Māori Consultative Committee

Open Agenda

 

Meeting Date:

Wednesday 13 December 2017

Time:

3pm

Venue:

Small Exhibition Hall

Napier Conference Centre

Marine Parade

Napier

 

 

Council Members

Piri Prentice (In the Chair), Mayor Dalton, Councillor Apiata Tapine, Liz Ratima, Tiwana Aranui, and George Reti

Officer Responsible

Director Community Services

Administration

Governance Team

 

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Karakia

Apologies

Nil

Conflicts of interest

Public forum

Announcements by the Chairperson

Announcements by the management

Confirmation of minutes

A copy of the Minutes from the meeting held on Wednesday, 1 November 2017 are attached on page 139

New Items for Māori Consultative Committee

1      Update on Review of Māori Consultative Committee....................................................... 3  

Reports from Standing Committees

Reports from Strategy and Infrastructure Committee held 22 November 2017

1      Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Joint Committee Terms of Reference................................. 4

Reports from Regulatory Committee held 22 November 2017

1      Adoption and Notification of Plan Change 11 - Park Island Reconfiguration.................. 16

2      Temporary Liquor Ban - Christmas in the Park.............................................................. 23

Reports from Finance Committee held 6 December 2017

1      Revaluation of napier city 2017..................................................................................... 31

2      Setting General Rates - Overview................................................................................. 33

3      Rating - 2017 Revaluation of Napier City...................................................................... 37

4      Allocation of General Rate-Funded Costs..................................................................... 44

5      Cost of Council Services Supplied to Bayview ............................................................. 53

6      Cost of Council Services Supplied to Rural Properties.................................................. 58

7      Representation Review: Engagement Update............................................................... 62

8      Quarterly Report for September 2017......................................................................... 109

9      Significance and Engagement Policy.......................................................................... 111

Reports from Community Services Committee held 6 December 2017

1      HOURS OF OPERATION - MTG HAWKE'S BAY AND NAPIER LIBRARIES.............. 128

2      Library Fees and Charges........................................................................................... 132

3      Joint Alcohol Strategy Review..................................................................................... 136


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda                                                                                                                          Item 1

New Items for MĀori Consultative Committee

 

1.    Update on Review of MĀori Consultative Committee

Type of Report:

Enter Significance of Report

Legal Reference:

Local Government Act 2002

Document ID:

428400

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Jane McLoughlin, Team Leader Governance

 

1.1   Purpose of Report

To update the Committee on progress made of the review of the Māori Consultative Committee which has occurred since the last meeting. 

 

Officer’s Recommendation

That the Committee:

a.     Receive the verbal updated provided by the Strategic Māori Advisor on the review of the Māori Consultative Committee. 

 

 

Chairperson’s Recommendation

That the Council resolve that the officer’s recommendation be adopted.

1.2   Background Summary

A verbal update is to be provided at the meeting by Council’s Strategic Māori Advisor. 

 

1.3   Attachments

Nil   


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

Reports from standing committees

MĀORI CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

That the Māori Consultative Recommendations arising from the discussion of the Committee reports be submitted to the Council meeting for consideration.

 

 

 

Reports from Strategy and Infrastructure Committee held 22 November 2017

 

1.    Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Joint Committee Terms of Reference

Type of Report:

Operational and Procedural

Legal Reference:

Local Government Act 2002

Document ID:

416006

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Deborah Smith, Governance Advisor

 

1.1   Purpose of Report

To present to Council the minutes of the inaugural meeting of the Hawke’s Bay Drinking Water Joint Committee and the ensuing Terms of Reference for adoption.

 

Committee's recommendation

Chairperson Price / Councillor Wise

        That Council

 

a.     Receive the minutes of the inaugural meeting of the Hawke’s Bay Drinking Water Joint Committee, held on 24 October 2017.

b.     Adopt the Terms of Reference for the Hawke’s Bay Drinking Water Joint Committee.

c.     Agree the Mayor will be appointed as an alternate representative for Napier City Council on the Hawke’s Bay Drinking Water Joint Committee.  

 

Carried

 

1.2   Background Summary

Information on a proposed Hawke’s  Bay Drinking Water Joint Committee was brought to Council’s meeting on 16 August 2017. At that time, it was resolved to participate in the Committee, adopt the Terms of Reference and to appoint the Chair of the Finance Committee and the Chair of the Strategy and Infrastructure as Council’s representatives to the Drinking Water Joint Committee.

The newly established Hawke’s Bay Drinking Water Joint Committee has now met for the first time, on 24 October 2017. Cr Kirsten Wise and Cr Keith Price attended as the appointees from Napier City Council; the Chief Executive was also present.

The minutes of this meeting are shown at Attachment A.

During the meeting, the Terms of Reference for the Committee were finalised and are now being brought to each member agency for adoption. The Terms of Reference are shown at Attachment B.

Under the Terms of Reference of the Committee, the Council will appoint the Mayor as an alternate representative.

1.3   Issues

No issues

1.4   Significance and Consultation

N/A

1.5   Implications

Financial

N/A

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

N/A

1.6   Options

a.     To adopt the Terms of Reference of the Joint Committee without alteration

b.     To propose amendments to the Terms of Reference for the consideration of the joint members.

1.7   Development of Preferred Option

a.     To adopt the Terms of Reference of the Joint Committee without alteration.

 

 

At the Meeting

In response to questions from Councillors, it was clarified that there will be an offer of representation made to tangata whenua to join the committee. 

1.8   Attachments

a     Draft minutes - Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Joint Committee - 24 October 2017  

b     Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Joint Committee - Terms of Reference    


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


 


 


 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


 


 


 


 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

Reports from Regulatory Committee held 22 November 2017

 

1.      Adoption and Notification of Plan Change 11 - Park Island Reconfiguration

Type of Report:

Operational and Procedural

Legal Reference:

Resource Management Act 1991

Document ID:

399787

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Dean Moriarity, Team Leader Policy Planning

 

1.1     Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is for Council to adopt Plan Change 11 - Park Island Reconfiguration, its accompanying Section 32 report and authorise officers to publicly notify the change for public submissions. This plan change is to give effect to the newly adopted Park Island Master Plan (May 2017).

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Taylor / Wise

a.     That the Council resolve:

b.     That Council adopt Plan Change 11, its accompanying Section 32 report and authorise officers to publicly notify the change for public submissions.

c.     That the closing date for submissions be an extended period no less than 1.5x the statutory minimum of 20 working days after the date of public notification (to recognise and provide for the holiday period).

d.     To enable the plan change to be notified prior to the impending holiday period a DECISION OF COUNCIL is requested.  This will require the following resolution to be passed before the Decision of Council is taken before being heard by an independent commissioner:

e.     That a DECISION OF COUNCIL is required urgently in order to enable timely processing of the proposed plan change. This will require the following resolution to be passed before the decision of Council is taken:

That, in terms of Section 82 (3) of the Local Government Act 2002, that the principles set out in that section have been observed in such manner that the Napier City Council considers, in its discretion, is appropriate to make decisions on the recommendation.

 

Carried

 

 

Decision of Council

Councillors White / Brosnan

That, in terms of Section 82 (3) of the Local Government Act 2002, that the principles set out in that section have been observed in such manner that the Napier City Council considers, in its discretion, is appropriate to make decisions on the recommendation.

Carried

 

 

Council Resolution

Councillors Wright / Taylor

a.     That the Council resolve:

b.     That Council adopt Plan Change 11, its accompanying Section 32 report and authorise officers to publicly notify the change for public submissions.

c.     That the closing date for submissions be an extended period no less than 1.5x the statutory minimum of 20 working days after the date of public notification (to recognise and provide for the holiday period).

 

Carried

 

1.2     Background Summary

 

The original Park Island Master Plan was developed in 2013.  The plan provides a blueprint for development over a 30 year timeframe to meet the community’s current and growing sport and recreation needs.  The Master Plan sets out the overall direction for Park Island, which includes the development of new sporting and recreational areas and various environmental enhancements throughout the 68 hectares.  The Master Plan also considers Park Island in the broader context and the relationship and linkages to surrounding areas, particularly Parklands subdivision and Mana Ahuriri’s Westminster Block.  The ‘sportsville’ concept is the basis of the Master Plan with reorganisation and development focused around sporting ‘hubs’.  A major component of the original Master Plan development was the inclusion of the substantial Northern Sporting Hub on a greenfields site.

 

Following the adoption of the Master Plan in 2013, a number of smaller scale projects were completed in the Southern and Central Sports Hubs. However, before proceeding with some of the more significant capital developments, it was identified that that a comprehensive review of the Master Plan was warranted.

 

During the 2016 stakeholder consultation, most sports organisations identified the need for greater capacity in sports fields based on growth of their sports.  However, the consultation also confirmed a trend that has dramatically impacted on land requirements for sport demand, i.e. a recent increase in the acceptability of the use of artificial turf pitches for sporting codes other than hockey, including football and rugby. What this means is that sports demand can be better met by the implementation and utilization of artificial turf pitches that can be more intensively utilised and even shared between different codes. 

 

An updated Masterplan was subsequently presented to, and adopted by Council in April 2017 and a resolution passed to initiate a District Plan Change “to rezone Park Islands Northern Sports Hub to meet the Master Plan objectives”

 

Updates to the Master Plan have seen a consolidation of the park layout giving the Northern Sports Hub a more compact urban form and better connectivity to the wider park and surrounds.  The Northern Sports Hub has contracted and shifted towards the southeast direction to overlay currently vacant Residential zoned land bordered by the corner of Orotu Drive and Westminster Avenue.

 

The Northern Sports Hub now includes additional car parking to support the inclusion of a new high performance facility and game standard training field for the HBRU which will contribute to the creation of an additional 527 car parks on Park Island in total.

 

Another significant change to the Plan is the removal of twelve tennis courts from the Northern Sports Hub as they are no longer seen as needed.  This was confirmed by the findings of the Indicative Business Case (IBC) carried out for the Clay Tennis Court proposal in 2015. 

 

The Central and Southern Sports Hubs are essentially unchanged from the 2013 Plan with the exception of the addition of the two artificial turf fields, one for rugby on the Tremains field and the other for football outside the Bluewater Stadium.

 

In summary, most changes to the Park Island Master Plan 2017 update have occurred in the Northern Sports Hub.  The main changes are;

 

   a reduction in the overall number of fields,

   an increase in the total number of artificial turfs, and

   the establishment of the HBRU high performance training facility. 

 

The redesign of the Northern Sports Hub in particular now necessitates a District Plan Change proposing to rezone the Residential Zone on the southeastern boundary to Sports Park Zone, and to rezone much of the current Sports Park Zone in the northeast, to a Main Residential Zone.

 

1.3     Issues

 

District Plan change processes are required to comply with statutory processes stipulated in the Resource Management Act and include opportunities for submissions, summary of submissions, further submissions, preparation of a hearing report and ultimately a hearing.  

 

Council should also be aware that generally rules of plan changes do not have any legal status until such time as Council issues decisions on submissions, i.e. the end of the process. 

 

The HBRFU have signalled a strong desire to establish in the newly proposed Northern Sports Hub, the first sporting group to do so, and are wanting to initiate development of their facility as soon as possible.

 

Even straight forward plan changes can easily take the better part of the year to complete and so any opportunities to avoid unnecessary delay assist in the timely processing of the plan changes. An indicative plan change process is shown below assuming a decision of Council is made in November.

 

 

 

 

 

For these reasons it is suggested that Council adopt Plan Change 11 as a decision of Council so that the plan change can be notified before the Christmas holiday period albeit with an extended submission period from early December through until early February so as not to disadvantage any potential submitters.  The alternative option is for the report and its recommendations to be referred to the next Ordinary meeting of Council (December 20) in which case the statutory non-working days stipulated in the RMA would then in effect mean that the plan change would not be able to be notified until mid to late January at the earliest.

 

1.4     Significance and Consultation

Adjacent owners/occupiers and other residents in the Parklands and Tamatea areas were provided an opportunity to provide feedback on the redesign and reconfiguration proposal during June and July 2017. Feedback from this initial engagement was to help inform the proposed Plan Change.

 

Adjacent residents were personally invited to an information sharing evening in mid-June 2017. They were also welcomed to meet individually with Napier City Council (NCC) planning staff. Six parties took this opportunity up. 

 

A second community information evening was held with invitations extended to adjacent residents, all other Parklands residents, and a portion of residents along Westminster Avenue. In addition, notices about the community meeting were distributed through key contacts and locations within the Tamatea community. Information about the proposed redesign and reconfiguration was posted on NCC’s website, providing residents in the area (and more widely) with a further opportunity to seek information and/or provide comment.

 

Issues raised by residents attending the information sharing sessions was wide reaching. A large portion of the feedback centred on concerns about the possibility of two-storey housing in the next stages of Parklands, and the impact this type of housing may have on outlook, housing quality, and residential amenity. This feedback was in response to a separate process NCC is undertaking around changing the nature and form of covenants applying to residential development within the existing zoned and consented Parklands area.  The intent of the changes to the covenants is to improve the urban design of the new Parklands residential area.

 

A number of concerns were also raised around plans for extra car parking to accommodate users of the Northern Sports Hub. Residents asked questions about the capacity of the proposed car park in the hub, the likelihood of overflow parking on Orotu Drive and the impact of extra traffic generally. Several residents were concerned about the current excess speeding along both Orotu and Prebensen Drives. Some residents were interested in hours, hireage and licensing arrangements for the clubrooms envisaged to be established in the Northern Sports Hub area.

 

Residents were generally supportive of the greenspaces, neighbourhood playgrounds and linkages for pedestrians and cyclists proposed for the area as part of the Master Plan.

 

In terms of the visual impact implications of the reconfiguration, the focused one-on-one sessions raised concern around changes in outlook, the location and type of potential two-storey houses, interruptions to landscape and skyline views towards the west/north west, and treatment of the interface along Orotu Drive. 

 

In response to the concerns about visual impacts, Council engaged a landscape architect to provide an assessment of the potential effects of the reconfiguration.  This assessment concluded that the combined width (60 metres) of the road and drainage reserve along Orotu Drive combined with two recommendations for additional mitigation (clustered planting of specimen trees and a building height restriction for an additional 30 metres into the proposed residential area) were sufficient to address these concerns.

 

There was interest in the likely timeframe and sequence of the proposed District Plan Change and development of the new Parklands area and Northern Sports Hub.   All participants in the initial stage of engagement were advised of the opportunity to make formal submissions on the District Plan Change following public notification.

 

The accompanying Section 32 report examines in detail the response to these concerns and the proposed means of mitigation to these concerns where it was considered necessary to address valid RMA matters.

1.5     Implications

Financial

The only financial implication is the cost of processing the plan change in accordance with the statutory requirements of the Resource Management Act.  This can be done utilising existing operational budgets.

 

Social & Policy

Managing and providing for urban growth as well as facilitating the delivery of recreational facilities enables people and communities to provide for their social, economic, and cultural well-being and for their health and safety.

 

The proposed Plan Change is intended to give effect to the 2017 Park Island Masterplan which represents the latest aspirations and best practice thinking around the needs of community and sports groups.   The Master Plan requires a change to the District Plan so that it can meet the demands and needs of the Napier community for the next 20-30 years.   

 

Risk

The main risk is that the Plan Change may not be approved through the process by either the commissioner/s hearing it, or subsequently by the Environment Court by way of a possible appeal.

1.6     Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

 

1.   Adopt Plan Change 11 and its accompanying Section 32 report as a decision of Council now and authorise officers to publicly notify the change for public submissions before Christmas (albeit with an extended submission period).

2.   Adopt Plan Change 11 and its accompanying Section 32 report at the next Ordinary meeting of Council (December 20) and authorise officers to publicly notify the change for public submissions early in 2018.

 

3.   Not adopt the plan change and do not publicly notify the change for public submissions.

 

1.7     Development of Preferred Option

Adopt Plan Change 11 and its accompanying Section 32 report as a decision of Council now and authorise officers to publicly notify the change for public submissions before Christmas (albeit with an extended submission period.

 

 

At the Meeting

The Team Leader Policy Planning spoke to the report giving a brief overview for Councillors. In response to questions from Councillors, officers clarified:

·     That the changes were driven by the various iterations of the Park Island Masterplan and significant consultation has been undertaken on the Masterplan.

·     That the District Plan change was highlighted to Council earlier in the year through the adoption of the Park Island Masterplan.

·     Hawke’s Bay Rugby Union are committed to going to Park Island as part of their development of a high performance centre.

·     One of the big drivers for the review of the Park Island Masterplan was the utilisation rate of sports fields. There are demands on the current facilities for which grass fields are not suitable. Altering the configuration assists with accommodating other sports and mid-week trainings.

·     Consultation is scheduled to be undertaken in December 2017, which allows 30 days and is over the statutory requirement of 20 days. Consultation has already been undertaken with the community also.

·     Notification will be made on 6 December 2017 with the submission period through until 9 February 2018. There is a closedown period during Christmas/New Year until 10 January 2018.

·     Council must be the administering body for the notification process. The independent officer from Stradegy Consulting have drafted the application.

·     Pre-consultation was targeted at local residents. Direct notification will be made to landowners on the western side of Orotu Drive, Parklands Estate residents and along Westminster Avenue, the statutory authority, and other stakeholders.

·     Community meetings have been well attended. Residents consider themselves affected therefore officers are taking a wider approach to notification.

 

1.8   Attachments

a     Stradegy S32 Evaluation Report (Under Separate Cover) 

b     Schedule of PC11 Amendments (Under Separate Cover) 

c     Current and Proposed Park Island Masterplans (Under Separate Cover) 

d     Current Planning Map (Under Separate Cover) 

e     Proposed Planning Map (Under Separate Cover) 

f     Community Engagement Report (Under Separate Cover) 

g     GLG Sports Provision Perspective Report (Under Separate Cover) 

h     Visual Assessment Report (Under Separate Cover) 

i       Visual Assessment Appendices - Photo Montages (Under Separate Cover) 

j      Contaminated Land Report (Under Separate Cover) 

k     Structure Plan  (Under Separate Cover) 

l      Park Island Lighting Report (Under Separate Cover) 

m     Park Island Lighting Report - Design and Calculations  (Under Separate Cover) 

n     Park Island Lighting Report - Obtrusive Light Compliance (Under Separate Cover)   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

2.    Temporary Liquor Ban - Christmas in the Park

Type of Report:

Legal and Operational

Legal Reference:

Local Government Act 2002

Document ID:

400881

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Hayleigh Brereton, Manager Regulatory Solutions  

 

2.1   Purpose of Report

To consider the request from the New Zealand Police for a temporary liquor ban at Anderson Park and the surrounding roads during 2017 Christmas in the Park event.

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors White / Wright

a.     That pursuant to section 147 of the Local Government Act 2002 and the Napier City Council Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2014. Council approve the following areas as a “Specified Public Place” where consumption, possession and bringing of alcohol into is prohibited from 1200 hours on the 9th December 2017 to 2359 hours on the 9th December 2017.

b.     That the following areas be designated as “Specified Public Place” are all those public, places, reserves, roads and footpaths on both sides of the road within the area described as;

·      Auckland Road       from Lannie Place to York Avenue

·      Freyberg Avenue  from York Avenue to Islington Place

·      Islington Place        full length

·      Kennedy Road       from Auckland Road to Taradale Road and 424                                                   Kennedy Road

·      Taradale Road       from Kennedy Road to adjacent to the boundary of 362                                       & 360 Taradale Road

·      York Avenue          from Auckland Road to Freyberg Avenue

 

c.     That a DECISION OF COUNCIL is required urgently to ensure a decision is made before the event takes place on 9 December 2017. This will require the following resolution to be passed before the decision of Council is taken:

 

That, in terms of Section 82 (3) of the Local Government Act 2002, that the principles set out in that section have been observed in such manner that the Napier City Council considers, in its discretion, is appropriate to make decisions on the recommendation.

 

Carried

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Decision of Council

Mayor Dalton / Councillor Price

That, in terms of Section 82 (3) of the Local Government Act 2002, that the principles set out in that section have been observed in such manner that the Napier City Council considers, in its discretion, is appropriate to make decisions on the recommendation.

Carried

 

 

Council Resolution

Councillors Hague / Wise

a.     That pursuant to section 147 of the Local Government Act 2002 and the Napier City Council Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2014. Council approve the following areas as a “Specified Public Place” where consumption, possession and bringing of alcohol into is prohibited from 1200 hours on the 9th December 2017 to 2359 hours on the 9th December 2017.

b.     That the following areas be designated as “Specified Public Place” are all those public, places, reserves, roads and footpaths on both sides of the road within the area described as;

·      Auckland Road       from Lannie Place to York Avenue

·      Freyberg Avenue  from York Avenue to Islington Place

·      Islington Place        full length

·      Kennedy Road       from Auckland Road to Taradale Road and 424                                 Kennedy Road

·      Taradale Road       from Kennedy Road to adjacent to the boundary                               of 362 & 360 Taradale Road

·      York Avenue          from Auckland Road to Freyberg Avenue

 

Carried

 

2.2   Background Summary

The application is made pursuant to Councils Public Places Liquor Control Bylaw 2014 Clause 4 which states:

 

“From time to time additional areas may be designated as a Specified Public Place for particular time periods, related to specified events or times of the year.  Where additional areas are so designated, a minimum of 14 days public notice shall be given prior to the event or particular time of years, specifying the additional areas, and the period when the specification applies. Public notices shall also be affixed in or adjacent to the additional specified public place(s) at such times that the liquor control applies.” [Extract]

 

The request has been made by Senior Sergeant Ross Smith of the New Zealand Police. Police are requesting that a temporary liquor ban is imposed on the roads adjacent to Anderson Park during the 2017 Christmas in the Park event.

 

The temporary liquor ban would encompass all public places, reserves, roads and footpaths on both sides of the road within the areas described as:

Auckland Road

from Lannie Place to York Avenue

Freyberg Avenue 

from York Avenue to Islington Place

Islington Place

full length

Kennedy Road 

from Auckland Road to Taradale Road and 424 Kennedy Road

Taradale Road

from Kennedy Road to adjacent to the boundary of 362 & 360 Taradale Road

York Avenue

from Auckland Road to Freyberg Avenue

 

        Please refer to the map at Attachment A.

                    

2.3   Issues

The temporary liquor ban is at the request of the Police (see attachment B). If approved appropriate signage is required to be displayed at all major entry points to the ban area prior to the initiation of a temporary liquor ban.

In previous years Christmas in the Park events, Council has imposed a temporary liquor ban.

2.4   Significance and Consultation

N/A

2.5   Implications

Financial

N/A

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

There is risk if the temporary liquor ban is not approved that the police may not be able to effectively reduce any incidents of alcohol related harm.

2.6   Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a.     That the application be approved.

b.     That the application be approved with amendments.

c.     That the application be declined.

2.7   Development of Preferred Option

The preferred option is the temporary liquor ban for the annual Christmas in the Park event be approved in the form described above. This option is at the request of the Police and would be enforced by the Police at the event.

 

 

At the Meeting

There was no discussion at the meeting.

 

2.8   Attachments

a     Temporary Liquor ban - Christmas in the Park map 2017 

b     Temporary Liquor Ban - Request from NZ Police   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda



Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

Reports from Finance Committee held 6 December 2017

 

1.    revaluation of napier city 2017

Type of Report:

Procedural

Legal Reference:

Local Government (Rating) Act 2002

Document ID:

415248

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Ian Condon, Revenue and Treasury Manager

 

1.1   Purpose of Report

Quotable Value NZ (QV), Council’s contractor for rating valuation services, will make a presentation to Council on the triennial revaluation of Napier City recently undertaken.

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Hague / Brosnan

That Council

 

a.     Receive the presentation.

 

Carried

 

 

At the Meeting

Gail Smits and Philippa Pearse of QV spoke to their presentation, making the following points:

·     The rating revaluation is done every three years, and is based on what is happening in the market place at the time.

·     A stringent independent audit is undertaken of the modelling and reviewed rating valuations.

·     Owners are notified by post of the new valuation and have until 19 January 2018 to lodge any objections in writing. This is best done online to ensure that all relevant information is collected.

·     The Napier market is performing well across all sectors but particular for residential sales.

·     The lower end of the market has seen the greatest percentage growth within the residential sector.

·     At least 80% of properties are inspected from the road as part of the valuations process; as the interiors are not viewed, this is typically where objections are raised i.e. a new kitchen may have been added and so on.

·     Seaward properties Whakarire Avenue, Westshore had been quite significantly discounted in previous valuations with the coastal erosion zone related restrictions but people have demonstrated a willingness to buy regardless, which has driven the valuations up this round.

·     Where there are very few properties in a sector (e.g. the rural sector), comparative sales from neighbouring districts and comparative other areas have been factored in as a form of benchmarking.

 

 

1.2   Attachments

Nil

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

2.    Setting General Rates - Overview

Type of Report:

Legal

Legal Reference:

Local Government (Rating) Act 2002

Document ID:

412497

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Ian Condon, Revenue and Treasury Manager

 

2.1   Purpose of Report

To provide background information on the underlying basis and process for applying general rate differentials. The information will enable a better understanding of the purpose of other rating related items on the agenda, and how each relates to the rate setting process.

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Wright / Price

That Council

a.     Receive the report titled Setting General Rates – Overview.

 

Carried

 

2.2   Background Summary

Within the Napier City Council rating system, general rates (inclusive of Uniform Annual General Charges) are set in such a way as to recover the assessed cost of general rate-funded services supplied to each of the main property categories – Residential, Commercial/ Industrial and Rural.

The allocation of costs results in six differentials applying for general rates. The six differential rating categories are:

 

Group 1                 City Residential

Group 2                 Commercial/Industrial

Group 3                           Miscellaneous (includes Lodge Rooms, Halls, Homes for the Elderly, Private Hospitals, Public Utilities, Miscellaneous Crown Properties, Pensioner Flats, Sports Clubs, Non Profit-Making Organisations, Vacant Substandard Sections)

Group 4                 Rural – ex City (mainly Awatoto, Guppy Road and Puketapu                                             Road)

Group 5                           Rural – other (Mainly Meeanee, Jervoistown, Brookfields Rd, Poraiti)

Group 6                 Bay View Differential Rating Area (Township and Coastal)

 

Groups 5 and 6 relate to properties which came into Napier City from the HB County Council in 1989 following Local Government Reform.

 

In establishing the differentials for general rates the following process is followed:

 

a.       The benefits arising from general rate-funded services are assessed for each service between residential and non-residential properties. The results are consolidated to determine the overall allocation of general rates between residential and non- residential properties. The current allocation is 69% residential and 31% non –residential. The assessment is reviewed every 3 years to coincide with the revaluation of Napier City. For this exercise, residential properties include the Bay View Differential Rating area.

 

b.       The cost of services supplied to Bay View is assessed. For most services Bay View’s share is based on the ratio of rateable properties in Bay View to total rateable residential properties, however for roading services, actual costs are assessed, as the level of service provided is deemed to differ from city residential properties.

 

c.     The balance of residential costs, after deducting the Bay View assessed costs, is deemed to be the assessed cost of services provided to city residential properties.

 

d.     The cost of services supplied to rural properties is assessed. While for most of the services, including roading services, the rural share is based on the ratio of rateable rural properties to total rateable properties, actual costs are assessed for those services where the level of service provided is deemed to differ from the cost that would otherwise have resulted from the proportion of properties approach. Those services affected are cemeteries and building consents.

 

e.     Council policy is to rate properties in the Miscellaneous Differential rating category at city residential rates. The assessed cost of services supplied to these properties is determined by applying the total rateable value of these properties to the residential rate.

 

f.     The balance of costs to be recovered from non-residential properties, after allowing for the recovery of assessed costs from rural and miscellaneous properties, is deemed to be the assessed cost of services supplied to commercial/industrial properties.

 

g.     The general rates to be recovered for each differential category is the balance of general rate funded costs remaining after deducting the amount to be collected from the Uniform Annual General Charge for each category.

 

h.     The percentage differentials are determined by calculating the general rate per dollar of land value applying to each differential category, then relating that rate per dollar to the city residential rate per dollar on a percentage basis, with the city residential percentage being 100%. Differentials to apply for 2018/19 will be based on the 2017 revised land values.

 

Attachment A is a flow diagram of the process for calculating general rates and establishing general rate differentials.

2.3   Issues

Following the 2017 revaluation of Napier City, differentials for general rates need to be reviewed and revised. The following agenda reports relate to the revaluation and the process for setting general rate differentials.

 

a.     Rating – 2017 Revaluation of Napier City

b.     Allocation of general rate-funded costs

c.     Costs of Services Supplied to Bay View 

d.     Cost of Services Supplied to Rural Properties

2.4   Implications

Financial

There are no financial implications to Council arising from this item.

Social & Policy

N/A

2.5   Options

This item is provided for information only and does not require the consideration of options.

 

At the Meeting

The Revenue and Treasury Manager provided an overview of the paper, noting:

·     This report sets out the general rates differentials and forms a background to the ensuing rates reports. Once the rates percentages are set, these are then modelled against the new valuations from QV.

·     Rates are set annually and cannot be changed once adopted. The following year’s process for setting rates will allow for any new services or upgrades that may have been undertaken during the year.

·     The UAGC calculation is set at about 20% of the overall rate take – the maximum percentage under statute is 30%.  The level can be reset but only by Council resolution. 

 

2.4   Attachments

a     Rating System Diagram 2017-18   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

3.    Rating - 2017 Revaluation of Napier City

Type of Report:

Procedural

Legal Reference:

Local Government (Rating) Act 2002

Document ID:

412911

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Ian Condon, Revenue and Treasury Manager

 

3.1   Purpose of Report

To summarise the changes in rateable value resulting from the triennial revaluation of Napier City in 2017, and to outline the rating effect of the revaluation on broad property categories, and on a range of selected residential, commercial and industrial properties.

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Wright / White

That Council

 

a.     Receive the report titled Rating – 2017 Revaluation of Napier City.

 

Carried

 

3.2   Background Summary

Napier City was revalued by Quotable Value Ltd as at 1 September 2017. The revised values apply to Napier City Council’s rating system with effect from 1 July 2018 for the 2018/19 rating year.

 

In preparing the information contained within this report, rates modelling has been based on the current 2017/18 budget, rating policy and rating levels.

 

To ensure this report identifies only the rating effect of the revaluation, the following have been excluded:

 

a)        Proposed changes to the current allocation of general rate funded costs between residential and non-residential properties, and to the cost of services supplied to Bay View and Rural Properties. These are the subject of separate reports on this agenda.

 

b)        Proposed budget or rating changes that may apply for 2018/19.

 

The following documents are attached:

 

Attachment 1: Land Values – Rateable for General Rate

·    summarises the change in rateable land value by Council’s differential rating categories

 

 

 

Attachment 2: Rating Impact on Properties

·    outlines the rating effect of the revaluation on residential properties by suburb using average values, plus the impact on a range of selected residential, commercial and industrial properties.

 

Attachment 3:  Map of Residential Land Value Percentage Changes

·    maps residential land value movements by percentage.

 

 

Grouped by percentage bands, the colour tone indicates the extent of variance of land value change from the average, across residential areas of the city.

 

Pale yellow indicates a spread of 5% above and below the city average (35% - 45% LV increase). The rating impact on these properties is generally minimal, below 2%.

 

Green shading indicates land value increases below the average range (<35%), while brownish / red shading indicates land value increases above the average range (>45%).

3.3   Issues

a)   The percentage increases shown in Attachment 1 reflect the average movement within each differential rating group. Significant variations from the average will occur between some individual properties and suburbs within the city.

 

b)  The percentage change in rates shown in Attachment 2 is directly influenced by the percentage change in land value.

 

For residential properties (Diff Group 1) the average land value has increased by about 39%. Generally, properties with an increase in land value below 39% will see rate reductions, while properties with land value increases above 39%, will see rate increases.

 

Areas within Ahuriri and Taradale have seen the greatest increase in land values (average increase for Ahuriri is 46.1%) while land values for Napier Hill are showing the lowest increase (average 12.3%).

 

For commercial / industrial properties (Diff Group 2) the overall average LV has increased by 23%. Greater increases are showing for industrial land (36.6%) while the average for commercial land has increased by 11.5%. For much of the CBD and Taradale business areas, land values have not changed.

 

Generally, increases in commercial / industrial land below 23% will result in rate reductions, while land value increases greater than 23% will result in rate increases.

 

Pockets of industrial land around Onekawa, Pandora and Ahuriri are showing the greatest level of increase, some in excess of 45%. These properties will see larger rate increases.

3.4   Significance and Consultation

N/A

3.5   Implications

Financial

There are no financial implications to Council arising from this item.

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

N/A

3.6   Options

        This item is provided for information only and does not require the consideration of options.

 

 

At the Meeting

The Revenue and Treasury Manager provided an overview of the paper, noting:

·     The report provides a summary of rating valuations received last week.

·     The rating effect shown only incorporates the rating valuations at this stage and other factors will be added into the final rates later during the LTP process.

 

3.7   Attachments

a     Land Values - Rateable for General Rate 

b     Rating Impact on Properties 

c     Residential Land Value Percentage Change   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda



Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

4.    Allocation of General Rate-Funded Costs

Type of Report:

Procedural

Legal Reference:

Local Government (Rating) Act 2002

Document ID:

412969

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Ian Condon, Revenue and Treasury Manager

 

4.1   Purpose of Report

To review the allocation of general rate-funded costs between residential and non residential properties as part of the process of establishing the differential to apply to general rates following the 2017 revaluation of Napier City.

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors White / Taylor

 

That Council

 

a.     Approve the allocation of general rate funded costs on the basis of 70% residential / 30% non-residential, to apply from 1 July 2018.

 

 

Carried

 

4.2   Background Summary

General rates recover the rating requirement not collected from targeted rates, and include a general rate, set on land values and a fixed uniform annual general charge (UAGC).

 

Under the current rating system, the allocation of general rate-funded costs is reviewed three-yearly to coincide with the revaluation of Napier City and preparation of the LTP. The last revaluation and review of assessed benefits was undertaken in 2014.

A 69% residential, 31% non-residential allocation was adopted, and phased-in on a transitional basis over 2 years, 2015/16 and 2016/17.

4.3   Issues

As Napier has just been revalued, the allocation has again been reviewed by re-examining the benefits available to these property categories. The results of the review, with an outline of assessed benefits by activity are shown at Attachment A. The overall result provides for a revised allocation for general rates of 70% to residential properties and 30% to non-residential properties.

 

There is only one change proposed in the allocation split. This relates to Building Consents which have been revised from an 80/20 split to 88/12, reflecting the average volume of building consents issued for the last three years. While this change is not significant, there has been a change in the overall allocation split because of budget changes and budget realignments since 2014. The largest general rate funded increases have tended to impact more on activities with high residential allocations such as Democracy & Governance, Grants and MTG, while several activities with high non-residential splits have seen reductions in their rate funded budgets such as the Aquarium, i-site, Kennedy Park and the Conference Centre – see Attachment B for the residential funding split.

The overall result is a change in the allocation from 69/31 to 70/30. This will result in a minor rating shift from non-residential to the residential sector but will more accurately reflect the assessed benefits based on current operations.

 

Based on the 2017/18 rating levels, the reallocations from 69/31 to 70/30 would add about $18pa (0.9%) to average residential rates, and reduce Commercial/Industrial rates by between 2% to 3.5%.

 

Currently residential properties represent 88% of total rateable properties and 75% of rateable land and rateable capital value within the city.

 

As the benefit assessment is showing a 70% allocation to residential/ 30% non-residential, this indicates that property values alone will not provide an accurate basis for the recovery of assessed costs / benefits of general rate funded services. For this reason, a differential approach is applied for setting general rates to enable the assessed costs to be fully recovered from each property category.

 

Rating Considerations

 

Residential

The residential rating comparison from Council’s 2016/17 Annual Report confirms that Napier has a lower level of average residential rates in comparison to others within the group.

 

A shift in the allocation split as proposed would result in Napier’s average residential rate for 2017/18 increasing from $1985 to $2003, an increase of $18 or 0.9%. At this level Napier would remain amongst the lowest rated provincial Councils.

 

Commercial

Commercial rating is more difficult to compare due to a variety of factors, such as location, property size and commercial values. However, from the review undertaken in 2014 where Napier rated slightly above the commercial average for similar Councils, a change in the allocation split as proposed would benefit the commercial sector and continue the shift applied over recent years in lowering the level of commercial rating, without impacting significantly on the residential sector.

 

The change in allocations is not significant and is consistent with Council’s Strategic priorities of maintaining rates affordability for citizens, while supporting the business sector and contributing to the economic wellbeing of the city.

4.4   Significance and Consultation

N/A

4.5   Implications

Financial

There are no financial implications to Council arising from this review. 

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

N/A

4.6   Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

1.     To not apply differentials for general rates.

2.     To retain the cost allocation at 69% residential / 31% non residential.

3.     To change the allocation to 70% residential / 30% non residential, as indicated by the current review, and apply it fully from 2018/19.

4.7   Development of Preferred Option

Council rating policy is to apply rates to categories of properties as closely as possible to the benefits the properties received from Council supplied services. This will require the continuation of a differential system for general rates. Option 1 is not therefore favoured.

Retention of the current benefit allocation would result in no transfer of rating burden between the residential and non residential property categories. However, it would not reflect the policy to apply rates as closely as possible to the benefits the properties receive from Council supplied services. As this option does not best reflect the Council’s current rating policy, it is not favoured.

The triennial review of the allocation following revaluation of the City is part of Council’s rating policy. Although there will be some shift in the rating burden, it would seem appropriate to adjust the allocation to reflect the outcome of the review, as this will reflect Council policy to apply rates to categories of properties as closely as possible to the benefits the properties receive from Council supplied services.

Option 3 is therefore the preferred option.

 

 

At the Meeting

The Revenue and Treasury Manager provided an overview of the paper, noting:

·     There has been gradual movement upwards in the residential/commercial split, from 67%/33% to 70%/30% over the course of 5 years. A principled approach is taken to ensure that the final split is a defendable result across the activities.

 

4.8   Attachments

a     Assessed Benefits Allocation 

b     Funding Residential Split   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda



Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

Basis of Allocation

KEY: R = Residential, in Napier City and Bay View.

NR = Non Residential, including rural properties and properties in Meeanee and Jervoistown.

 

Democracy & Governance

Based on the total rateable capital value of each of the property categories.

Sportsgrounds

The non-residential portion was assessed on the commercial benefits of sportsgrounds, in particular Park Island.

The balance was allocated as residential.

McLean Park

The non-residential portion was assessed on the commercial benefits of McLean Park (including Rodney Green Centennial Events Centre).

The balance was allocated as residential.

Napier Aquatic Centre

The non-residential portion is based on use by non-residential users, including users from outside Napier.

Marine Parade Pools

The non-residential portion is based on use by non-residential users, including users from outside Napier and the assessed commercial benefits of the Marine Parade Pools.

Par2 MiniGolf

The non-residential portion is based on use by non-residential users, including users from outside Napier and the assessed commercial benefits of Par2 MiniGolf.

Bay Skate

The non-residential portion is based on use by non-residential users, including users from outside Napier and the assessed commercial benefits of Bay Skate.

Reserves

The non-residential portion was assessed on:

·      a visitor promotion component on expenditure on foreshore reserves and major greenbelt reserves; and

·      a visitor promotion component, particularly on expenditure for the City’s high profile public gardens.

The balance was allocated as residential.

Inner Harbour

12.5% of cost reflects benefits to direct commercial users such as fishing companies and other fishing industry servicing companies. Remaining costs reflect general benefits to the community and are allocated on the number of rateable properties (88% R, 12% NR).

Libraries

Non-residential portion assessed on a share of general benefit to the community (5%) and to a share of membership (5%). The balance is allocated as residential.

Napier Conference Centre

The majority of use is by corporate/commercial businesses. A smaller percentage of use relates to ratepayer residential purposes such as weddings.

Napier Municipal Theatre

The majority of usage benefits the local and regional community through residents attending theatrical events, etc. The remainder relates to commercial hire and the benefits of this to non-residential beneficiaries.

MTG Hawke's Bay

Residential based on the benefits to residential ratepayers through cultural enrichment from an important community/public facility. The balance is allocated as non-residential to reflect the tourism economic impact.

Community Strategies       

Based on an assessed allocation of the services provided to the categories of beneficiaries.

Grants

Based on an assessed allocation of community related benefit.

Housing

Services provided by the Housing activity are primarily of benefit to residential. The maintenance and operation of the complexes provides a small commercial benefit.

Halls

Based on the current usage

Cemeteries        

Based on the number of residential and rural properties.

Public Toilets

Based on the number of rateable properties.

Emergency Management

Based primarily on the value of improvement to properties, but adjusted to recognise the priority of restoring the business and commercial activities of the City following an emergency.

City and Business Promotion

Based on an assessed allocation of the services provided.

City and Promotion Grants

Based on an assessment of the beneficiaries of the grants.

Events and Marketing

Based on an assessed allocation of the services provided.

National Aquarium of NZ

The majority of people visiting are from outside of Napier, with benefits to the commercial tourism support sector. The Napier residential community benefits from visits and various functions.

Napier i-Site Visitor Centre

Based on usage. Local residents source local and national information especially for visiting friends and relatives. Commercial activity and accommodation operators use the Centre to advertise their products and receive bookings.

Kennedy Park Resort

Residential benefits include accommodation for friends and family, quality of life/tourism benefits and employment opportunities. Non-residential benefits include commercial opportunities for local goods and service providers and commercial sector benefits from tourism activity generally.

Property Holdings

Based on the total rateable land value of each of the property categories.

City Development      

Based on the proportion of the District Plan related to the various categories of properties.

Regulatory Consents

Based on the average number of subdivision, non-notified and notified consents issued over the last three years for the various categories of properties.

Building Consents

Based on the average volume of building consents for the last three years.

Environmental Health

Based on actual time and effort and materials on each type of activity, and the following assessment of benefit by function:

·      General Licences  30% R  70% NR

·      Liquor Licensing  10% R  90% NR

·      General Activities  100% R

·      Monitoring  90% R  10% NR

Animal Control

Based on the number of residential and rural properties.

Transportation 

Allocation for traffic related costs (76% of roading expenditure) based on network analysis of the number and reasons for trips.

Allocation for amenity related costs (24% of roading expenditure) based on the number of rateable properties.

Waste Minimisation

Based on the number of rateable properties, with a multiplier of two for commercial/ industrial properties to allow for litter generation.

Stormwater

Based on a combination of:

·         costs for maintenance and reticulation allocated between urban and rural areas on an actual expenditure basis - urban areas reallocated to residential and non-residential for disposal costs based on run off determined from land area and run off coefficient obtained from the building code; and

·         infrastructural asset renewal costs fully allocated to urban areas, with allocation between residential and non-residential based on run off (see above).

Apportionment of other costs based on number of rateable properties.

         

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

5.    Cost of Council Services Supplied to Bayview

Type of Report:

Procedural

Legal Reference:

Local Government (Rating) Act 2002

Document ID:

414420

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Ian Condon, Revenue and Treasury Manager

 

5.1   Purpose of Report

To review the assessed cost of general rates funded services provided to Bay View as part of the process of establishing the differential to apply to general rates following the 2017 revaluation of Napier City.

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Brosnan / Tapine

That Council

 

a.     Approve that the differential applying to the Bay View Rating Area be adjusted for 2018/19 to enable the assessed cost of supplying general rate funded services to Bay View properties be fully recovered collectively from these properties.

 

Carried

 

5.2   Background Summary

The current rating system provides for a differential on general rates between city residential properties and Bay View properties. The differential recognises that the level of some general rate-funded services to Bay View differs from city residential properties. Currently, transportation/ roading is the only service affected where an adjustment is made to recognise the assessed direct cost to Bay View.

 

In all other respects Bay View properties are considered to benefit from general rate-funded services to the same extent as city residential properties.

5.3   Issues

As Napier has just been revalued, the assessed cost of services to Bay View funded from general rates has been reviewed. Attachment A shows a summary of the assessed costs. With the exception of transportation costs, which are based on a calculation model, the costs have been assessed on the basis of the proportion of rateable properties in Bay View to the total number of residential properties, applied to the general rate-funded costs allocated to residential properties as identified in the earlier report on this agenda. The allocation of other items such as investment income, the contingency provision, remissions etc., have been apportioned based on Bay View’s share of total rateable properties. It should be noted that the assessed costs relate only to services funded from general rates and do not include those costs funded from targeted rates.

 

 

The review indicates an assessed cost of services, based on budgeted costs for 2017/18 of $658,661 including GST. General rates actually charged to the Bay View Rating Area for 2017/18 total $639,121. The difference indicates an under-recovery of $19,540, and requires an increase of 3.1% of general rates to enable costs to be fully recovered.

 

This under-recovery does not represent a shortfall of rates to Council, but indicates a reallocation of general rates is required between the City residential area and the Bay View rating area.

 

This situation arises as the differentials applied for setting the general rate are adjusted on a three yearly basis at the time of revaluation. Between reviews, the level of general rates collected is influenced by various factors that can affect differentials.

 

Examples include an increase in the overall amount collected under UAGCs as a result of growth in the number of City Residential properties, changes to the mix of rateable properties between City Residential and Bay View, and changes arising from the split of general rate funded costs between residential and non-residential properties, as reported separately.

 

The adjustment required is not a significant movement and confirms that the three yearly review period aligned with the general revaluation is an appropriate timeframe for this exercise.

 

Attachment B shows a comparison of rates between City Residential properties and Bay View, based on the average land value for each group. This shows the current level of rates for 2017/18 together with the effect of the proposed increase which would apply for 2018/19.

5.4   Significance and Consultation

N/A

5.5   Implications

Financial

There are no financial implications to Council arising from this item.

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

N/A

5.6   Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a.     Provided Council wishes to continue with a differential system for general rates to recognise the assessed costs and differing level of benefit between City residential properties and properties in the Bay View Differential Rating Area, an assessment along the lines covered in this report is necessary.

 

b.     The other option is not to apply differentials for general rates. This would result in the assess benefits from general rate funded services not being correctly recovered from properties in the Bay View Differential Rating Area.

5.7   Development of Preferred Option

Council rating policy is to apply rates to categories of properties as closely as possible to the benefits the properties received from Council supplied services. Accordingly continuation of a differential system for general rates is the preferred option.

 

 

At the Meeting

There was no discussion on this item.

 

5.8   Attachments

a     Bay View Share of General Rate Funded Costs 

b     Bay View / City Residential Rates   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

6.    Cost of Council Services Supplied to Rural Properties

Type of Report:

Procedural

Legal Reference:

Local Government (Rating) Act 2002

Document ID:

414427

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Ian Condon, Revenue and Treasury Manager

 

6.1   Purpose of Report

To review the assessed cost of general rates funded services provided to rural properties as part of the process of establishing the differential to apply to general rates following the 2017 revaluation of Napier City.

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Wright / White

That Council

 

a.     Approve that the differentials applying to rural properties be adjusted for 2018/19 to enable the assessed costs of supplying general rate funded services to rural property to be recovered collectively from these properties. 

 

Carried

 

6.2   Background Summary

For the 2017/18 rating year, Napier has 1,276 rating units within the rural rating category. This represents 5.07% of total rateable properties within the city.

 

The current rating system provides for a differential on general rates for rural properties to enable rates recovered from these properties to reflect the assessed cost of general rate funded services provided to rural properties. The differential applied ensures that the assessed cost of these services is collected as general rates irrespective of the overall land value movement for the rural sector, and recognises that rural properties are considered to benefit from general rate funded services to the same extent as other properties.

 

The assessed costs were last reviewed during 2014/15 and Council agreed that the general rates differentials applying to rural properties be adjusted for 2015/16 to enable the assessed cost of supplying services to rural properties be recovered collectively from these properties.

6.3   Issues

As Napier has just been revalued, the assessed cost of services to rural properties funded from general rates has been reviewed. Attachment A shows a summary of the assessed costs. Generally the costs have been allocated to the rural sector in the proportion to which total rural rateable properties relate to total rateable properties. It should be noted that the assessed costs relate only to services funded from general rates and do not include those costs funded from targeted rates.

The review indicates an assessed cost of services, based on budgeted costs for 2017/18 of $2,240,782 (including GST). General rates actually charged to rural properties for 2017/18 totaled $2,228,805. The difference indicates an under-recovery of approximately $11,977 and would require an increase of 0.5% to enable costs to be fully recovered. This under-recovery does not represent a shortfall of rates to Council, but indicates a minor reallocation of general rates is required between rural and non-rural rating areas.

 

Adjustments are required as the differentials applied for setting the general rate are reviewed on a three yearly basis at the time of revaluation. Between reviews the level of general rates collected is influenced by various factors that can affect differentials. Examples include changes to the general rate / UAGC funding mix as a result of growth in the number of rating units, and changes to the mix of rateable properties between rural and non-rural properties as a result of subdivision and growth within the city.

 

The adjustment required is minor and confirms that the three yearly review period aligned with the LTP preparation and general revaluation is an appropriate timeframe for this exercise.

6.4   Significance and Consultation

N/A

6.5   Implications

Financial

There are no financial implications to Council arising from this item.

Social & Policy

N/A

6.6   Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a.     Provided Council wishes to continue with a differential system for general rates to recognise the assessed cost of services between rural properties and non-rural properties, an assessment along the lines covered in this report is necessary.

 

b.     The other option is not to apply differentials for general rates. This would result in the assessed costs of general rate funded services not being correctly recovered from rural properties.

6.7   Development of Preferred Option

Council rating policy is to apply rates to categories of properties as closely as possible to the benefits the properties received from Council supplied services. Accordingly, continuation of a differential system for general rates is the preferred option. Applying the proportion of rateable properties as the basis for allocation will require an adjustment to the differentials for 2018/19 to enable full recovery of the assessed cost of general rate funded services supplied to rural properties, and an increase of 0.5% in the total general rural rates for 2018/19.

 

 

At the Meeting

There was no discussion on this item.

 

6.8   Attachments

a     Assessed Rural Costs   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

7.    Representation Review: Engagement Update

Type of Report:

Information

Legal Reference:

Local Government Act 2002

Document ID:

406865

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Jane McLoughlin, Team Leader Governance

 

7.1   Purpose of Report

To provide an update on the Representation Review project, data-gathering and pre-consultation phase. 

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Boag / Hague

That Council:

 

a.     Receive the report titled ‘Napier City Council Representation Review Survey’ prepared by SIL Research. 

 

b.     Note the summary report from Officers on the engagement undertaken during the pre-consultation phase of the Representation Review project. 

 

c.     Note that Officers will next report to Council early next year once modelling options have been prepared for consideration.

 

Carried

 

7.2   Background Summary

Introduction

At the 30 August Strategy and Infrastructure Committee, Council was provided with an initial update on the representation review project.  Napier City Council is undertaking its review in line with the Local Government Commission, Guidelines for local authorities undertaking representation reviews, 6th Edition, June 2017.  As previously advised to Council, Napier City Council will follow the key steps outlined below and broad timeframes. 

        The broad steps are:

        Step 1: Data-gathering and pre-consultation (Aug-Nov 2017)

        Step 2: Analysis of fair and effective representation (Nov 2017 – Feb 2018)

Step 3: Statutory Process: Council decision, submissions, appeals process (commencing in March 2018).

 

Council have made decisions on the electoral system and Māori Wards, which are not formally part of the Representation Review, but necessary precursors to it.

Progress Update

An update on the progress made with the Representation Review project follows. 

Step 1. Data-gathering and pre-consultation (August – November 2017)

As outlined in the Local Government Commission guidelines (Guidelines 2017), pre-consultation is considered best practice; it is not mandatory and is not a substitute for consultation within the formal statutory steps.  The results of the pre-consultation is one way to inform the development of the representation model to be presented as a formal proposal, and can assist in the identification of issues relevant to the review process:

“The review must seek to achieve fair and effective representation for all individuals and communities of interest of the district/region, and not be limited to reflecting community views on particular aspects of arrangements”. (Local Government Commission Guidelines, 2017)

Between September and November, Officers undertook pre-consultation to seek views from the public on options of representation and current communities of interest.  The summary report from Officers (Attachment A) provides detailed information on the types of engagement undertaken.

The public was asked to fill out a survey.  As a result, 618 responses from individuals were received, with 598 useable responses.  This exceeded the target of 400, which was determined as a statistically sound sample target for Napier’s population of 61,000 people.  The Representation Review Survey report is provided in Attachment B.

Key findings from the survey included:

1.     Three-out-of-four (74.6%) respondents were able to name the ward they live in.

2.     Most respondents identify their main community of interest as ‘Napier’.

3.     41.3% of respondents preferred the status quo electoral system, ‘a mix of wards and at large’, which is consistent with previous years (2009-2011).

4.     Over half of respondents indicated that the size of Council should stay the same (52.4%).

5.     30.3% of respondents wanted community boards in Napier, 42.6% stated ‘No’ to this question.

 

Step 2: Analysis of fair and effective representation (Nov 2017 – Feb 2018)

Now that pre-consultation is complete, the next step is to analyse all relevant information to identify any communities of interest and consider fair and effective representation options.  As per sections 9.8-9.19 of the Guidelines 2017, consideration will be given to a variety of factors, including, but not limited to:

-     Accessibility, size, and configuration of the district

-     The existence of community boards

-     Single versus multi-member wards 

-     The wider statutory role of local authorities encompassing overall community wellbeing, sustainability and the interests of future generations

-     Increasing diversity of the population and the physical location of particular communities of interest

-     Improved communications mechanisms

 

 

Council will be provided with a report in early 2018, which outlines the analysis of fair and effective representation and provides options for representation models.

Any changes to the current representation arrangements need to be based on analysis of relevant information, including up-to-date statistics from the Local Government Commission, and the results of the pre-consultation. 

7.3   Issues

N/A

7.4   Significance and Consultation

Representation arrangements are relevant for the entire population of Napier, and may extend to those people that use service and facilities in Napier but reside outside of Napier’s boundaries.

Once the next steps of analysis and options for models of representation are developed, the formal statutory process will commence, which includes public notification, submissions, and an appeals process.

7.5   Implications

Financial

There are no financial implications currently.  

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

The Local Government Commission Guidelines are being followed which will ensure that Council’s legislative obligations are being met.  

 

 

At the Meeting

Officers were congratulated on the comprehensive pre-consultation undertaken. It was noted that it was particularly pleasing that a wide variety of people were engaged by a variety of new methods, and the final number of respondents was well above that required for a statistical relevant result.

It was noted that consultation processes should continue to utilise a wide range of outreach methods with a particular focus on youth.

 

7.6   Attachments

a     Engagement Report 

b     Pre-consultation report   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

Pre-Consultation Engagement: Representation Review

November 2017

Prepared by: Natasha Carswell – Manager, Community Strategies

Engagement Summary

The purpose of the Representation Review pre-consultation engagement was gain feedback from the community on how they wish to be represented in the future so Council can consider this when develop a representation proposal for formal consultation early in 2018. 

Engagement activity was undertaken from 14 September to 1 November and focused on channeling people to fill in a survey either online or by hardcopy.

Information was provided to the community about the current system and other representation options in order for them to provide informed feedback on future representation arrangements.  A variety of collateral was used including fact sheets, reports (on website), bookmarks and advertising. 

The primary engagement activities were pop-up events in shopping centres (Soap Box series), a focus group, meetings with Māori and Disability groups and social media.  The Library and Customer Service staff were also briefed, so they could encourage people to fill in surveys.

The engagement activities were effective in channeling people to fill in the survey with 598 responses provided (target 400).  The survey results are reported separately.

Engagement Activities

The table below lists the engagement activities undertaken for this project.

Date

(2017)

Engagement Activity

Council/ Project team members involved

21 September

Library / Customer Services Staff Briefing

 

9-10am, Library Seminar Room

Staff were briefed on the Representation Review and their role in engagement.  Staff were provided with a fact sheet. 

 

The team were enthusiastic about having a role in engagement.  Hard copy surveys were made available in both libraries and at customer services, with ipads also placed in the libraries for online survey responses.  Information Bookmarks were also provided.

Mainly hard copy surveys were completed through this activity.  Staff noted that customers were more focused on the pending Library move at this time.

 

See Fact  Sheet Appendix 1

Engagement Team

Library staff

Customer Services team

13 October to 24 October

Pop-up Events (Soap Box Series)

 

 

Several Councillors took part in presenting the Soap Box Series in four locations across Napier:

·      13 October – Onekawa Shopping Centre (Cr Brosnan, Cr White)

·      13 October – CBD (Cr Wise, Cr Price)

·      17 October – Taradale Shopping Centre (Cr Wise, Cr Taylor)

·      24 October – EIT Maraenui (Cr Boag, Cr Tapine)

 

At these events, Councillors presented on the different representation systems and canvassed what people thought an appropriate number of Councillors should be.  Staff encouraged people to fill in surveys.

 

At these events, people engaged in conversations about the current system and gave their feedback via the survey.  The ipads were an effective tool at the shopping centres.

 

See Soap Box Series notes guide Appendix 2

 

Councillors and Engagement Team

26 October

Focus Group

 

 

3.30-5:00pm, MTG Education Suite

 

Invitations were made to the following groups to provide participants for the focus group:

·      Positive Ageing Reference Group (2)

·      Napier Youth Council (2)

·      Te Kupenga Hauora

·      Napier Ability Plus (3)

 

In total, 7 participants attended representing Māori, Pacific People, Youth, Seniors, Disability and were across 3 Wards.

Most participants identified their community as where they lived.  The pros and cons of each system were discussed and shared.  Generally, the group did not support Community Boards but did see the need for minority groups to have a voice.  The point was made that if Councillors understand the communities they serve, the need for special interest groups, or specific areas to be represented was diminished.

The group considered the Council size to be adequate at the moment with some suggesting one or two less, and others suggesting one or two more.

 

All participants completed the survey.

 

See Focus Group Guide and Notes in Appendices 3 and 4.

 

Engagement Team members

 

Meetings with Māori organisations / groups

 

Engagement period

The meetings with Māori organisations covered a number of subjects and while the Representation Review was identified more interest was shown towards the option to establish Māori Wards in these meetings.

 

The Māori Consultative Committee received the initial update to Council on the review.

 

Further consultation with Māori will be undertaken when the representation proposal is developed.

 

Māori Strategic Advisor,

Team Leader Governance

 

Safer Napier Event

 

28 October

Two team members attended the Celebrate Safer Napier event and approached attendees to fill in surveys either on the ipads or on hardcopy.  Over 70 surveys were completed on the day.

Engagement Team

 


 

Appendices

                                                                                                                                                                                      Page

Appendix 1: Staff Fact Sheet                                                                                                    5

Appendix 2: Soap Box Series notes                                                                                          7

Appendix 3: Focus Group Guide                                                                                             11

Appendix 4: Focus Group notes                                                                                              13

 

 


 

Appendix 1: Staff Fact Sheet

 

Representation Review Factsheet for NCC Staff

21 September 2017

 

 

The details

Every six years we need to review the Council’s make-up.

 

Currently Napier’s residents are represented by 12 Councillors in a mixed system – this is made up of six at large councillors elected by the entire city, and six ward councillors elected by residents in the four wards (two in the Taradale ward, two in Napier South, one in Onekawa-Tamatea, and one in Ahuriri).

 

Should we have ward councillors, at large councillors or a mix of both – and how many councillors should we have?

 

Should we have community boards or not, and where?

 

What we need you to do

We want to know if people feel well represented on Council, and if it could be any different.

 

To do this, we’re encouraging people to complete a survey. That’s where you come in – please let library visitors know about the survey, answer any queries they may have and encourage them to complete the survey.

 

Refer people to our website www.napier.govt.nz search keyword #repreview. Alternatively, the survey is also available as a hard copy for people to fill out while they are in the library, or they can do it on a tablet.

 

The survey

We’re running the survey over the next few weeks. The survey opens on Monday 25 September and closes on 31 October 2017.

 

People who complete the survey have the option of going into a random draw for a $50 Prezzie card. (Staff are encouraged to complete the survey but are not eligible to enter the prize draw.)

 

Other events

Councillors and staff will be out and about at a series of pop-up “soap box” events, where they will talk about the current arrangement and other possible options.

 

People will have the opportunity to do the survey at these pop-ups:

·     CBD Flowerpot, cnr Market and Emerson Streets, 12.30-1.00pm Friday 13 October

·     Onekawa shopping centre, by Fish n Chip shop, 3.00-3.30pm Friday 13 October

·     Taradale shopping centre, near Bay Espresso café, 2.30-3.00pm Tuesday 17 October

·     Maraenui EIT, Tu Tangata Meeting, 5.30-6.00pm Tuesday 17 October.

 

What does the Council look like currently?

See our website www.napier.govt.nz search keyword #councillors.

https://www.napier.govt.nz/our-council/mayor-and-councillors/councillors/

 

How do people find out what ward they live in?

Refer people to our website www.napier.govt.nz search keyword #councillors, where they can click on a special link to find out their ward and suburb.

https://napier-city.maps.arcgis.com/apps/SimpleViewer/index.html?appid=f8ff032a2cba47f78849ae4b7c20c4dd

 

Who decides what changes will be made?

The results of the survey will be presented to Council and will help info the development of an option to go through a formal consultation process early next year.

 

When will any changes happen?

Following consultation, Council will decide what, if any changes will be made to Napier’s system of representation. The Local Government Commission will then confirm the decision, which will take effect from the election in 2019.

 

How can people have a say?

For more information and to complete the survey online, go to www.napier.govt.nz search keyword #repreview. Or do the survey while visiting the library.

https://www.research.net/r/sil-NCCrep2017w

 

Any queries?

Contact Jane McLoughlin, Team Leader Governance, jane.mcloughlin@napier.govt.nz, extn 8755.


 

Appendix 2:

 

Representation Review – Soap Box Series

 

 

 

Soap Box Series – Schedule

 

Date/Time

Where

Ward presenter

At Large Presenter

Friday 13 October

10:30am to 11am

 

 

 

12:30 – 1pm

 

Onekawa Shopping Centre

(fish n chip shop)

 

 

CBD

(Flower pot)

 

Annette

 

 

 

Kirsten

 

Faye

 

 

 

Keith

 

17 October 2017

2:30 – 3pm

 

Taradale Shopping Centre

(bay expresso)

 

Kirsten

 

Graeme

24 October 2017

5:30 0 6pm

 

Tu Tangata Maraenui Meeting

 

Maxine

 

Api

 

 

Talking Points

 

Key outcomes for the event – to explain:

·    what representation arrangements are and what the review is about

·    what the current Council make-up is

·    the difference between an At-large and Ward councillor

·    what Councillors actually do

·    get people to fill in the survey

 

We will try to gather a small group of people together – then we will get you started.

Your talk should be about 3-5 mins each.  Remember this is about sharing information and getting community opinion.

 

 

 

 

 

At Large Councillor

 

·    Introduce self and Councillor colleague

·    We are here today to get your opinion on how the Council is made up – if you have any other questions we are happy to talk with you at the end.

So - do we have enough Councillors? Too many?  Should everyone elect all the Councillors or should we have Councillors who are elected according to where you live – or a mixture?  Do you want community boards?  We look at this every 6 years.

·    In Napier’s history we have had a whole raft of different systems.  At election time at we have over 20 candidates vying for one of 12 councillor spots.  The Mayor is extra.  Currently we have a mixed system – 6 ward councillors and 6 at-large councillors.  I am going to talk more about what an at large councillor is and xxxx will cover what a ward councillor is.

·    At-large councillors are elected by everyone in the city – you could think of them as city-wide councilors.  Pretty straight forward.

·    What do councillors actually do? Well we have 2 hats – one is to ‘govern’ the city – make decisions for the overall benefit of Napier – it is a mix of big picture, long term planning and also guiding what happens across the city on an ongoing basis.  The second hat is that we represent our community - making sure we are in touch with what the community view might be on any particular issue or our general direction.

·    I have some questions for you –

Who thinks we should have less councilors? More? The same? (ask someone why they think that)

Who knows the name of one of the at large councillors?

Who thinks we should only have at large councillors?

 

 

Handover to Ward Presenter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ward Councillor

 

·    Introduce self (again)

·    I am going to talk about Wards and community boards

·    As xxx said, we have some ward councillors (half the Council in fact).  The city is spilt into 4 wards – 2 bigger ones with 2 ward councillors each and 2 smaller ones with 1 ward councillor each.

·    Who can name 1 or more of the wards? (Ahuriri, Nelson Park, Taradale, Onekawa-Tamatea)

·    Do you know which ward you are in?

·    So what is the difference between a ward councillor and an at-large councillor?

Ward councillors are elected by the people living in the ward they are standing in – e.g if you live in Marewa you vote for a candidate standing in the Nelson Park ward (substitute for where you are).

You might think that ward councillors represent their ward – but all councillors have to act in the best interests of the city – so in that way they are no different from at-large councillors.  They do have a responsibility to bring the views of their ward at the Council table – so in this way they do have regard for the interests of their area.  Because of this, they often network within their ward community so they have the understanding they need about the views of the ward community.  Has anyone heard about a ward meeting happening?  (if anyone says yes – did they go?)

·    Community Boards – so Napier has never had a community board, but some councils do – typically larger cities or areas with isolated or distinct communities – Hastings has a community board for rural Hastings.  If there is a community board, the council may or may not give it some powers e.g. some might get a budget to spend in the area and they can make recommendations to the full council.  They are funded either by everyone (general rate) or by the community they represent (targeted rate).  

Does anyone think we should have a community board?  Why / why not?

 

 

Finally – if you haven’t already, please go and see the team and fill in the survey – guess the lolly jar or grab a bookmark so you can do the survey at home.

 

The survey results will give the Council good information for when we look at how the Council should be made up for the next 6 years.  (early next year).

 

Thank you for your attention!

 

 

 

Further Notes:

 

·    This review does not include whether or not to establish Māori Wards – this is done separately (and before this decision) – if Māori Wards are established, that will be part of the mix for the rep review.

 

·    You are likely to get other questions about what Council is and isn’t doing – it is up to you if you want to answer them or whether you want to talk to the person separately – BUT we don’t want the session to get off track too much.

 

·    Our main aim is to get people to fill in the survey – this is where it counts.  The team will be looking after this.

 

·    Jane (governance) will be on hand at all events for any questions


 

Appendix 3: Focus Group Guide

 

Representation Review

Focus Group Guide

 

Thursday

26 October 2017

3.30 – 5pm

MTG Education Centre

 

Participants

 

Jill Fitzmaurice

5 Hukarere Road, Napier

PAS Ref Group

Bubbles Munro

28A Whilte Street, Taradale

PAS Ref Group

Janet Smith

67 Avenue Road, Greenmeadows

PAS Ref Group

Val Forward

97A Avondale Road, Taradale

PAS Ref Group

Leigh Bedford

YCON

Anna Lorch

61 King Street, Taradale

YCON

Nora Hopkins

8 Rochester Street, Tamatea

NAPS

Jacqui Lee

4 Rhodes Place, Taradale

NAPS

Berry Rangi

271 Westminster Ave, Tamatea

Tiare Ahuriri PACIFICA

Mike Marsh

TBC

Via NAPS

Te Kupenga Hauora

Te Kupenga Hauora

 

Focus Group Team

Natasha Carswell

Michele Grigg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Welcome – Natasha

Intros, afternoon tea

 

Health and Safety / Housekeeping - Natasha

 

Introduction – Natasha

 

§ Representation Review – what is it?

Ward / At Large / Mix – what is your Ward? (i-pad, look up)

Community Boards

How many Councillors

Engagement focus

 

§ Purpose of the focus group – our roles

 

§ Topics for today

What is your community?

The options

The survey

 

Exercise – What is your community?

 

Place, community of interest etc – prompts: work, travel, visiting friends, family, services

 

Map – draw your connections

 

Discussion – Wards / Community Boards

 

The Options

Split in three groups

 

Q: How should we be represented

Q: How many Councillors?

G1: Wards – pros and cons

G2: At large – pros and cons

G3: Mixed – pros and cons

 

G1: more – how many – why?

G2: less – how many – why?

G3: the same – why?

 

All together:

§ Wards – if we are to have Wards, what should they be – the boundaries, the size etc?

§ Community Boards – if we have Community Boards – how should they be made up?

 

Survey

Complete the survey – ipads / paper

Wrap-up

Final thoughts / questions – thanks and koha

Appendix 4: Focus Group Notes

 

Representation Review Focus Group

MTG Education Room

26 October 2017, 3.30pm-5.00pm

 

7 participants

Natasha, Michele, Jane from NCC

 

Background of project – described by Natasha.

 

Community of interest exercise (with the maps)

·     Karen - started with where I live, which is Tamatea – more than that – it’s where our life happens, where the kids go to school, family live there, shop there, like living there, on BOT of high school. But also part of Cook Island community and our hall is in Flaxmere. Plus I work out of town – community is on the plane most weeks, cause I’m flying to Auckland, Wellington, Rarotonga. Also connected on social media.

·     Mike – basic locality is as far as I can walk – Pandora Pond, Marewa, town, Marine parade. But still feel close to Clive as that’s where I was born and raised. But it’s part of Hastings. Blind sport – involved in that but that’s based in Hastings. Still love Napier. Overall I go back to where I am now.

·     Nova – realised that Tamatea is my main hang out spot – schools, family, shopping, doctors, community stuff in the churches. With blind sport – I’m limited in what I can do. Realise how limited we become in where we can go. Mainly based in Tamatea but like the whole of Napier.

·     Leigh – now live in Parklands, but Pirimai is mainly my home. I attend the church there, friends there, primary school there, where I established myself. It’s my community. Spent my high school life in Taradale. My memories are in Pirimai.

·     Anna – born in Taradale and moved back when 7. I feel like it’s my community. School is down the road, go to church in Taradale. Don’t have a licence. It’s where I have my independence. Freedom. Go the bus to places. Walk a lot. Sometimes come into town to see Mum.

·     Berry – live in Tamatea and love it there. Daughter is 6 houses up, son is 6 houses down. But as a Cook Islander we spend a lot of time in Hastings and Flaxmere; where our hall is. Come into Te Awa sometimes. Main area is Tamatea; everything we want is there. Church is there too.

·     Jacki – born in Onekawa South. Grew up there. Left in teens. Don’t connect with that area much. Visit sister there. Live in Taradale – live with daughter and her kids, 4 and 2. With Jasper and the grandkids, Napier is my playground. Go for walks along river and Marine Parade – go for safe places to walk.

 

Wards and/or at large system

Ward Councillor awareness? Two people (out of seven) know who their ward councillors are.

Awareness of wards? Three of seven not aware what ward they live in.

 

Group 1: Ward Only System

·     Pro: if you had only ward reps you would feel they have care for and take responsibility for the area they work in – only if they are accessible and known though

·     Pro: Ward councillors can live out of the area, so that gives them a bit of objectivity

·     Con: discourages people from having the interests of the city as a whole

·     Only works well if the communities of interest within a ward can be strongly identified - often lots of groups within the ward, of different identities

·     Overall, they only work well if there’s a good decision making process at the Council table and they fairly weigh up all the views. Otherwise it’s the loudest voice or the majority voice.

 

Group 2: At Large System

·     Geographical location of councillors may not be well represented – e.g. they could all live on the hill and the other communities would feel left out. Their views wouldn’t think about other smaller communities.

 

Group 3: Mixed Ward and At Large System

·     Ward represents different communities, different people reside in each area (eg, elderly and families in Taradale); more intimate – you might know the people in the ward or they’ve been in the area and you’ve connected with them. At large – opportunity to have reps across the whole area. If only wards they would all be fighting for their own corner and not thinking about the whole of Napier.

 

Community Boards

      Would these be good for Napier?

      Any community not well represented at the moment?

 

·     Māori aren’t well represented. I have watched the debates in Rotorua and Taranaki with interest, and we have a high population of Māori and yet, we have only one Māori Councillor.

·     Who’s the voice for people with disabilities? Mental, intellectual, physical? At least one person so people know who to go to if they have an issue etc. [talking here about how other groups are represented or advocated for by Council.]

·     Should we be thinking about Māori or more multicultural?

·     If you try and represent all views, it’s quite difficult. Need to make sure Council (members) understands the community they serve – doesn’t mean they all have to represent different special interest groups. They need to understand the community in its entirety.

·     Community Boards: sometimes there are issues that come up, where you could pull a group together to consider things on an issue-by-issue basis rather than standing boards. Regular turnover too, to give people an opportunity to participate.

 

Number of Councillors

 

Group 1: more Councillors

·     Don’t want to see more Councillors

·     Could have one more perhaps – so they can help with the workload of the others!

Group 2: less Councillors

·     If we had less might be too big of a job for the rest of the Councillors

·     Fewer people making decisions, so quicker to make decisions and get on with things.

·     No magic number. Maybe 8, 10.

 

Group 3: same number of Councillors

·     If it ain’t broken don’t fix it

·     It seems ok at the moment – City seems to be going ahead, things happening.

·     About quality not quantity.

 

Other comments

Would like to have a better understanding of Councils, what they do and why they make decisions.

 

I’ve been on the Youth Council almost a year and never met any Councillors. Need more visibility and more interaction. The YCON Chair could attend a Council meeting, or vice versa.

 

Instead of the ward system, could you have a community board that reflected the make up of that community and they could give their views to the Council? At large plus community boards.

 

Information given about People’s Panel and Civic Councils consultation.

All participants completed Representation Review survey.

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

8.      Quarterly Report for September 2017

Type of Report:

Procedural

Legal Reference:

Local Government Act 2002

Document ID:

423027

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Caroline Thomson, Chief Financial Officer

 

8.1     Purpose of Report

To consider the Quarterly Report on performance by Activity Group for the period 1 July 2017 to 30 September 2017.

 

Decision of Council

Councillors Wise / Boag

That the Committee

a.   Receive the Quarterly Report for the period 1 July 2017 to 30 September 2017.

 

Carried

 

8.2     Background Summary

The Quarterly Report summarises the Council’s progress in the first quarter of 2017/18 towards fulfilling the intentions outlined in the Annual Plan. Quarterly performance is assessed against Income, Total Operating Expenditure, and Capital Expenditure.

8.3     Issues

No issues

8.4     Significance and Consultation

N/A

8.5     Implications

Financial

N/A

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

N/A

 

 

At the Meeting

Thanks were extended to the team that produce the Quarterly report, noting that each time it is refined to ensure a more user friendly format.

In response to a question from councillors it was advised that the delays in the street lighting contract were due to the availability of a subcontractor, and generally indicative of how stretched businesses in the construction industry are currently.

8.6     Attachments

a     Quarterly Report September 2017 (Under Separate Cover)   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

9.    Significance and Engagement Policy

Type of Report:

Legal

Legal Reference:

Local Government Act 2002

Document ID:

426034

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Adele Henderson, Director Corporate Services

Natasha Carswell, Manager Community Strategies

 

9.1   Purpose of Report

1.1. The Local Government Act 2002, Section 76AA requires every local authority to adopt a policy setting out how the local authorities determine significance of proposals and decisions in relation to issues, assets and other matters.  The policy determines how the criteria or procedure are applied and how the community engagement and/or consultation will be carried out.

 

Decision of Council

Councillors Brosnan / Wright

That Council:

 

a.     approve and adopt the Significance and Engagement Policy as attached.

 

Carried

Councillor Tapine against

 

9.2   Background Summary

As noted above the Significance and Engagement Policy is required by all Local Authorities. 

Section 76AA requires the following to be included within the Policy itself

1) Every local authority must adopt a policy setting out:

         (a) that local authority’s general approach to determining the significance of proposals and decisions in relation to issues, assets, and other matters; and

        (b) any criteria or procedures that are to be used by the local authority in assessing the extent to which issues, proposals, assets, decisions, or activities are significant or may have significant consequences; and

        (c) how the local authority will respond to community preferences about engagement on decisions relating to specific issues, assets, or other matters, including the form of consultation that may be desirable; and

        (d) how the local authority will engage with communities on other matters.

 

(2) The purpose of the policy is—

        (a) to enable the local authority and its communities to identify the degree of significance attached to particular issues, proposals, assets, decisions, and activities; and

         (b) to provide clarity about how and when communities can expect to be engaged in decisions about different issues, assets, or other matters; and

        (c) to inform the local authority from the beginning of a decision-making process about

             (i) the extent of any public engagement that is expected before a particular decision is made; and

         (ii) the form or type of engagement required.

(3) The policy adopted under subsection (1) must list the assets considered by the local authority to be strategic assets.

(4) A policy adopted under subsection (1) may be amended from time to time.

(5) When adopting or amending a policy under this section, the local authority must consult in accordance with section 82 unless it considers on reasonable grounds that it has sufficient information about community interests and preferences to enable the purpose of the policy to be achieved.

(6) To avoid doubt, section 80 applies when a local authority deviates from this policy.

1.3 Issues

Each decision, proposal or issue requires consideration of significance. Ongoing monitoring of the assessment of significance in Council papers will be put in place to provide an objective assessment of significance and the associated level of engagement required for every Council decision. This process will need to demonstrate a consistency of application and be a demonstrably robust process.

Each agenda item will need to advise Council of the significance of the project/proposal/decision requested and the level of engagement required for each project/proposal/decision.

Adoption of this policy does not require special consultation.    When adopting or amending a policy under this section, the local authority must consult in accordance with Local Government Act Section 82 unless it considers on reasonable grounds that it has sufficient information about community interests and preferences to enable the purpose of the policy to be achieved.

9.3   Significance and Consultation

Adoption of this policy does not require special consultation. 

9.4   Implications

Financial

NA

Social & Policy

NA

Risk

NA

9.5   Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a.     Continue with existing policy

b.     To approve revised policy as attached

9.6   Development of Preferred Option

The preferred option is to approve the revised policy as attached.  The revised policy provides greater clarity, includes tools and guidance to determine significance and levels of engagement, and aligns with international best practice.

 

 

At the Meeting

In response to questions from councillors it was clarified that:

·     Decisions on engaging with mana whenua or tangata whenua are based on legislative stipulations (of the Local Government Act 2002) and the advice of the Pou Ārahi/ Strategic Māori Advisor where the law may not be clear.

·     The Policy is intended to present how, when and on what we will engage, rather than how reputational risk will be managed. Risk is one factor that is considered during the planning phase of any project, including how any risks identified will be managed.

·     Each time the Policy is triggered the proposed consultation will be brought to Council for approval, as part of the paper to Council. 

 

9.7   Attachments

a     Significance and Engagement Policy 2017   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


 


 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

Reports from Community Services Committee held 6 December 2017

 

1.    HOURS OF OPERATION - MTG HAWKE'S BAY AND NAPIER LIBRARIES

Type of Report:

Operational and Procedural

Legal Reference:

Local Government Act 2002

Document ID:

420487

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Sally Jackson, Manager Visitor Experience

 

1.1   Purpose of Report

To review the MTG Hawke’s Bay and the Napier Libraries hours of operation to better meet the needs of the community during the temporary co-location of the two facilities.

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Hague / Boag

That Council:

a.     Approve that commencing 7 February 2018, the MTG Hawke’s Bay and Napier City Library and the Taradale Library change its hours of operation to be open to the general public as follows:

·      The MTG Hawke’s Bay and temporary Napier City Library open Monday to Sunday 9.30am – 5.00pm, and

·      The Taradale Library open Monday to Friday 9.30am – 5.30pm and Saturday & Sunday from 10.00am – 4pm.

b.     Approve that the hours of operation for both the MTG Hawke’s Bay and the Napier Libraries are reviewed at the end of the temporary co-location period.

Carried

 

1.2   Background Summary

 

On the 2 October 2017 Napier City Council opted to temporarily co-locate the Napier City Library within the MTG Hawke’s  Bay. The current Napier City Library will close to the general public on 22 December and reopen in the temporary location at the MTG on the 7 February.

 

During this temporary transition period, the Taradale Library will become the main library for the Napier community and a smaller library service will be provided within the MTG.

 

Over the next 12 months, Council Officers will be embarking on the development of a Library Strategy that will define the product and service requirements of Napier Libraries and the requirements of a future city library.

 

The Council will be updated on the strategy as it progresses and will be involved throughout with the community engagement programme.

 

1.3   Issues

The co-location of the MTG Hawke’s Bay and the City Centre Library has presented a challenge around the opening hours of the shared facility, as the current hours of operation for the two businesses are not aligned.

With the reduced size of the City Library for the Napier community Council officers would like to ensure access to services provided by the Napier Library is available as much as possible.

Increased community outreach programmes, reduction in fees and charges, quick and easy access to library stock are all areas of mitigation currently being investigated by Council Officers.

 

The current and proposed hours of operation can be seen in the table below.

 

Facility

Current hours of operation

Proposed hours of operation

MTG Hawke’s Bay

Mon – Sun: 10.00am – 5.00pm

 

Mon – Sun: 9.30am – 5.00pm

Napier City Library

Mon – Friday: 9.30am – 5.30pm

Saturday: 10.00am – 4.00pm

Sunday: 12.00pm – 4.00pm

 

Mon – Sun: 9.30am – 5.00pm

Taradale Library

Mon – Friday: 9.30am – 5.30pm

Saturday: 10.00am – 4.00pm

Sunday: 12.00pm – 4.00pm

Mon – Friday 9.30am – 5.30pm

Sat – Sun: 10.00am – 4.00pm

 

 

 

NB: Extending the hours of operation beyond 5pm at the MTG Hawke’s Bay is not possible due to the commercial events and functions held in the Foyer and Century Theatre, which frequently commence at 5.30pm.

1.4   Significance and Consultation

It is considered that this matter does not trigger any criteria for significance or consultation in Council’s Significance and Engagement policy.

1.5   Implications

Financial

The change in hours of operation will require variations to be made to staff working arrangements at both the MTG Hawke’s Bay and the Napier Libraries. All changes can be achieved within the current labour budget.

Social & Policy

   N/A

Risk

There is a risk of customer dissatisfaction if the hours of operation are not changed to meet the expectations of the community. 

1.6   Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

1.    Change the hours of operation as detailed above;

2.    Extend the hours of operation further;

3.    Decrease the hours of operation;

4.    Maintain the status quo.

1.7   Development of Preferred Option

 

The preferred option is the first option, to change the hours of operation as detailed in the above table.

 

Peak times at the Napier City Library are from 9.30am to 11am and 3pm – 5pm weekdays.

 

The lowest periods of patronage is traditionally after 5pm and this time is generally used by staff to complete the end of day procedures and to set up for the next day’s operation. 

 

Peak times for the MTG Hawke’s Bay are fluid, with visitor numbers dependent on cruise ships, time of year, weather conditions and programme times.

 

Both MTG Hawke’s Bay and the Napier Libraries team understand the importance of maintaining the same standard hours of operation during the co-location period. The teams also understand the importance of providing excellent customer service and the same visitor experience along with good access to both collections.

 

The MTG Hawke’s Bay is currently open for 49 hours a week, the Napier and Taradale Libraries 50 hours. The proposed changes see the MTG and Napier City Library increase hours of operation to 52.5 hours and the Taradale Library hours of operation increase to 52 hours a week.

 

The extended hours over the weekend will allow for increased number of community programmes and increased opportunities for the public to interact with, and enjoy the services provided by both the library and MTG.

 

Extending the hours of operation beyond 5pm at the MTG Hawke’s Bay is not possible due to commercial events and functions often held in the Foyer and Century Theatre. 

 

 

At the Meeting

The Libraries Manager advised that adjustments to the opening hours have been made for simplicity across the two entities (MTG and library). The opening hours have been extended in the morning as the MTG hosts evening events and requires set up time for these from 5pm.

In response to questions from Councillors, it was clarified that:

·     The messaging to the community will be carefully constructed to manage any concerns regarding an overall downsizing of the town library.

·     Some adjustments will need to be made to the gallery work that is completed before the building opens; this will impact on what is done when by whom, but will not require extra staff.

·     Extra cleaning will be required but it is expected that the current budgets will allow for this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.8   Attachments

Nil

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

2.    Library Fees and Charges

Type of Report:

Operational and Procedural

Legal Reference:

N/A

Document ID:

421204

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Antoinette Campbell, Director Community Services

 

2.1   Purpose of Report

To seek approval to remove the Reservations Fees in place for the Napier Libraries.

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Jeffery / Wise

That Council:

 

a)     Approve that the Reservations Fees be removed from the Napier City Council Fees and Charges schedule effective immediately;

 

b)    Review the removal of this fee at the end of the temporary transition period.

 

c)     That a DECISION OF COUNCIL is required urgently so officers can promote the change and the extended loan period with the public as soon as possible. This will require the following resolution to be passed before the decision of Council is taken:

 

        That, in terms of Section 82 (3) of the Local Government Act 2002, that the principles set out in that section have been observed in such manner that the Napier City Council considers, in its discretion, is appropriate to make decisions on the recommendation.

 

Carried

 

 

Decision of Council

Councillors Wright / Wise

That, in terms of Section 82 (3) of the Local Government Act 2002, that the principles set out in that section have been observed in such manner that the Napier City Council considers, in its discretion, is appropriate to make decisions on the recommendation.

Carried

 

 

Council Resolution

Councillors Taylor / Hague

That Council:

 

a)     Approve that the Reservations Fees be removed from the Napier City Council Fees and Charges schedule effective immediately;

 

b)    Review the removal of this fee at the end of the temporary transition period.

 

Carried

 

2.2   Background Summary

 

The Napier Libraries currently charge a reservations fee to customers to reserve a book that is either on loan or located at the other library (Napier or Taradale).  The reservation fees are currently:

 

·   Charge per adult membership (includes interbranch transfers)            $1.10

·   Charge per child/teen membership (includes interbranch transfers)     $0.60

·   Charge for magazine reservation                                                         $1.10

 

With the relocation of the Napier Library to the MTG in early 2018, the on-site collection will be heavily reduced from over 100,000 items available to just 25,000 items at the new site.  Of the remainder of the collection that hasn’t been deselected, approximately 12,000 will go to Taradale Library and up to 50,000 will go into retrievable storage where items can be accessed when requested by our customers.

 

In this regard it is anticipated that customers will need to use the reservations method of accessing book stock more frequently due to the reduced likelihood of a desired item being readily available on site.

2.3   Issues

With the reduced library operation within the MTG from 7th February 2018, Library customers will be expected to access the collection in different ways.  There will be provision to browse a reduced collection on-site however customers will also need to increasingly browse online to locate the item they wish to check out.  The likelihood of a desired item not being on-site and having to be reserved will be much increased.  In the interest of maintaining a good level of customer service, it is proposed to remove the reservation fee to facilitate this new method of browsing.  It might be that a customer will need to reserve multiple items at a time and payment of several reservation fees may be perceived as cost prohibitive to some members.

It is considered that maintaining the reservations fee in the temporary library operation will not be received well by inconvenienced library customers, and that its removal will go some way towards mitigating any customer dissatisfaction.

It is not proposed to remove any other charges including the Best Seller Collection fees, Interloan charges or City Loan handling fees.

2.4   Significance and Consultation

It is considered that this matter does not trigger any criteria for significance or consultation in Council’s Significance and Engagement policy however; the Friends of the Library have been consulted on numerous occasions and welcome this change to the schedule.

2.5   Implications

Financial

The Libraries generate revenue through various fees and charges including reservation charges, extended loan charges, photocopying fees, high demand best sellers, intercity loans etc. 

The annual budget for reservations for 201718 financial year is $13,000 and $3,750 has been received to date.

Revenue gained through charging for reservations over the past three financial years is as follows;

·     2016/17      $11,437

·     2015/16      $12,850

·     2014/15      $12,511

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

There is a risk of increasing customer dissatisfaction with the library service if the reservation fee is maintained. 

2.6   Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a.     Remove the fee for reserving an item from the library

b.     Maintain the status quo.

 

2.7   Development of Preferred Option

The preferred option is to remove the fee for reserving an item from the library.  The likelihood of items being located either at Taradale Library or in storage will be increased greatly with the reduced number of collection items held at the temporary location.  To promote accessibility to items and mitigate potential customer dissatisfaction with having to reserve an item and return to collect when it arrives, it is recommended that the reservation fee is removed while the library is in its temporary location.

With the reservation fee removed, customers will be able to reserve an item either online or at one of the library locations. Within 48 hours (normal level of service is 24 hours) the customer will be able to collect the item from the Taradale or the temporary Napier location.

Alternative revenue generation activities including co-hosted commercial events with MTG Hawke’s Bay, additional community programmes, increased access to internet and photocopying services, are currently being investigated.  These initiatives along with anticipated efficiencies derived from the co-location of the Library and the MTG will go toward offsetting the lost revenue from reservation fees.

 

 

 

At the Meeting

The Libraries Manager noted that the removal of reservation fees is in line with other libraries across the country and is a good way to ensure that access to books continues over the temporary relocation period.

 

2.8   Attachments

Nil

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

3.    Joint Alcohol Strategy Review

Type of Report:

Operational

Legal Reference:

N/A

Document ID:

422034

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Michele Grigg, Senior Advisor Policy

 

3.1   Purpose of Report

To update Council on the feedback process for the revised Joint Alcohol Strategy, and to request adoption of the revised Strategy.

 

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Price / White

a.     That Council adopts the revised Joint Alcohol Strategy 2017.

 

Carried

 

3.2   Background Summary

A Joint Alcohol Strategy for Napier and Hastings was first adopted by Napier City Council and Hastings District Council in 2011. The 2011 Strategy recognised that the region experiences issues relating to alcohol misuse including crime, hospital visits, injuries, abuse, and violence. The Strategy closely aligns with the goals of the two local safe communities, Safer Napier and Safer Hastings, each of which has identified alcohol harm as a priority area.

The 2011 Strategy had a five year review period. A draft revised Strategy was prepared earlier this year. The revised Strategy considered the latest alcohol harm data for the region. It includes a clear vision statement, three key objectives, four at-risk groups, and a focus on the councils’ areas of influence.

The draft revised Strategy was presented to both councils in March 2017, when it was approved for release for feedback from stakeholders and the public.

Feedback Process

The draft revised Strategy was sent directly to key stakeholders for feedback, and feedback was also sought from the general public (see Feedback Plan in Appendix 1).

Channels advising feedback options included:

·     A joint media release

·     Information posted on both council websites (Napier City Council ‘Talk to Us’ and Hastings District Council ‘My Voice, My Choice’)

·     Multiple posts on both council Facebook pages

·     An advertisement in Napier City Council’s ‘Proudly Napier’ insert in the Napier Mail community newspaper

·     Information on digital screens in council customer centres and facilities

·     E-signatures on Napier City Council staff emails.

The feedback period was 14 August - 8 September 2017.

Four organisations provided written feedback (Alcohol Action Hawke’s Bay, Alcohol Healthwatch, Hawke’s Bay District Health Board, and the Health Promotion Agency). Members of the public provided feedback through the councils’ websites and Facebook pages.

Feedback was considered by the Joint Alcohol Strategy Advisory Group (comprising two Councillors from each of NCC and HDC) at their meeting on 12 October 2017 (see minutes of meeting in Appendix 2). The Advisory Group also heard verbal presentations from two submitters who had provided written feedback. The Advisory Group made some amendments to the draft Strategy, which are shown in the revised Strategy attached (see Appendix 3).

Revised Strategy

On the whole, agencies and the public are supportive of the Strategy and its aspirational vision. The Strategy vision is ‘a safe and healthy community, free from alcohol related harm’.

Submitters were also largely supportive of the Strategy objectives although some changes to the wording of these were suggested. Agreed changes are marked in the revised Strategy.

Two submitters called for the reintroduction of two objectives that were in the 2011 Strategy but removed from the draft 2017 version:

·     ‘Work collaboratively with community and agencies on initiatives to reduce alcohol harm’ – this objective was not reinstated as the Advisory Group agreed it represents a way of working, rather than being an objective in and of itself.

·     ‘Use clear and effective regulation around alcohol’ – this objective was not reinstated as the Advisory Group agreed the Strategy should not govern the regulatory functions of councils. These functions are governed by legislation and care is required to make this distinction.

Submitters also suggested slight rewording to one of the at-risk groups (pregnant women) to ensure a focus not only on women who may become pregnant but also those who are currently pregnant. The revised wording for this at-risk group is ‘women who are or may become pregnant’.

Suggestions were made to extend the list of indicators proposed in the Monitoring and Review section, which are included in the revised Strategy.

Several of the written submitters proposed actions for implementation. These will be considered following adoption of the Strategy.

Next Steps

The revised Strategy and associated paper is being presented to the Hastings District Council at their meeting on 20 December 2017.

3.3   Issues

No issues.

3.4   Significance and Consultation

The revised Strategy was sent directly to stakeholders and released to the public for feedback. This feedback was considered by the Joint Alcohol Strategy Advisory Group at their meeting in October 2017, with submitters given the opportunity to present their feedback.

The engagement undertaken reflected that no significant changes were made to the Strategy apart from updated data and trends and aligning the Strategy with current research and priorities in this field. 

3.5   Implications

Financial

There are no financial implications. Any activities identified in the subsequent implementation plan will be funded either externally or within current budget.

Social & Policy

Following adoption of the Strategy an implementation plan will be developed with Hastings District Council and other members of the Joint Alcohol Strategy Reference Group (ACC, Police, HBDHB).

Risk

All work on the revised Strategy has been undertaken jointly with Hastings District Council. The feedback process followed the agreed plan for ensuring stakeholders and the public had an opportunity to provide comment on the draft revised Strategy.

3.6   Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a.     Council adopts the revised Joint Alcohol Strategy 2017 (preferred option).

b.     Council does not adopt the revised Joint Alcohol Strategy 2017. This is not recommended as the revised Strategy has been updated to reflect current information and has incorporated feedback from the community.

3.7   Development of Preferred Option

Following adoption of the revised Strategy, both councils will work with members of the Joint Alcohol Strategy Reference Group (ACC, Police, HBDHB) to develop a Strategy implementation plan. The plan will consider suggestions made in submissions that provided comment on actions for implementation.

The plan will include activities under each of the three objectives, which will be phased across the years and identify project leads and partners. Implementation plan development will commence in early 2018.

 

 

At the Meeting

The Senior Advisor Policy and team were commended on the Strategy.

In response to questions from councillors it was clarified that:

·     The Strategy will address problem drinking across all sectors of the community; while there is an initial focus on youth and Māori there is a recognition that problem drinking occurs across all demographics and one is not being penalised while another is ignored.

·     The selected indicators have existing baseline data and ongoing sources to feed into annual reporting and five yearly reviews of the Strategy.

 

3.8   Attachments

a     Revised Joint Alcohol Strategy Feedback Plan 

b     Minutes - Joint Alcohol Strategy Advisory Group meeting, October 2017 

c     Revised Joint Alcohol Strategy with tracked changes from Joint Alcohol Strategy Advisory Group   

 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


 


 


 


 


 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Māori Consultative Committee - 13 December 2017 - Open Agenda

 

 

MĀori Consultative Committee

Open Minutes

 

Meeting Date:

Wednesday 1 November 2017

Time:

3pm-4.10pm

Venue

Small Exhibition Hall

Napier Conference Centre

Marine Parade

Napier

 

 

Present:

Piri Prentice (In the Chair), Mayor Bill Dalton, Tiwana Aranui, Liz Ratima

In Attendance:

Chief Executive, Director Community Services, Strategic Māori Advisor, Councillor Boag

Administrator

Governance Team

 

 

Karakia

A karakia was delivered by Mr Aranui and responded to by the Chair. 

Apologies

Apologies

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

Liz Ratima / Tiwana Aranui

That the apologies from Cr Tapine and George Reti be accepted.

Carried

 

Conflicts of interest

Nil

Public forum

Nil

Announcements by the Chairperson

The Chair spoke on the 10 year celebration of the Pukemokimoki Marae and invited Mr Aranui as a member of the Pukemokimoki Marae Trust to speak on it also.  Key points made included:

 

- The 10 year celebration was very successful, and appreciation was expressed to Council for its ongoing support to the Marae and for enabling the Māori Consultative Committee to give Māori a seat around the table to effect change. 

- The celebration was a good opportunity to reflect on the last 10 years, in particular, the aspirations of the people for the Marae, and consider the Marae into the future.   The Marae is built for all generations and has to be part of the community and walk alongside the people and the Council.   

- The Marae is a place for people to congregate and kaupapa.  The Marae is part of the community, it is the people who make it what it is. Tangi are also a large focus of the Marae business.

 

The Chair also mentioned the 150 year celebrations at the St Joseph’s Māori Girls College, and the new whare being planned at the Wharerangi Marae. 

 

Announcements by the management

Nil

Confirmation of minutes

Mayor Dalton / T Aranui

That the Minutes of the meeting held on 20 September 2017 were taken as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

Carried

 

New Items for MĀori Consultative Committee

 

1.      Update on Review of Terms of Reference for MĀori Consultative Committee

Type of Report:

Enter Significance of Report

Legal Reference:

Local Government Act 2002

Document ID:

399951

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Jane McLoughlin, Team Leader Governance

 

1.1     Purpose of Report

To update the Committee on discussions to review the TOR of the Māori Consultative Committee which have occurred since the last meeting. 

 

At the Meeting

The Māori Strategic Advisor delivered a verbal update, including:

- Relevant examples of Māori representation from around the country have been collected.

- Council is developing wider Māori strategies such as a Māori responsiveness plan, Māori engagement framework, cultural competency framework, and development plan.  The review of the TOR of this Committee will fall out of the wider strategies, including the structure of the committee. 

- There is a need to have the right ‘line of sight’ into Māori communities and understand the aspirations of the communities. 

- The Māori Strategic Advisor will be engaging with the Committee members shortly. 

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

L Ratima / T Aranui

That the Committee

a.     Receive the verbal update provided by the Strategic Māori Advisor on the review of the TOR of the Māori Consultative Committee. 

 

Carried

 


 

Reports from standing committees

L Ratima / T Aranui

That the Māori Consultative Recommendations arising from the discussion of the Committee reports be submitted to the Council meeting for consideration.

Carried

 

Reports from Strategy and Infrastructure Committee held 11 October 2017

 

1.      20 & 21 Chambers Street, land legalisation - land to be declared road

Type of Report:

Legal

Legal Reference:

Public Works Act 1981

Document ID:

387052

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Bryan  Faulknor, Manager Property

Jenny Martin, Property and Facilities Officer

 

1.1     Purpose of Report

To obtain a formal declaration from Council as required under the Public Works Act that the land in question be declared road.

 

 

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

No discussion was held on this item. 

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

Mayor Dalton / T Aranui

That the Council resolve that the Committee’s recommendation be adopted.

Carried

Committee's Recommendation

Mayor Dalton / Councillor Tapine

That Council

a.       Resolves pursuant to Section 115 of the Public Works Act 1981, to declare the land in the schedule below to be road.

 

SCHEDULE

Hawke’s Bay Land District – Napier City

Area

Legal Description

Part of Certificate of Title

0.0053 ha

Section 1 SO Plan 511878

HB A3/562

0.0122 ha

Section 3 SO Plan 511878

Proc 179673, HB W3/362

 

 

CARRIED

 

 

2.      Kaiangaroa Place land legalisation

Type of Report:

Legal

Legal Reference:

Public Works Act 1981

Document ID:

387429

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Bryan  Faulknor, Manager Property

Jenny Martin, Property and Facilities Officer

 

2.1     Purpose of Report

To seek Council’s approval pursuant to Section 114 of the Public Works Act 1981, to declare the land in the Schedule to this report to be road.

 

 

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

No discussion was held on this item. 

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

Mayor Dalton / T Aranui

That the Council resolve that the Committee’s recommendation be adopted.

Carried

Committee's Recommendation

Councillors Taylor / Wise

That Council

a.       Resolves pursuant to Section 114 of the Public Works Act 1981,  to declare the land in the Schedule below to be road.

SCHEDULE

Hawke’s Bay Land District – Napier City

 

Area (ha)

Legal Description

Certificate of Title

0.0008

Lot 11 DP 314817

58488

0.0008

Lot 12 DP 314817

58489

 

 

 

CARRIED

 

 

 

 

3.      Property Purchases - Gloucester Street

Type of Report:

Operational

Legal Reference:

Enter Legal Reference

Document ID:

390966

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Bryan  Faulknor, Manager Property

Jenny Martin, Property and Facilities Officer

 

3.1     Purpose of Report

To obtain Council approval to purchase portions of residential property on Gloucester Street, Taradale affected by Planning Designation 153.

 

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

No discussion was held on this item. 

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

Mayor Dalton / T Aranui

That the Council resolve that the Committee’s recommendation be adopted.

Carried

Committee's Recommendation

Councillors Dallimore / Wise

That Council

a.       Approve the purchase of portions of residential property on Gloucester Street, Taradale affected by Planning Designation 153.

CARRIED

 

Reports from Community Services Committee held 25 October 2017

 

1.      MĀori Wards

Type of Report:

Legal

Legal Reference:

Local Electoral Act 2001

Document ID:

387769

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Jane McLoughlin, Team Leader Governance

 

1.1     Purpose of Report

To outline the feedback received from the community engagement on Māori Wards and seek a decision from Council on whether to establish Māori Wards for the 2019 election.

 

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

On Māori representation, the Committee spoke on the following points:

- The key question is whether there is adequate representation on the Council for Māori representation – do Māori have a voice.  This point was made considering whether there are Māori wards or whether there is another mechanism to achieve it.   

- The work that Council is undertaking on its Māori strategies was seen as very positive and a way of ensuring there is adequate representation and a voice.

-  It is important to encourage more Māori to stand as candidates in the local government elections.  However it was noted that even if there were more Māori elected onto Council, this would not replace council’s obligations to rangatiratanga. 

- The greatest value may be in involving Māori early on in what Council is developing.  An example of this is already in motion in the work being undertaken on the Aquarium, where Māori have been engaged from the conception stage, rather than towards the end of the design of a project. 

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

L Ratima / T Aranui

That the Council resolve that the Committee’s recommendation be adopted.

Carried

Committee's Recommendation

Councillors Wright / Brosnan

That Council

a.       Do not establish Māori Wards in Napier City for the 2019 and 2022 local elections.

 

CARRIED

Boag against

 

2.      Napier Aquatic Centre Expansion

Type of Report:

Operational and Procedural

Legal Reference:

N/A

Document ID:

394789

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Glenn Lucas, Manager Sport & Recreation

 

2.1     Purpose of Report

To present the results of the community engagement and consultation, and to proceed with design, schedule and costings on the basis that Option 3 is the preferred option.  The preferred option will be considered during the 2018-28 Long Term Plan (LTP) process.

 

 

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

The Director Community Services spoke to the report. 

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

L Ratima / T Aranui

That the Council resolve that the Committee’s recommendation be adopted.

Carried

Committee's Recommendation

Councillors Taylor / Price

That Council

a.       Receive the summary of community engagement.

b.       Support the development of designs, schedule and costings for Option 3  to be considered during the 2018-28 LTP process.

 

CARRIED

 

 

3.      NRB Survey 2017

Type of Report:

Information

Legal Reference:

N/A

Document ID:

391673

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Elaine  Cooper, Corporate Planner

 

3.1     Purpose of Report

To advise Council on the results of the NRB survey carried out in 2017.

 

 

 

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

The Chief Executive and the Mayor spoke to the survey and noted the survey is very useful as it gives a broad public opinion on the Council.  

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

L Ratima / T Aranui

That the Council resolve that the Committee’s recommendation be adopted.

Carried

Committee's Recommendation

Councillors Hague / Wise

That the Council

a.       Receive the results of the NRB survey 2017.

 

CARRIED

 

 

4.      Creative Communities Scheme Meeting September 2017

Type of Report:

Operational

Legal Reference:

Local Government Act 2002

Document ID:

393626

Reporting Officer/s & Unit:

Belinda  McLeod, Community Funding Advisor

 

4.1     Purpose of Report

a)   To note the Creative Communities funding decisions made on 28 September 2017.

Council administers this scheme on behalf of Creative NZ. Funding decisions do not require ratification from Council.

 

b)   To receive the minutes from the meeting held on 28 September 2017, as shown as Attachment A.

 

c)   The decision meeting for September 2017 allocated $21,673 to 13 projects. We received 14 applications seeking a funding total of $34,747.67. Shown as Attachment B.

 

 

 

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

As a member of the Creative Communities Committee, the Chair invited Councillor Boag to speak to the paper. 

 

 

 

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

L Ratima / T Aranui

That the Council resolve that the Committee’s recommendation be adopted.

Carried

Committee's Recommendation

Councillors Wright / Boag

That Council

a.       Note the Creative Communities funding decisions report from 28 September           2017

b.       Receive the minutes from the Creative Communities meeting held on 28 September 2017

 

CARRIED

 

  

The Chair asked the Strategic Māori Advisor to close the meeting.

 

The meeting was closed at 4.10pm.  

 

 

Approved and adopted as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

 

 

Chairperson .............................................................................................................................

 

 

Date of approval ......................................................................................................................