Agenda of Extraordinary Meeting of Council

Extraordinary Meeting of Council - 29 June 2018 - Open Agenda Item 1

New Reports

1. War Memorial Design

Type of Report:	Procedural
Legal Reference:	N/A
Document ID:	519623
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Charles Ropitini, Strategic Maori Advisor

1.1 Purpose of Report

To consider and approve the Roll of Honour and preferred design for the reinstatement of the memorial elements and signage to the War Memorial Centre.

Officer’s Recommendation

That Council:

a. Approve display conventions for the presentation of names on the War Memorial Roll of Honour as follows:

i. Rank | Surname | First Name in Full | Middle Initials | Military Awards

b. Approve Option 3 (landscape solution) as the preferred design to move forward to a detailed design phase and public consultation:

c. Approve external signage placement in accordance with Option two in centre of building forecourt as demarcation of the War Memorial Centre as a site of significance.

Mayor’s Recommendation

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

1.2 Background Summary

The physical memorial elements of the original 1950s War Memorial Hall were the Roll of Honour and perpetual flame, presented as a Wall of Remembrance with the flame sitting in a pool of water.

The Roll of Honour listed Napier war dead from World War II only, in-line with the criteria for a Government subsidy for World War II memorials.

The War Memorial Hall was renovated and enlarged in to a conference centre by Napier City Council in 1995 to continue as a living, working memorial, befitting those Napier Citizens who served and died in that century's conflicts. The memorial elements were encapsulated by the building with a new foyer extending from the original ballroom.

Through the redevelopment three additional plaques were added recording the names of those from the wider Napier City area, from Bay View to Meeanee and Taradale. An upper tier of plaques was included for names of those who died during World War I, replacing a former Great War Roll of Honour that was destroyed in the 1931 Earthquake. A separate plaque recording those who died in post-World War II conflicts was also added.

This extended Roll of Honour was re-dedicated on 30th September 1995 at the facility's reopening as the War Memorial Centre, in the 50th year since the end of World War II.

The creation of the revised Roll of Honour was a joint project between the Napier City Council and the Napier and Taradale Returned Services Association, assisted by grant allocation from the New Zealand Remembers fund.

The return of the War Memorial title and memorial elements to the Napier War Memorial Site provides an opportunity to review the Roll of Honour, leverage information that has been made available to the public domain and provide further inclusions to the Roll of Honour, expanding the work that was completed in 1995.

To support the presentation of the Roll of Honour and reinstatement of the memorial space, three potential design options have been assessed by external experts from Ministry of Culture and Heritage. The designs have been assessed against a design brief that has been developed by Council Officer’s with significant contribution from Mr Guy Natusch. The design brief has been signed off by the War Memorial Working Group as the guide for development and assessment of the memorial design.

This paper recommends an approach for the display of names on the Roll of Honour and also presents the assessed memorial designs in which the Roll of Honour will be housed. This paper also presents options for external signage as a flagstone marking the entire site as a memorial site of significance.

1.3 Issues

Roll of Honour

Challenges for a Roll of Honour review exist in the following areas:

1. Absence of national guidelines and recommendations for eligibility criteria, and presentation of a Roll of Honour.

2. Restrictions to NZDF personnel files for World War II and all conflicts post-1921.

The challenges related to Honour Roll’s in New Zealand are surmised by Ministry of Culture and Heritage Senior Historian’s Imelda Bargas and Tim Shoebridge in their book New Zealand’s First World War Heritage:

“… These groups faced a more difficult task if they wanted to individually name those they were honouring. Would they just list the fallen, or all who had served? The vast majority decided to list only the names of the fallen, but some included those who died shortly after the war, or in the period before the memorial was unveiled. Some communities added the names of men who died in the decades that followed, while other memorials, notably throughout Southland, include lists of ‘repatriated’ or ‘returned’ men. The next problem was how to come up with an accurate list. Some groups had existing rolls or registers, but others had to appeal to the public for nominations. This led to names being misspelt or omitted, and to a jumbling of NZEF and imperial names, not to mention those of current and past residents, students and staff, workmates and workers, parishioners and members. The inconsistency of such choices made long ago, and the lack of evidence about the decision-making process, can lead modern viewers of these memorials to question their accuracy and stir a desire to ‘fix’ them.”[1]

Through the challenges Bargas and Shoebridge outline, there is acknowledgement that a Roll of Honour review may not result in a definite and complete list of war dead, but rather is a continuous effort to keep as accurate a list as possible, with the information available in our time.

Memorial design and external signage

Public sentiment has pushed for the return of a flagstone marking the War Memorial site clearly in a similar way to the 1995 flagstone.

With the reinstatement of a more prominent Wall of Remembrance and expanded Roll of Honour, the site is more visibly a war memorial site in its entirety and external signage in the form of a flagstone should be placed with consideration and balance to preferred memorial design.

The reinstatement of this memorial design places people at the core through the Roll of Honour and it is acknowledged that the current Cenotaph in Memorial Square commemorates significant battles.

1.4 Significance and Engagement

Roll of Honour

Given the challenges of reaching concensus relating to Napier’s Roll of Honour, the War Memorial Steering Group identified the need to canvas public opinion on the review and establishment of criteria for the Roll of Honour. As a result, three public meetings were held:

· Napier RSA, 10.00am Wednesday 24th January 2018

· Taradale RSA, 5.30pm Wednesday 24th January 2018

· Greenmeadows Hall, 5.30pm Thursday 25th January 2018

At the public meetings, an open forum workshop was conducted with the following questions asked of the public:

1. Defining Napier Citizenry, inclusive of Taradale Meeanee and Bayview

Question:

As a centre of enlistment during World War I and II, many men and women travelled to enlist from outside of the Napier city boundaries. How important is it to you that those commemorated on the Napier Roll of Honour are citizen residents of Napier?

Outcome:

General concensus across the three public meetings reflect that:

1. No names from the previous 1995 iteration of the Roll of Honour are to be removed unless there is a very good and legitimate reason for removal.

2. Research criteria is to be applicable within the physical boundaries of greater Napier from the Tūtaekurī river as the Southern boundary to the former Wairoa Borough Council boundary to the North. To be eligible a person must either be:

q Born in Napier

q Enlisted in Napier

q Next of Kin resides in Napier

q Employed in Napier

q Educated in Napier

q Church parish is in Napier

3. The research criteria is applicable to those not currently on the Roll of Honour and who are being discovered and added through research.

2. Eligibility Criteria - Roll of Honour

Question:

A Roll of Honour typically commemorates those who have died overseas while in active service. How important is it to you that only those who have died overseas in active service are commemorated on the Roll of Honour?

Ordinarily a person’s death must be a result of that conflict over a specified period of time - what would you consider a fair timeframe to specify for death as a result of active service at home or abroad?

Outcome:

General concensus across the three public meetings reflect that:

1. Only those that died on active service at home or abroad are to be commemorated

2. Timeframe for death in service is to be in accordance with the New Zealand Government dates from the official commencement date to the official end date of that conflict.

3. The Australian War Memorial elegibility criteria is adopted with appropriate changes to be specific to Napier New Zealand.

3. Naming conventions

Question:

How important is it to you that the naming conventions are considered by the Steering Group to include the service number and additional information that could be added into this Roll of Honour?

Outcome:

1. Expansion of information was to see the first name written in full for the following reasons:

a. A first name written in full denotes a person’s sex and cultural background (with the exception of unisex names), whereas initials would require further identifiers, particularly to denote women who served in conflict.

b. Consideration that middle names in full would add inconsistent length to each line of the Roll with some people not having registered middle names.

2. There was a desire to see provision made for families to provide additional information such as family names or nicknames that were common use in their life

3. Rank and Military Decorations should be displayed as recognition of achievement

4. While it was agreed that service numbers are unique identifiers, consensus could not be reached on whether the service number should be listed on the physical Roll of Honour or accessible through a digital channel which provides all information on the listed service person.

Roll of Honour Option One:

Rank | surname | first name in full | middle initials | military awards

This option meets the outcome of public consultation and feedback captured in regards to naming conventions and display of the Roll of Honour.

Roll of Honour Option Two:

Service # | surname | initials | military awards

Option two inclusive of the service number is designed for research purposes as a unique identifier of an individual, however, this criteria for display has limitations for research, particularly for those who may have held multiple service numbers. As a list, the service number does not promote the humanness of the Roll of Honour.

See Appendix A for examples of Roll of Honour

War Memorial Design

Three design options for the War Memorial have been assessed by external experts from the Ministry of Culture and Heritage:

· Imelda Bargas – Senior Historian, manages the Flags, Symbols and Emblems Act and is responsible for memorials. Is a respected author and has published works on NZ’s war history.

· Ashley Mackenzie-White – National War Memorial Park Education Manager, manages the Pukeahu Education Centre and writes education programmes for national and foreign memorials in the park.

The three memorial options have been assessed through a design criteria matrix that has assessed the key elements described in the Memorial Design Brief.

The design brief has been a collaboration between Council Officer’s and Mr Guy Natusch and has been endorsed and signed off by the War Memorial Working Group.

Key Design Considerations include:

· Display of the Roll of Honour as provided by the Roll of Honour Working Group.

· Design for remembrance and contemplation through landscaping, structures and sculptural form. Incorporate progression through or around the space for the dual purpose of education and contemplation.

· Design to meet CPTED guidelines.

· Engagement with mana whenua to include te reo Māori and decorative motif where and when appropriate

Key Design Features:

· Perpetual flame to be visible and related to the Roll of Honour

· Contemplation – a place to pause, read and reflect

· Shelter – protection from the elements

· Education – linking the new Memorial with the MTG education programmes and passive learning through inclusion of historical text

· Flagpoles

· Plaques - empathy for the material in which the Roll of Honour is to be displayed with a clear rational for the material used.

Council are to select a preferred design option taking into consideration the feedback from Ministry of Culture and Heritage. This preferred design is then to be taken through a period of community consultation for consideration of elements of symbolism and emotion that promotes remembrance and evokes contemplation.

Three design options were assessed against the matrix with the following summaries:

Option One – Annex attached to the main Memorial Building

Summary of feedback is that this solution does not fully meet the design brief with limited opportunity for inclusion of emotion and symbolism, education programmes and 24/7 access and ownership.

Option Two – Building solution outside of the main Memorial Building

Summary of feedback is that this design is strong in shelter and access, however has limitations in the ability to fully view and appreciate the Roll of Honour. The building is dominant and overshadows the significance of the Roll of Honour. As a predominantly concrete structure, opportunity for ongoing landscaping and enhancement of the area is reduced. The design does not provide opportunity for the public to provide consultation in the detailed design phase.

Option Three – Landscape solution outside of the main Memorial Building

Summary of feedback is that this design is strong in opportunity to include the public into consultation of the detailed design with options provided for placement of the Roll of Honour and perpetual flame. The design is open allowing for passive remembrance and education to take place.

As a landscape solution this design can be expected to change and evolve as the landscape around it is continually enhanced over time.

See Appendix B for full assessment Summary

External Signage

Option One

External signage is to the extreme front left of the building (from Marine Parade) flanked by a flag pole. This option in balance with the Roll of Honour at the extreme right of the site, clearly demarcates the entirety of the site as a War Memorial without compromise to the egress routes for vehicles.

This option can also see the main Conference Centre brand moved from the current front to side of the new building.

Option Two

External signage is placed prominently in the centre of the main forecourt of the building, with gold lettering in a traditional and respectful font.

Conference Centre brand remains in current place on the front of the new building.

This solution poses safety risk to trucks and vehicles accessing the main entrance to the Memorial Building with tight space for manoeuvring safely in and out of the forecourt.

See Appendix C for images of external signage

1.5 Implications

Financial

Financial implications are in the areas of:

1. Accessing service personnel files for post-1921 information: While enlistment and deceased lists give a good indication of Napier people serving in post-1921 conflicts, for absolute clarification, service personnel records may need to be accessed which incurs a fee per file accessed.

2. Additional information displayed on the Roll of Honour: Increasing the information displayed on the Roll of Honour increases cost for production, however the detailed design phase of the memorial may identified cost effective ways for inscribing into the Roll of Honour plaques leveraging laser technology as an example.

Memorial design options assessed by Ministry of Culture and Heritage hold their own financial implications that are outlined further below.

Social & Policy

Policy is required for the entirety of the War Memorial Centre inclusive of:

1. Roll of Honour Eligibility Criteria

2. Memorial Maintenance

3. Ceremonial Protocols (e.g. flag flying and wreath laying)

Risk

An acknowledged risk exists in the correctness of information available in the public domain for researching the Roll of Honour. Risk is increased with the level of information displayed.

Placement of external signage in the middle of the forecourt is a safety risk for entrance and exit of trucks and multiple vehicles.

1.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a. The Roll of Honour display conventions:

i. Rank | Surname | First Name in Full | Middle Initials | Military Awards

ii. Service # | Surname | Initials | Military Awards

b. Memorial design:

i. Option One – Annex solution attached to the main Memorial Building

ii. Option Two – Building solution outside of the main Memorial Building

iii. Option Three – Landscape solution outside of the main Memorial Building

c. External signage:

i. Option One – Signage to the left of the site flanked by a flag pole

ii. Option Two – Signage in the middle of the forecourt

1.7 Development of Preferred Option

Roll of Honour – Option One

Rank | surname | first name in full | middle initials | military awards

The recommendation to display the Roll of Honour in the following manner acknowledges the achievement of rank and promotes active learning in wanting to know more about rank and military award abbreviations. This display formula follows a criteria of honour, where the display of the first name in full creates a deeper appreciation for the loss of human life and contribution of Napier and Hawke’s Bay to significant global conflicts.

War Memorial Design – Option Three (Landscape Solution)

· Perpetual flame to be visible and related to the Roll of Honour

Flame is at the heart of the design. Good consideration of flame in water as per original design.

Gives a sense of cleansing. Flame is stylised.

Flame is at the centre of the design however is at a distance from the Honour Rolls. Design concept shows consistency in use of materials across the Flame and Honour Rolls providing a good visual connection.

· Contemplation – a place to pause, read and reflect

As an open space the design provides multiple opportunities for additional placement of symbolic representation.

Allows for strong contemplation of the Flame without cluttering the Honour Rolls.

Potential options are inclusion of historical details, poetry, commissioned artworks and ongoing potential for landscaping to enhance contemplation.

Promotes passive remembrance.

· Shelter – protection from the elements

Design includes a pergola type structure that could be developed further through the detailed design however in its current form does not provide sufficient shelter.

· Education – linking the new Memorial with the MTG education programmes and passive learning through inclusion of historical text

Design provides very strong ability for formal and passive education to take place. As a landscape solution there is ability to link the current environment to the memorial e.g. Pōhutukawa trees and cultural significance to Māori.

External environment is easy to work with whole classes and “exposes” formal education e.g. not hidden in a room in a building.

There are multiple opportunities for children to be a part of the memorial with unconstrained limitations e.g. memorial rubbings.

Strong scope to promote passive education about Napier’s contribution to the sacrifice of war without focus on the gory.

· Flagpoles

No – the design does not include a flag solution with the recommendation the flagpole is placed close to the War Memorial Centre to connect the Roll of Honour and Flame with the building to reinforce the entirety of the site as a memorial.

· Plaques - empathy for the material in which the Roll of Honour is to be displayed with a clear rationale for the material used.

Honour Rolls are depicted in two positions giving choice for the detailed design phase – options are good for consultation.

Acknowledgement of Corten Steel panels matching the materials of the Flame, creating consistency and association between the both.

Potential for WWI Honour Roll to be traditional in stone and WWII Honour Roll in Corten Steel.

Honour Rolls are at a consistent level and are grounded.

The use of modern materials with back-lighting is being used increasingly across the country.

· General Comments

Has multiple opportunities for further incorporation of symbolism and emotion through the detailed design phase. Gives choice for placement of memorial elements and promotes remembrance and contemplation with Honour Rolls and Flame core to design.

Can be sympathetic to the original design

External Signage – Option two

Whilst there is a risk with the placement of the external signage prominently in the centre of the main forecourt of the building, with gold lettering in a traditional and respectful font this can be mitigated to some extent by bringing it as far forward as possible.

Conference Centre brand remains in current place on the front of the new building.

1.8 Attachments

a Roll of Honour ⇩

b Full Assessment Summary ⇩

c External Signage Images ⇩

Extraordinary Meeting of Council - 29 June 2018 - Open Agenda Item 6

6. Adoption of Long Term Plan 2018 - 2028

Type of Report:	Legal and Operational
Legal Reference:	Local Government Act 2002
Document ID:	461997
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Wayne Jack, Chief Executive

6.1 Purpose of Report

To adopt the Long Term Plan 2018 – 2028 in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002

Officer’s Recommendation

a. To adopt the Long Term Plan 2018 – 2028 in accordance with the Local Government Act 2002

b. That the submitters be advised of the Council’s responses in relation to their submission.

Mayor’s Recommendation

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

6.2 Background Summary

The consultation process was carried out for the Long Term Plan and Audit NZ has completed their audit of the document. The audit opinion will be tabled at the meeting and included in the adopted Long Term Plan 2018 - 2028.

Summary of Financial Changes Resulting from the Submission and Audit Processes

Following the hearing of submissions between 1st June and 6th June, Napier City Council made the following decisions and changes:

Requests for funding:

· Sport Hawke’s Bay: One off additional $20,000 (funded from Council Projects Fund) to support low participation areas through programme delivery

· Hawke’s Bay Community Fitness Centre Trust: $2m (unfunded) provision in the Long Term plan for 2021/22 for the development of the Fitness Centre to be consulted in the next Long Term Plan

· Napier City Business Inc: One off payment of $25,000 to assist the with the development and implementation of its strategy ensuring that it aligns with the City Vision principles

· Hawke’s Bay Knowledge Bank: One off grant of $23,000 (funded from Council Projects Fund) to assist with addition staff costs

· Toimata Foundation: $15,000 pa for three years (funded from Council Projects Fund) to assist with the Enviroschools project

· Hawke’s Bay Biodiversity Foundation: Seed funding grant of $50,000 (funded from Capital Reserve Fund) with an expectation that the foundation reports back in a year on progress on the strategy and projects

· Hawke’s Bay Hockey Artificial Surface Trust: $500,000 (funded from Capital Reserve Fund) as per past LTPs (funded from Capital Reserve Fund), an additional $500,000 (funded from Parklands Fund) and a loan guarantee of $500,000 for the delivery of an additional artificial hockey turf at Park Island

· Surf Life Saving NZ: One off payment of $20,000 (funded from Council Projects Fund) to support surf lifesaving staffing requirements for Hawke’s Bay

Consultation Topics

• De-chlorinated water stations: An initial two de-chlorinated water stations to be provided. The locations are still to be agreed and a report will be brought to Council. The provision of the stations and ongoing operating costs to be funded from rates. (note: corresponding decreases in rates have been identified in the changes below). Further stations will be determined based on usage

For the reason being that this gives the public a choice to access de-chlorinated water if desired, noting that the Director of Health has strongly urged chlorination of drinking water across the country.

• Napier Aquatic Centre Development: Council to proceed with the proposed 25m x 25m Pools and Play option in the new location and retain the allocated $41.3 million for this project in the LTP, subject to the following caveats.

o Post-move development and funding plan put in place for Onekawa

o Outdoor space built-in to the new complex

o Scope of Tender agreed by Council before it goes out

o The site investigations for the new location being completed

That the Officer’s Recommendation be accepted subject to the following Caveats:

· Post-move development and funding plan put in place for Onekawa

· Outdoor space built-in to the new complex

· Scope of Tender agreed by Council before it goes out

· The site investigations for the new location being completed

For the reasons that:

1. The location allows the flexibility to provide a premium facility that will provide for future generations and areas of increased growth within Napier

2. There can be continuity of swimming pool use while the new facility is under construction

3. The new site has a great public profile and accessibility

4. There will be a net increase in green space allowing for community access to free play

· Non-strategic leasehold land: Council to proceed with the preferred option to enable the sale of non-strategic leasehold land on a case by case basis, subject to alternative investments being identified. This policy change will reflect the following resolutions from the Strategy and Infrastructure Committee meeting on 30 January 2018:

o To allow freeholding of non-strategic land using as a guide the June

2016 Boffa Miskell report “Napier City Investment Portfolio: Urban Landscape Strategic review” on a case by case basis.

o That recommendations on the freeholding of all identified nonstrategic

land be considered by the Audit and Risk Committee in the first instance for recommendation to Council.

o That the sale of leasehold land be a Decision of Council.

o That a divestment and investment policy for the sale proceeds is

established and approved by Council resolution prior to the release of any leasehold land

For the reasons that:

1. The current policy provides no flexibility for freeholding specific, non-strategic assets that if sold, could assist in the redevelopment of industrial and/or commercial land in Napier and stimulate private investment.

2. Introducing some flexibility in the policy will allow Council to consider each leasehold property on its merits so that any decisions relating to such land is made with the best intentions for the future of Napier.

3. Freeholding specific properties will enable diversification of the Council’s investment portfolio which will reduce market exposure risks.

4. Using the Boffa Miskell report as guidance to determine the strategic nature of each property and performing an investigation into sale and reinvestment opportunities on a case by case basis, gives Council the ability to adapt to current market conditions to ensure maximum benefit to ratepayers.

· National Aquarium of New Zealand : Resolve that the following officer recommendations be adopted, including any changes and/ or additional recommendations arising from the Hearing and consideration of all submissions to the Long Term Plan 2018-28 (‘LTP’) Consultation Document:

(i) proceed with the preferred option, and allocate $10.2M in the LTP as Council’s contribution towards the $53M full expansion project, and

(ii) proceed to full business case (including the full geotechnical assessment) and design concept following Government endorsement of the indicative business case

For the reasons that:

1. It is now an important decision point: to close or reinvest – the facility exists so opportunity to maximise the asset

2. This is a unique tourist attraction

3. The expanded facility will be a leader in environmental education to both schools and the community and a showcase for research being undertaken in the land-to-sea environment

4. The expanded facility will support economic development and employment opportunities

5. We will continue to promote Napier as a kid’s capital

6. To allow Council to capitalise on partnerships and creative opportunities including with Weta Workshop and Air New Zealand

7. This is an opportunity for Council to focus on Māori and Pacific education, training and careers in the science and mathematics areas; with school and tertiary partners locally, nationally and internationally

8. Council recognises there are future decision gateways

· Ahuriri Masterplan : That Council resolve to proceed with the12 Ahuriri Masterplan projects and the $21.4 million for these projects is included the LTP.

For the reasons that:

1. The focus of this Council is prioritising environmental sustainability and ecological excellence

2. We support the rejuvenation of the Ahuriri Estuary

3. These projects will enhance the area and build on using our natural environment sustainably

4. It fulfils our obligations to our partners who also want to work in this space

Other Changes to the Long Term Plan 2018-28

· Animal Control: Revenue from dog registrations is adjusted from year two to recognise increased number of dog owners and expenditure adjusted to include a minor reduction in costs relating to the provision of the service

· Public Toilets: Capital expenditure in years six to year ten is reduced by $2.2m

· Anderson Park: Capital expenditure of $1.2m for the Anderson Park upgrade is removed from the capital plan ($112,000 in year 6 and $1.1m year 7) due to a duplication

· Housing Review: $200,000 to be allocated to undertake the housing review (funded from the housing ring fenced fund)

· Te Awa Development: $500,000 added, $250,000 in 2018/19 and 2019/20, for investigation/design requirements for the Te Awa development (funded from Capital Reserve Fund)

· Dredging Disposal Consent: $25,000 pa for years one and two (allocated from existing Reserves activity budgets funded from rates) for consents for dredging disposal at Westshore.

· Aquarium Business Case: Funding of $300,000 in 2018/19 for the business case to be moved from rates to the Capital Reserve Fund

· Council Projects Fund: One year increase of $100,000 in 2018/19 for items funded from the Council Projects Fund (sourced from unspent Council Projects Fund budget from 2017/18)

6.3 Issues

Not applicable

6.4 Significance and Consultation

The purpose of the Consultation document as required under the Local Government Act Section 93B, was to provide an effective basis for the public participation in local authority decision-making processes relating to the content of the long term plan.

Council received 812 submissions, an increase of 15% over the last Long Term Plan. There were a total of 20 consultation activities.

The content of the consultation document Section 93C for the adoption of the long-term plan was such that it could achieve the purpose set out in section 93B. Council had regards to the Significance and Engagement Policy, and the importance of other matters in its community. Each issue provided options, the proposal and the consequences on rates, debt and level of service to address those matters.

6.5 Implications

Financial

All financial impacts of the Long Term Plan have been included within the Long Term Plan document including impacts on rates, debt and levels of service. Council originally consulted on a rates increase of 5.6% for 2018-19, however through funding changes have bought this down to 5.2% in year 1.

Social & Policy

n/a

Risk

The following Long Term Plan 2018-28 key risks have been identified:

1. Central Government have signalled changes to the structure of 3 Waters in New Zealand. These are currently core services of Council. This may impact on staffing, costs and services currently provided by Local Government

2. There is a significant capital programme across Hawkes Bay, which may impact on the Councils ability to deliver the Plan

6.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a. Adopt the Long Term Plan 2018-28 and undertake plan

b. Adopt the Long Term Plan 2018-28 and if any changes are required to the Long Term Plan at any stage, they can be the subject of consultation and possible amendment of the Long Term Plan pursuant to s 93D of the Local Government Act 2002

c. Not adopt the Long Term Plan 2018-28 (which would mean that rates could not be struck), projects in the Long Term Plan could not be commenced, and the council would be in breach of the statutory deadline for the adoption of a Long Term Plan)

6.7 Development of Preferred Option

Option A – Adopt the Long Term Plan 2018-28 and undertake plan

6.8 Attachments

a LTP 2018-28 (Under Separate Cover) ⇨

[1] ‘First World War Centenary Series – Volume 1: New Zealand’s First World War Heritage,’ Imelda Bargas and Tim Shoebridge, Exisle Publishing Auckland, 2015, page 236.

Meeting Date:	Friday 29 June 2018
Time:	3.00pm
Venue:	Council Chamber Hawke's Bay Regional Council 159 Dalton Street Napier

Council Members	Mayor Dalton (In the Chair), Councillors Boag, Brosnan, Dallimore, Hague, Jeffery, McGrath, Price, Tapine, Taylor, White, Wise and Wright
Officer Responsible	Chief Executive
Administrator	Governance Team
	Next Council Meeting Tuesday 7 August 2018

Type of Report:	Legal
Legal Reference:	Local Government Act 2002
Document ID:	461999
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Adele Henderson, Director Corporate Services