost-recovery basis and a premium or surcharge should be introduced; recyclables should be banned.

Submitter opposes partly subsidising services through rates - these should be entirely user-pays. Instead, issues could be resolved by providing small wheelie bins for rubbish instead of bags. These could be charged per collection and by size of bin, with more frequent collections costing more.

Business and industry waste could be addressed by encouraging use of facilities, and educating their employers. Raises the issue of roadside litter potentially coming from a specific business.

Submitter would like to see a food waste collection started sooner than planned, and made a user-pays service - or encourage community composting.

Submitter has pointed out two errors in the Waste Assessment which will be amended.

Analysis:

The draft WMMP incorporates a number of actions relating to the issues raised here, and the specific feedback will be noted and considered when each of these actions is carried out.

The submitter also suggests placing recycling facilities on private property such as supermarket carparks. This has caused problems in other parts of NZ in the past, as these sites tend to attract illegal dumping, and so the owners of the property can be reluctant. However, Council will continue to consider these locations and pursue opportunities where possible.

The submitter notes issues with the servicing frequency of the Waipukurau recycling facility.

Some suggestions made by the submitter are contrary to the intended implementation - e.g. a charged food waste collection service (the recommendation is that this is a rates funded service, to encourage full participation in the service), and reducing out-of-district waste coming to the landfill (Council's current analysis shows that this waste enables the provision of the landfill to remain financially feasible).

Thanks to the submitter for identifying errors in the draft Waste Assessment provided – this has since been updated.

Recommendation:

The submission supports a number of actions in the WMMP, and raises some helpful and insightful issues to be considered during the implementation of the Plan.

Council will continue to review their position on charges, acceptance of waste types, and acceptance of out-of-district waste at the landfill to ensure that this does not have a detrimental impact on the long-term access to a landfill disposal point for the CHB community.

Advice to Council has been that waste services focusing on diversion, such as recycling and any potential food-waste collection service, should be rates-funded to maximise participation in and use of these services. This is based on experience within New Zealand and overseas.

Council will consider the option of using wheeled bins for collection services, while noting that systems enabling user-pays collections with wheeled bins are not yet widely introduced and present logistical difficulties.

Council notes the issues with servicing at the Waipukurau recycling facility, and will continue to work with our service provider to improve this service offering.

OPTIONS

Option 1 Adopt the WMMP 2019

a) Financial and Resourcing Implications

Resourced and financed within the WMMP budget of $60,000 to deliver this WMMP.

b) Risk Analysis

None of significant nature to note.

c) Alignment to Project Thrive and Community Outcomes

This option aligns greatly with thrive and the smart environmental outcomes through durable infrastructure.

d) Statutory Responsibilities

Complies with Waste Minimisation Act 2008 and Local Government Act 2002.

e) Consistency with Policies and Plans

Within current plans, if actions are delivered there may be future impacts on annual plans/ long term plans – these will be evaluated as and when they occur and pass relevant due diligence or feasibility studies.

f) Participation by Māori

Tangata Whenua contributed input directly into the WMMP, and were consulted on through the July 2019 engagement.

g) Community Views and Preferences

Community views were sought through the consultation period, and through hearings, and deliberations on submissions.

h) Advantages and Disadvantages

· Great benefit to the community in adopting this WMMP and implementing the action plan.

· This WMMP provides a great platform to formulate a work programme for council.

· No perceived disadvantages from adopting this WMMP.

Option 2 Reject the WMMP and provide guidance

a) Financial and Resourcing Implications

Additional financing and resourcing to further iterate the WMMP, likely greater than budgeted for.

b) Risk Analysis

Operation, financial and resourcing risk pressures if not adopted, and community perception risk in completing a consultation period and then not adopting a largely supported plan.

c) Promotion or Achievement of Community Outcomes

Rejecting does not promote community outcomes that were heard through Project Thrive and the support received for this WMMP to be actioned.

d) Statutory Responsibilities

No risk, as council adopted a WMMP in 2018

e) Consistency with Policies and Plans

Not consistent with the Long Term Plan 2018, where council advised a more detailed plan would be implemented in 2019.

f) Participation by Māori

Further input would be required, for likely no greater value.

g) Community Views and Preferences

Not aligned with community views, where support was given to the WMMP.

h) Advantages and Disadvantages

Only disadvantages are perceived from not adopting this WMMP at this time.

This WMMP gives officers and council a great platform to implement the action plan heard by our community.

NEXT STEPS

If this WMMP was adopted, officers would treat this as a final and live document, work would progress on establishing a work programme to work with the community to implement and deliver on the action plan to address the issues highlighted within the WMMP to deliver on objectives and targets to ultimately deliver on our vision of a ‘Waste Free CHB’.

Recommended Option

This report recommends Option One to Adopt the WMMP for addressing the matter.

Council Meeting Agenda 26 September 2019

9 Chief Executive Report

9.1 Delegations to the Chief Executive

File Number: COU1-1400

Author: Monique Davidson, Chief Executive

Authoriser: Monique Davidson, Chief Executive

Attachments: Nil

PURPOSE

To request Council to delegate to the Chief Executive during the interim election period the responsibilities, duties and powers of the Council, except for certain powers set down in the legislation that cannot be delegated.

RECOMMENDATION for consideration

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) That the Delegations to the Chief Executive report be received.

b) That subject to the limitations set out in clause 31(1) of the Seventh Schedule to the Local Government Act 2002, the Council delegates all of its responsibilities, duties and powers to the Chief Executive for the period from the day after the official declaration of the election results until the swearing in of the new Council, subject to a requirement that the Chief Executive may only exercise this delegation after the following:

a. Consultation with the person elected to the position of Mayor,

b. May only attend to those matters that cannot reasonably wait until the first meeting of the new Council and;

c. Shall be reported to the first meeting of the new Council.


compliance
Significance	This matter is assessed as being of some importance.
Options	This report identifies and assesses the following reasonably practicable options for addressing the matter: 1. Grant delegated authority to the Chief Executive during the Interim Election Period 2. Not delegate to the Chief Executive during the Interim Election Period 3. Grant delegated authority to a Council Committee.
Affected persons	The persons who are affected by or interested in this matter are all residents and ratepayers across Central Hawke’s Bay.
Recommendation	This report recommends option 1 for addressing the matter.
Long-Term Plan / Annual Plan Implications	No implications intended.
Significant Policy and Plan Inconsistencies	No significant implications.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Council are required to consider arrangements to ensure the effective and efficient conduct of the Council’s business during the period from the day after the declaration of the electoral result until the new Council is sworn in at the Inaugural meeting. Until the new members’ declarations are taken at the Inaugural meeting, neither the outgoing nor the incoming elected members can act in their capacity as members of the Council.

It is recommended that the Council delegate its responsibilities, duties, and powers to the Chief Executive for the period from the day after the declaration until the swearing in of the new Council, except for those set out in Schedule 7, Clause 32(1) of the LGA. It is recommended that the Council discharge all its Committees and therefore no resolution is required under Clause 30 (7) of Schedule 7 of the LGA. Two Committees continue to operate following the elections, the District Licensing Committee and the Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group and these do not require a resolution of the Council to do so.

BACKGROUND

Members Coming in and Out of Office

It is prudent for Council to consider arrangements to ensure the effective and efficient conduct of the Council’s business during the period from the day after the declaration of the 2019 electoral result (17 October or as soon as practicable thereafter), until the new Council is sworn in at the Inaugural meeting, scheduled for Thursday, 31 October 2019.

Clause 14 of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 provides that a person newly elected to Council may not act until they have made the necessary declaration at the Inaugural meeting. This provision combines with sections 86, 115 and 116 of the Local Electoral Act 2001 the effect that, from the day after the declaration of election results, until the new members’ declarations are taken at the Inaugural Council meeting, neither the outgoing nor the incoming elected members can act in their capacity as members of the Council.

While the official results will likely take place on Thursday, 17 October 2019 (or sooner or as soon as practicable thereafter), and placed on the Council’s website, in terms of the LEA sections 86 and 115, the public notice is deemed to be by way of a public notice in a local newspaper. Therefore the official declaration is likely to be Friday 18 October via a public notice in Hawke’s Bay Today.

To ensure the effective and efficient conduct of Council’s affairs during the interim election period, Council may wish to consider delegating to the Chief Executive all of its responsibilities, duties, and powers for the period in question except those set out in paragraphs (a) to (h) of clause 32(1) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002.

For the avoidance of doubt those powers excluded from the delegation are as follows:

Unless expressly provided otherwise in this Act, or in any other Act, for the purposes of efficiency and effectiveness in the conduct of a local authority’s business, a local authority may delegate to a committee or other subordinate decision-making body, community board, or member or officer of the local authority any of its responsibilities, duties, or powers except—

(a) the power to make a rate; or

(b) the power to make a bylaw; or

(c) the power to borrow money, or purchase or dispose of assets, other than in accordance with the long-term plan; or

(d) the power to adopt a long-term plan, annual plan, or annual report; or

(e) the power to appoint a chief executive; or

(f) the power to adopt policies required to be adopted and consulted on under this Act in association with the long-term plan or developed for the purpose of the local governance statement; or

(g) [Repealed]

(h) the power to adopt a remuneration and employment policy.

This delegation would be for the limited time period between the declaration of the election result and the first meeting of the new Council. This is anticipated to be ten days as the public notice of the declaration of the result is expected on 18 October 2019 and the Inaugural Council meeting is expected to be held on 31 October 2019. The delegation period is therefore between the 19 October (the day after the official declaration of results) and the 31 October 2019. However, these dates may be subject to change, depending on the timing of the declaration and whether there is a challenge to the election result.

It is also recommended that the delegation is subject to a number of requirements. Firstly that the Chief Executive may only act after consultation with the Mayor Elect. Secondly that the Chief Executive may only attend to those matters that cannot reasonably wait until the first meeting of the new Council and thirdly that the Chief Executive is required to report any decisions to the first meeting of the new Council.

It should be noted that the current Council remains until the day of the official declaration of results (inclusive). The new Council is officially in place from the day of the formal swearing in ceremony.

Discharging Committees

Pursuant to Schedule 7, Clause 30(7) a committee, subcommittee, or other subordinate decision-making body is, unless the local authority resolves otherwise, deemed to be discharged on the coming into office of the members of the local authority elected following the 2019 election.

There are two Committees which continue to operate following the election in October 2019 and do not require a Council resolution to do so:

· The District Licensing Committee set up under the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 to make decisions on all licences and managers certificates. There are Commissioners and List Members who have been appointed for a five year period to 1 December 2018.

· The Civil Defence and Emergency Management Group (CDEMG). Amendments to section 12(2) of the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 provide that the CDEMG is not deemed to be discharged following a triennial election.

SIGNIFICANCE AND ENGAGEMENT

In accordance with the Council's Significance and Engagement Policy, this matter has been assessed as of some importance.

OPTIONS

Option 1 – Grant Delegated Authority to the Chief Executive during the Interim

Election Period

The Council has the option of delegating to the Chief Executive all of its responsibilities, duties, and powers for the period in question except those set out in paragraphs (a) to (h) of clause 32(1) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002, subject to the three requirements set out in section 3.

The risks involved in delegating to the Chief Executive include the Council not agreeing with the decisions made and overturning decisions at a later date. However, the limited time period and the fact that any decision by the Chief Executive is required to be made in consultation with the Mayor elect and that it would only be pressing matters that must be attended to and reported on at the first meeting of the incoming Council, does provide a degree of comfort to elected members that decisions will not be made unless required for the smooth running of the Council.

Option 2 – Not delegate to the Chief Executive during the Interim Election Period

The Council has the option of not delegating to the Chief Executive all of its responsibilities, duties, and powers for the period in question except those powers that cannot be delegated out (these are set out in paragraphs (a) to (h) of clause 32(1) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002), which are the powers of the Council subject to the three requirements set out in section 3.

The risks of not delegating would be the risk of the Council not being able to undertake its business during the period from the declaration of the election result until the first meeting of the new Council.

Option 3 – Grant delegated authority to a Council Committee

A further alternative available is that the Council may now, under Clause 30 (7) of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002, resolve before the election that its committees or some of them are not discharged and continue following that election.

If the Council did pass a resolution under Clause 30 (7) not to discharge some or all of its committees then the membership of its committees may continue after the election because of Clause 31 (5) which states that the Council can replace the members of the committee that are not discharged after the election.

The Council is not required to replace the membership and if the Council takes no action members already appointed to the Council committees will continue to be members of those committees. The effect of this clause is that those members who have not been re-elected would seem to continue to be members of the committees (until they go out of office) as well as those members who have been re-elected. If all the members cease to be members, the Committee will cease to be able to comply with clause 31(4) (a) which requires that at least 1 member of a committee must be an elected member of the local authority. Members who have been re-elected will not be able to act as members until they have taken their declarations.

These provisions are untested and there is some doubt about how they would work out in practice. Accordingly it is not recommended that the Council follow this option.

RECCOMENDATIONS

That having considered all matters raised in the report:

a) That the Delegations to the Chief Executive during Interim Election Period and Discharging Committees be received.

b) That subject to the limitations set out in clause 31(1) of the Seventh Schedule to the Local Government Act 2002, the Council delegates all of its responsibilities, duties and powers to the Chief Executive for the period from the day after the declaration of the election results until the swearing in of the new Council, subject to a requirement that the Chief Executive may only exercise this delegation after the following:

a. Consultation with the person elected to the position of Mayor,

b. May only attend to those matters that cannot reasonably wait until the first meeting of the new Council and;

c. Shall be reported to the first meeting of the new Council.