Agenda of Māori Consultative Committee

In response to questions from councillors it was advised that:

· The membership of the focus group has not yet been finalised and the request to include at least one councillor would be actioned

· The feedback provided by councillors on recommended changes to the current layout would be considered as part of the overall review, including matters such as the cycling lane ‘pinch point’ and signage for raised courtesy crossings

· While the Herschell Street leased parking may appear to be underused it belongs to the Masonic Hotel whose clientele use the parking in the evenings and at night

1.8 Attachments

Nil

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

2. District Plan Review - Project Launch

Type of Report:	Procedural
Legal Reference:	Resource Management Act 1991
Document ID:	603455
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Dean Moriarity, Team Leader Policy Planning

2.1 Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is to follow up on the seminar held with Council on 23 July 2018 regarding initiating a review of the District Plan and for Council to approve ‘in principle’ both the overall strategic direction for the review and the indicative overall process the review of the District Plan will follow.

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Brosnan / Jeffery

The Strategy and Infrastructure Committee:

a. Resolve to formally initiate the review of the current District Plan.

b. Endorse ‘in principle’ both the overall strategic direction for the review and the indicative overall process the review of the District Plan will follow.

Carried

2.2 Background Summary

The current District Plan was made operative in 2011 and is therefore due to be fully reviewed before 2021. Preliminary work has begun on a scoping project to develop an outcomes focussed framework to undertake the review. This scoping project seeks to understand the extent of the review required to achieve the desired outcomes, and ultimately the resourcing required to deliver the project for a notification date of 2020.

Officers presented a seminar on 23 July which showed a recommended strategic direction for the review of the District Plan consisting of ‘Outcomes’, ‘Key Principles’, and ‘Strategic Objectives’ which cascade down from each other to create an overall recommended strategic direction for the review of the District Plan. A copy of these have been circulated to all Councillors following the seminar and are attached as Appendix A.

The intention is that the review of the specific provisions of the District Plan (Issues, Objectives, Policies and ultimately Rules) would be assessed against this overall strategic direction to ensure the District Plan retains an internal consistency that would ultimately make administration of the District Plan easily understandable, logical and traceable.

There does of course need to be due consideration also given in the review to the legislative requirements set by the Resource Management Act. However, confirming outcomes, key principles and objectives early in the review will assist greatly in defining the scope of the project and to enable assessment against the overall strategic direction in the first instance rather than against undefined outcomes.

The recommended approach has already been assessed against the draft templates for all District Plans recently released by the central government and is considered to be consistent with that template.

2.3 Issues

The District Plan review is a major project requiring extensive engagement and consultation with the whole of the community. There will however be a series of opportunities for any person, organisation and/or the Councillors to reassess the ‘in principle strategic direction’ (and indeed any other proposed plan provision) to ensure it remains fit for purpose during an extended iterative process and continues to deliver clear outcomes expected and desired by the community of Napier.

The ‘in principle’ strategic direction is therefore potentially subject to ongoing refinement. However, in order to progress the District Plan review it is desirable that officers have some form of clear starting point for initiating the review so there is a clear focus, hence the purpose of this report.

2.4 Significance and Engagement

The District Plan potentially impacts every person, business and property owner in Napier. A full review of the District Plan typically only occurs once every 10-15 years and provides a unique opportunity for the community to input their views into its development. Given the magnitude of the District Plan review a separate engagement/consultation plan will be developed in the coming months and referred through to Council prior to its finalisation.

Separately attached to this report however, is a high level process diagram presented at the Council seminar on 23 July which shows ‘in principle’ the overall process the review of the District Plan will follow. It is important to note that this is simply a general ‘road map’ for the overall review of the District Plan and is itself subject to ongoing refinement during the review.

Additionally individual workstreams within the District Plan review may have their own bespoke engagement/consultation processes tailored for the workstream to recognise the significance of any change proposed in the planning framework impacting on private properties.

2.5 Implications

Financial

There is currently budget set aside for the District Plan review. Notwithstanding that, the review is still at the scoping stage and so the full resourcing required to deliver it within the intended timeframes may be subject to change over time. Should additional funding be required separate application would be made to Council through the normal budgeting processes.

Social & Policy

The review is a rare opportunity for Council to ensure that the District Plan fully aligns with all of its current strategic priorities, plans and policies. Officers have identified a full list of these that may impact on the District Plan and will endeavour to align the regulatory provisions of the District Plan with the adopted priorities, plans and policies.

Risk

The risk with this project is that should Council decide not to adopt an overall framework for a strategic direction for officers to follow in reviewing the District Plan, the scope, complexity, time and resourcing required to deliver the project may expand significantly and potentially also compromise the quality of the final product.

2.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a. Adopt ‘in principle’ both the overall strategic direction for the review and the indicative overall process the review of the District Plan will follow albeit recognising that these may be subject to refinement as the project progresses.

b. Not to adopt ‘in principle’ both the overall strategic direction for the review and the indicative overall process the review of the District Plan will follow.

2.7 Development of Preferred Option

The preferred option is for Council to adopt ‘in principle’ both the overall strategic direction for the review and the indicative overall process the review of the District Plan will follow. This will greatly assist officers in refining the scope of the review, determining the key issues and opportunities of importance, and producing a product that has internal consistency that aligns with Council’s key strategies, and policies.

In response to questions from councillors it was clarified that:

· The communications and engagement strategy for the District Plan will be brought to Council, including around the “Our House” concept

· While the District Plan contains rules, it is also a strategic document which provides an overall guideline as to how the components of Napier interact with one another, and as such it has been brought to the Strategy and Infrastructure Committee at this stage in the project and not the Regulatory Committee

2.8 Attachments

a District Plan Review- Strategic Direction

b District Plan Review - Indicative Process

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

District Plan Review – Outcomes, Key Principles and Strategic Objectives

As discussed at the Council seminar please find attached a summary document of the following:

· Key Outcomes

· Key Principles

· Strategic Objectives

Collectively these three components will form the basis of the strategic vision for the District Plan Review. As such they will be key reference points for any future drafting of provisions throughout all of its zones. In essence any plan provisions should be seeking to deliver these key outcomes/principles/objectives albeit within the legislative framework permitted by the Resource Management Act.

It is important for Council to agree in principle with the strategic direction so that we can begin in earnest reviewing the District Plan with an end goal in mind; although of course there will be a number of opportunities for any person/organisation etc to comment and submit on any provision in the District Plan. As such the outcomes/principles/objectives may be subject to refinement/change over the evolution of the District Plan Review.

Outcomes

Napier – Our Home

Outcome			Our Home
Greenfield growth in the hills			Catering for the extra kids + inlaws
Premier Regional Park in Ahuriri Estuary			A kickass garden for the kids to play in
City living supporting a vibrant CBD			Open plan living
Leveraging our heritage			Keeping the character of the villa even through it’s a bit impractical
Great urban areas			Our house is part of a great neighbourhood
Regional approach to industry			Sharing the drive with the neighbours

Principles

Strategic Objectives

Smart Growth

1. Infrastructure planning is aligned with land use planning to facilitate efficient and affordable development in identified growth areas

2. Vibrant and sustainable Napier CBD with a mix of complementary activities and public spaces that encourages inner city / fringe city living

3. Economic activity and innovation is supported and enabled in appropriate locations

4. Significant infrastructure which supports economic growth, including the Port, Airport, Expressway and railway, is enabled and protected

5. Housing supply and choice meets demand and reflects the demographics of Napier’s community

6. Rural production in the Heretaunga Plains is enabled and protected

7. Regulation is clear and appropriate to achieve the strategic objectives

Quality design

1. Quality, high amenity and healthy environments to live, work and play

2. Napier’s transport network optimises connectivity, public health and safety, and encourages active and public transport modes

3. Infrastructure is integrated into urban form and design

Environmental excellence

1. Sustainable design is integrated into the design of new developments

2. Ecological assets and urban waterways are maintained and enhanced

3. Napier’s coastal environment is recognised and protected from inappropriate use and development

4. Plant selection recognises Napier’s environmental and cultural context

Resilient Napier

1. Risk to people and property from natural hazards is avoided or mitigated

2. Vulnerability of the community to hazards is reduced

3. Natural systems are maintained and restored

4. Infrastructure design considers long term risk of natural hazards and climate change

Our People, Our Stories

1. Napier’s distinctive character, culture, heritage, and landscapes are recognised, celebrated and enhanced

2. The protection, management and conservation of Napier’s Art Deco heritage is achieved

3. The relationship of Mana Whenua with their cultural heritage and with the natural environment is recognised and respected

4. Social and community facilities support the wellbeing of all members of our growing community

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

Reports from Regulatory Committee held 21 August 2018

1. Annual Dog Control Report 2017/18

Type of Report:	Legal
Legal Reference:	Dog Control Act 1996
Document ID:	559263
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Hayleigh Brereton, Manager Regulatory Solutions

1.1 Purpose of Report

To present the territorial authority report on dog control policies and practices for the dog control registration year 1 July 2017 – 30 June 2018, for adoption by Council as required under Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996, prior to being submitted to the Secretary for Local Government and being made publically available.

Committee's recommendation

Councillors White / Tapine

The Regulatory Committee:

a. Adopt the Napier City Council Annual Dog Control Report 2017/18.

i. That the report be submitted to the Secretary for Local government and published in accordance with the Dog Control Act 1996.

Carried

1.2 Background Summary

Section 10A of the Dog Control Act 1996 requires territorial authorities to report on their dog control policy and activities annually.

The law requires that:

· the report be adopted by Council and made publically available each year (subsection 1);

· notice of adoption of the report be published in a daily paper or other newspaper that has an equivalent circulation within the district, or by any other means the territorial authority thinks is desirable (subsection 3); and

· within one month of adoption, a copy of the report must also be submitted to the Secretary for Local Government (subsection 4).

1.3 Issues

The Napier City Council Annual Dog Control report 2017/18 is shown in attachment A. In Summary:

· Napier City Council has 7,640 registered dogs

· 3,090 complaints were received

· A total of 803 dogs were impounded

· 46 dogs were rehomed

1.4 Significance and Engagement

Council officers have prepared the attached report in accordance with the Section 10A reporting requirements provided by the Department of Internal Affairs. No consultation is required for this report as it is a legislative requirement.

1.5 Implications

Financial

N/A

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

Failure to adopt the report and make it available to the public would put Napier City Council in breach of the Dog Control Act 1996.

1.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a. Adopt the report, submit it to the Secretary for Local Government, and publish it so that the information is publicly available to meet legislative requirements under the Dog Control Act 1996.

b. Not adopt the report.

1.7 Development of Preferred Option

N/A

Some context was provided to the number of infringements recorded – in an effort to enforce compliance with dog registrations a large number of infringements were issued; of these, 485 were cancelled following payment within the 14 day grace period or as the dog was not sighted.

The number of dogs recorded as being euthanised shows an increase this year as a number of animals have been surrendered to Council specifically for the purpose of euthanisation, mostly by other organisations. When the animals in this category are removed, the numbers are approximately the same as last year.

It was noted that the Council’s service request system could identify whether particular areas experienced higher levels of challenges regarding animal control call outs.

1.8 Attachments

a Annual Dog Control Report 2017/18

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

Reports from Finance Committee held 4 September 2018

1. Joint Waste Management and Minimisation Plan

Type of Report:	Operational and Procedural
Legal Reference:	Waste Minimisation Act 2008
Document ID:	619564
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Rhett van Veldhuizen, Waste Minimisation Lead

1.1 Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is to obtain a decision from the Council on the adoption of the Joint Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (Plan) 2018-2024.

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Brosnan / Tapine

The Finance Committee:

a. Adopt the Joint Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2018-24 in accordance with section 43 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 without further amendment which revokes the previous Joint Waste Management and Minimisation Plan 2012-2018.

b. Delegate to the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee the authority to implement updates and changes that may be required due to wider environmental factors, while keeping within the intent of the strategy.

c. Acknowledge the recommendation from the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee that additional resource is urgently required to implement the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan.

Carried

1.2 Background Summary

The Council is required to give effect to the purpose of local government as prescribed by Section 10 of the Local Government Act (LGA) 2002. That purpose is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure, local public services, and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost–effective for households and businesses. Good quality means infrastructure, services and performance that are efficient and effective and appropriate to present and anticipated future circumstances.

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

The Act requires territorial authorities (TA’s) to conduct a waste assessment and review their Plan every six years.

The Act enables Councils to use various tools to influence, promote and implement measures to manage and minimise waste. The Plan is intended to be the guiding document for councils to promote and achieve effective and efficient waste management and minimisation within their districts.

A Plan should contain a summary of objectives, policies and targets for waste management and minimisation. The Plan should clearly communicate how the Councils will deliver on these objectives.

A Plan must have regard to the waste hierarchy (a list of the six most effective ways to control waste in order of their environmental acceptability), the New Zealand Waste Strategy, and the joint council’s most recent Waste Assessment (WA).

Plans must be reviewed at least every six years. Not keeping to the statutory timeframe for a Plan review may result in the council’s waste levy funding payments being withheld under section 33 of the Act. The current Joint Plan was required to be reviewed by 30 June 2018. The Ministry for the Environment have been informed of our delay as a result of the high number of submissions received from the consultation process and were understanding, however there are financial penalties (explained in paragraph 6.9) if the Plan is not adopted before 30 September 2018. Hastings District Council received $300,777.00 broken into four quarterly payments last financial year and if the plan is not adopted prior to the next quarterly payment the Act requires the Minister to withhold payment, which has been done in other areas in the past.

The Plan is scheduled to be adopted by Hastings District Council on 30 August 2018.

The New Zealand recycling market is currently facing challenges created by China’s policy decision to stop importing plastic and paper/cardboard for recycling as they have sufficient supply within the Chinese market to meet their demands. Local Hawke’s Bay contractors are currently experiencing difficulties in selling plastics collected for recycling. Officers are in discussions with these businesses to explore all possible options. The Hawke’s Bay is fortunate to have a local paper/cardboard recycling company that has capacity to continue taking our material for recycling.

Council services, initiatives and education need to be developed and implemented to ensure our local recycling industry receive valuable products for recycling.

1.3 Issues

The following key points are the ‘collective’ outcome after consideration of the written, verbal and late submissions received.

· Work collaboratively with the waste collection industry to set up an incentive scheme/s that will strongly encourage people to separate out their green waste to ensure it is composted either at home or commercially.

· Roll out a major public engagement and education programme explaining the best ways to deal with rubbish, recycling and waste minimisation opportunities.

· Consider a local waste levy to help pay for initiatives identified in the action plan.

· Set up a contestable fund to provide seed support monies for waste reducing initiatives.

· Engage closely with iwi to embed the principles of Kaitiakitanga (guardianship) throughout the Joint Plan.

· Work with commercial, industrial and retail businesses to encourage recycling.

· Investigate methods for better dealing with problem products.

· Continue to lobby central government on the need for priority products and product stewardship schemes.

· Improve data collection and provide results to the public.

· Bylaw reviews to ensure alignment with the Joint Plan.

· Consider forming one combined Hastings and Napier waste/waste minimisation team.

· Provide a small (80L) general rubbish bin to every home in current council collection areas, with Hastings semi-rural (close to town), also considered for the service. Initially weekly rubbish collection with a possible move to fortnightly as people become more skilled at waste minimisation.

· Provide recycling containers to ensure plastics, paper and glass are kept as clean as possible to enable them to be recycled; and moving Napier from a fortnightly to weekly recycling collection.

1.4 Significance and Engagement

In conjunction with Hastings District Council, Napier City Council implemented an extensive campaign to inform the Hawke’s Bay community of the opportunity to review the draft Joint Plan and to submit during the consultation via an online or written submission. The consultation was undertaken between 19 February and 23 March 2018.

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

Four days of hearings were held the week of 18 June 2018. Submissions received were heard, or read and considered before alterations were made based on these submissions. All changes recommended at the conclusion of these hearings have been incorporated into the final version of the Joint Plan (Attachment A).

The Medical Officer of Health was specifically consulted with as part of the consultation process as required by Section 51 of the Act. The Medical Officer of Health submission (#10083) will be included in the documentation that forms the final Joint Plan, including the waste assessment documents.

1.5 Implications

Financial

See Risk below.

Social & Policy

The Joint Plan consultation process set about obtaining community views and preferences and these were considered at the hearings meeting in June prior to the Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee (the Committee) agreeing on recommended changes to the draft Joint Plan. More information on the Committee and the time line of work to date is shown at Attachment B.

Officers have made the changes to the Joint Plan as instructed by the Committee.

The Committee is satisfied that the Joint Plan will provide a clear direction for waste minimisation and recommends both constituent Councils adopt the Joint Plan with no changes.

Significant changes arising from this Joint Plan adoption will need to be incorporated into each Council’s LTP or Annual Plan depending on timeframes.

Risk

There is an option for Council to refer the Joint Plan 2018 – 2024 back to the Committee for further work, with clear recommendations.

However, the Council should be aware of a territorial authorities’ requirements to spend the levy to promote or achieve waste minimisation. Plans prepared by each territorial authority set out how the levy will be used.

Section 33 of the Act states the secretary must retain levy money instead of paying territorial authority in certain situations. One situation being at the time the payment is to be made, the territorial authority has not adopted a waste management and minimisation plan; or reviewed its waste management and minimisation plan under section 50, if a review was required before the time for payment.

This decision would be vulnerable to legal challenge should the Council depart from the recommendation from the Committee, as Council was not involved in the hearings process.

1.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a. Adopt the Joint Plan based on the recommendation from the Committee following the consideration of all submissions at the hearings meeting in June 2018. This option includes revoking the previous Joint Plan 2012 – 2018.

b. Not adopt the new Joint Plan and send it back to the Committee.

Only two options are available to the Council as Council was not involved in the consultation and hearings process and are unable to set policy outside of this process.

The long‐term plan (LTP), Annual Plans and the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan are to be aligned. The LGA 2002 requires that every LTP contain a summary of the council’s Waste Management and Minimisation Plan. The LTP contains details of funding for Council provided waste services and project, which Council is committed to provide to the community.

1.7 Development of Preferred Option

The preferred option for the Council is Option 1, to adopt the Joint Plan with no amendments as the Joint Plan has been the subject of a robust and thorough public consultation process across both communities as recommended by the Committee.

The Joint Waste Assessment and subsequent Joint Plan has been completed in accordance with the WMA 2008 and the Ministry for the Environment Plan guidance document.

The Joint Plan was peer reviewed by an independent consultant prior to consultation to ensure all requirements were met.

The public consultation was undertaken in line with sections 82 and 83 of the LGA 2002.

An annual report will be provided to inform Council on implementation progress and any adaptations.

The Chair of the Joint Waste Committee, Tania Kerr, was invited to speak to the Joint Waste Management and Minimisation Plan (Plan) 2018-2024; she noted that input from the community has guided the committee. Feedback from Hastings District Council (HDC) was that the Plan was a little short on the ‘how’ and one Councillor is still uncomfortable with one of the decisions; however, this Plan is about where we wish to go, how we can protect the environment, how we can separate our green waste from mixed waste and how we can ensure that the recycling that we do collect remains safe and clean to be turned into valuable products. Consideration has also been given to small businesses operating in this space.

Councillor Brosnan advised that every aspect of waste has been discussed with 8000 submissions having been received. It was noted that there is still a lot of work to do including final costings, by-laws to be developed and aligned with HDC, recycling receptacles to be chosen, tender scopes to be agreed etc. As the final costings have not yet been decided Council are not voting at this time to adopt any costs, this will come back to Council through the Annual Plan.

In response to questions from Councillors the following points were clarified:

· This is a 2020 plan for implementation and will go through two more Annual Plans before costs are set; any changes will go through Council.

· One of the recommendation points allows for flexibility around any changes in this space; any significant changes will come back to Council.

· The average household waste is 80L and the committee decided that council should provide a service that meets the current average, hence the proposed 80L bins. Three recycling bins will also be provided.

· The provision of the receptacle does not reduce waste; however, waste will be reduced through education to promote the decrease of waste per household and the implementation of by-laws prohibiting green waste and recycling being placed in those bins. Steps will be taken to drive change.

· There is a two year lead in time which will be used to educate the community regarding waste.

· Cameras are located within the collection trucks allowing the contents of bins to be viewed. If anything is there that shouldn’t be, a warning will be issued to the household.

· There is a serious concern that there will not be a robust tendering process for bag collection in future, due to service providers’ safety concerns.

· It was accepted that wheelie bins being left out too long affects the streetscape, but this is no different to our recycling receptacles at present.

· The percentage of general waste in rubbish bags currently is 38%. There is a significant amount of other waste including kitchen waste, green waste, plastic, glass etc. that can be redirected under this Plan.

1.8 Attachments

a Waste Management and Minimisation Plan

b Supporting Information

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

Supporting information for the

Waste Management and Minimisation Plan Report,

30 August 2018

Waste Management and Minimisation Plans (WMMP)

Section 43 of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008 (Act) states that a WMMP must provide:

(a) objectives and policies for achieving effective and efficient waste management and minimisation within the territorial authority’s district

(b) methods for achieving effective and efficient waste management and minimisation within the territorial authority’s district, including -

(i) collection, recovery, recycling, treatment, and disposal services for the district to meet its current and future waste management and minimisation needs (whether provided by the territorial authority or otherwise); and

(ii) any waste management and minimisation facilities provided, or to be provided, by the territorial authority; and

(iii) any waste management and minimisation activities, including any educational or public awareness activities, provided, or to be provided, by the territorial authority.

(d) if the territorial authority wishes to make grants or advances of money in accordance with section 47, the framework for doing so.

1.2 Section 33 of the Act which states:

Secretary must retain levy money instead of paying territorial authority in certain situations

(1) Despite section 31, the Secretary must retain levy money payable to a territorial authority if,—

(a) at the time the payment is to be made, the territorial authority has not—

(i) adopted a waste management and minimisation plan; or

(ii) reviewed its waste management and minimisation plan under section 50, if a review was required before the time for payment; or

(b) the Minister has directed the Secretary to retain the payment under section 37.

(2) The Secretary must spend any money retained under subsection (1) in accordance with section 30(c).

Waste Assessment

The waste assessment plays a key role in determining the content of a WMMP. TAs are required to conduct this assessment before reviewing their WMMP and to have regard to it in the preparation of the plan.

The purpose of the waste assessment is to provide the necessary background information on waste and diverted materials that will enable a territorial authority to determine a logical set of priorities and activities.

The waste assessment establishes the planning foundations for the WMMP by describing the waste situation, setting the vision, goals objectives and targets for the district, and developing options for meeting future demand. Most of the information presented in a waste assessment will be summarised in the final WMMP.

The waste assessment provides information about the waste situation in the TA, having regard to the information considerations below. The information should include data about:

• current and future projected waste quantities

• composition

• source and destination of waste

• diverted materials.

Joint Council Waste Futures Joint Project Steering Committee

By agreement of the local authority members, the Joint Council Waste Futures Joint Project Steering Committee was established under clause 30A of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002. The committee comprises of three councillors from each Council.

The purpose of the joint committee is to:

a) Approve the content of the draft Joint WMMP for public consultation.

b) Hear submissions and make recommendations to the constituent Councils on the draft Joint WMMP.

c) Be responsible for overseeing, supporting, monitoring and reporting progress toward achieving the intent of Joint WMMP. As well as representing the interests of participatory Councils in the WMMP.

d) Review the Joint WMMP at least every six years to meet the requirements of the Act.

The joint committee will have responsibility and authority to:

a) Accept and hear submissions on the Joint WMMP, and report back to the individual councils on an as required basis.

b) Make recommendations to each participant council on the Joint WMMP.

c) Monitor performance and progress to give effect to the purpose of the Joint WMMP and to make recommendations to the constituent councils accordingly.

Joint WMMP timeline to date

The Council’s draft Joint WMMP was adopted on 20 December 2017. A comprehensive community consultation was carried out in early 2018. A total of 6,165 submissions were received.

All submissions were considered during the four days of hearings as well as an officer’s report covering the statistical information regarding the submissions. The hearings were held from Monday 18 to Thursday 21 June 2018. Fifty one (51) submitters spoke to their submissions.

All WMMPs are subject to the requirements of the Local Government Act’s (LGA) special consultative procedure, a requirement also set out in the WMA Part 4, section 44 and section 50(3) which outlines consultation requirements for preparing new plans.

At the Committee meeting dated 18 June 2018 (concluding 21 June) the Committee were satisfied that all the relevant provisions contained within the Local Government and WMA regarding the preparation of the Joint WMMP were met.

The final step in the WMMP process is adoption of the new Joint WMMP by both the Hastings District Council and Napier City Council.

Significant changes arising from the Joint WMMP review will need to be incorporated into each Council’s LTP(s) or Annual Plan depending on timeframes.

The public consultation methodology and program was co-developed by Hastings District and Napier City Council marketing and communication teams.

Key Dates

Date(s)	Activity
October 2016	Work began on collating the Joint Waste Assessment
05 July, 02 August, 14 September and 12 October 2017.	Joint Council Waste Futures Project Steering Committee meetings and workshops to draft the Joint WMMP
22 November 2017	Waste Futures Committee – recommend adoption of draft Joint WMMP
14 December 2017	HDC Council Meeting to adopt draft Joint WMMP for consultation
20 December 2017	NCC Council Meeting to adopt draft Joint WMMP for consultation
19 February to 23 March 2018	Public Consultation
22 February 2018	Joint Committee meeting with waste operators
26 March to 25 May 2018	Compilation of Submissions
18 to 21 June 2018	Hearings of Submissions
25 July 2018	Waste Futures Committee recommend adoption of final Joint WMMP
30 August 2018	HDC meeting to adopt Joint WMMP
18 September 2018	NCC meeting to adopt Joint WMMP

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

4. 2018 NRB Survey

Type of Report:	Information
Legal Reference:	N/A
Document ID:	619834
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Steve Gregory, Transformation Lead

4.1 Purpose of Report

To advise Council on the results of the NRB survey carried out in 2018.

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Wright / Boag

The Community Services Committee:

a. Resolve that the 2018 NRB Survey results be received.

Carried

4.2 Background Summary

As part of its ongoing commitment to actively seek the opinions and involvement of citizens, Napier City Council commissions the National Research Bureau Ltd to conduct a wide ranging survey of its citizens. This is the 26^th year Council has commissioned this survey. The results of the survey are used in the Council’s planning processes and are also included in the annual report performance results for the various significant activities.

The NRB Communitrak Survey is a scientifically prepared service based on a random probability sample. The 2018 survey is based on a sample of 450 interviews as previous years and includes, for the first time this year, 40 face-to-face interviews targeting younger audiences. The sample gives a margin of error of ±5%. Weightings are then applied to the data to reflect the actual male/female/age/ethnic proportions in these areas. The survey results give comparisons with New Zealand as a whole and a Peer Group Average (similarly constituted Local Authorities). The results are analysed on the basis of the four wards; Ahuriri, Onekawa-Tamatea, Nelson Park and Taradale, in line with the electoral boundaries.

1.3 Overall Results

Overall satisfaction levels with various services and facilities are comparable with those in the 2017 survey though there are several areas that are unfavourable compared to the 2017 results. Public Gardens, Street Beds and Trees, Parks and Reserves and Refuse Collection remain the top scoring activities and the lower scoring activities are Water Supply, Swimming Pools, and MTG Hawke's Bay. As in past years Napier continues to score well in comparison to the New Zealand average and the peer group comparison.

The satisfaction levels have increased for Civil Defence Organisation (up 8%), and Swimming Pools (up 5%).

Decreases in satisfaction were with the Library Service (down 24%), Water Supply (down 22%), Town Planning (down 10%), Parking in the CBD of Napier City (down 12%), Public Toilets (down 7%), Roads (down 5%) and Refuse Collection (down 5%).

The significant decrease in the Library Service is because due to potential risks of a large earthquake, the Napier City Library closed in December 2017 and moved to a temporary location, MTG Hawke’s Bay, in February 2018. The main reason residents are not very satisfied with the Library Service are:

· Temporary closure / unsafe / moved to Museum / preferred old building,

· Too small / not enough space / room,

· New location unsatisfactory,

· Poor parking.

The decrease in water supply satisfaction is most likely a combination of chlorination and water supply shortages in the reservoirs. Chlorination commenced on 24 May 2017 due to the results of five water supply bacteriological compliance transgressions that occurred in the network early last year.

The decrease in satisfaction for parking in the CBD of Napier City results from residents view that there is a lack of parking, parking is too expensive and that there needs to be more free parking provided.

A summary of the results with comparisons to the previous years are included below. These graphs give a good indication of trends which are important elements to the Council’s planning and budgeting process.

Other Specific Results

Council Policy and Direction

50% of residents have in mind a recent Council action, decision or management they approve of (down from 55% in 2017).

The main actions/decisions/management mentioned are:

· Marine Parade development / upgrade, mentioned by 16% of all residents,

· Appearance / clean and tidy / beautification / gardens, 5%

· Parks / reserves / playgrounds / sportsfields, 4%

· Roading / traffic improvements / footpaths, 4%

· Provision of services / facilities / improvements, 4%.

57% of Napier City residents have in mind a recent Council action, decision or management they disapprove of (47% in 2017).

The main actions/decisions/management mentioned are:

· Water issues / chlorination / the dam, mentioned by 17% of all residents

· War Memorial, 11%

· Swimming pool issue, 6%

· Roading / roadworks / road safety / footpaths / traffic, 3%

· More facilities needed / issues with public facilities, 3%

Rates Issues

Overall, 84% of residents are satisfied with the way rates are spent on the services and facilities provided by Council, with 86% of ratepayers being satisfied. These readings are similar to the 2017 results.

The percentage not very satisfied (10%) compares favourably with both the Peer Group and National Averages and is on par with the 2017 reading.

Main Sources of Information about Council

The main source of information is Newspapers (45%), Council Website (19%), Newsletters (9%) and Council’s Facebook page (10%). Newspapers are down from 49% in 2017 though the big mover is Council’s Facebook page up from 4% in 2017

Of those who say Newspapers, HB Today ranked 85%, The Courier 46% and Napier Mail 22%. Compared to 2017 the movement from HB Today (up 8%), The Courier (down 25%) and Napier Mail (down 52%).

Consultation

When asked how much consultation they would like the Mayor and Councillors to have with its citizens, 57% opted for Council consulting with people on major issues only (62% in 2017), otherwise getting on with the job they are elected to do. This percent is the same as the Peer Group and National Averages.

21% of Napier residents want Councillors to get on with the job, but keep the public informed, whilst 21% want consultation on most issues (17% in 2017).

Local Issues

74% of residents said there is a significant project or issue they would like Council to give priority to in the next ten years (62% in 2017). The five most mentioned major concerns about the community as a whole are:

· Water supply, 28%

· Swimming pools, 16%

· Waste management / recycling services, 7%

· Housing / land for housing, 5%

· Infrastructure / services / facilities needed / need attention, 5%

4.3 Significance and Engagement

This is information only.

It was noted that Council support has plummeted to 53% this year. The 10% drop in satisfaction regarding City Planning was surprising considering what has been achieved in this area. A copy of the survey will be made available to Councillors to view at Council.

4.4 Attachments

a 2018 NRB Survey Results

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

5. Investment Property Portfolio Policy

Type of Report:	Operational and Procedural
Legal Reference:	Local Government Act 2002
Document ID:	622351
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Bryan Faulknor, Manager Property

5.1 Purpose of Report

To seek Council’s approval of a Policy relating to the Investment Property Portfolio (Leasehold Land).

The resolution of Council of 1 June 2018 (as outlined below) required 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.

The attached policy has been developed in response to the resolution. It outlines the terms and conditions on which Council may sell non-strategic land included in the portfolio. The policy also provides guidance relating to the investment of the proceeds of sale.

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Wise / Hague

The Finance Committee:

a) Approve the Investment Property Portfolio Policy.

Carried

5.2 Background Summary

After public consultation as part of Council’s Long Term Plan 2018-2028, Council resolved on 1 June 2018 and confirmed on 29 June 2018:

That the resolutions from the Strategy and Infrastructure Committee meeting on 30 January 2018 be updated to reflect the following:

a. 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.

b. That recommendations on the freeholding of all identified non-strategic land be considered by the Audit and Risk Committee in the first instance for recommendation to Council.

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

d. 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.

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 whilst also providing the ability for Council to secure better community outcomes and value from the area through project design, urban design, upzoning the land to encourage better development potential or a combination of these, whilst also ensuring maximum benefit to ratepayers.

5.3 Issues

The overriding principle of the policy is that Council’s ability to sell non-strategic land represents a discretion to be executed by Council on a case by case basis. Nothing in the Policy represents a right for any person to insist or require the Council to sell to them and the sale by Council of any land under the Policy does not create precedent or expectation that other land held by Council (whether of a similar nature or not) will be sold.

Factors which may be considered in evaluating whether land is strategic or not will not only consider strategic value in terms of urban landscape development potential, but also the land terms of a strategic financial investment.

Other important principles outlined in the policy are:

· Sales are only to be made to the registered lessee at the time of sale

· Land is to be sold at such price as determined by Council at its sole discretion. There is no right of appeal or arbitration.

The policy also outlines matters in relation to the reinvestment of sale proceeds. Investments will be evaluated on a case by case basis and require a resolution of Council. The underlying goal is to ensure that any investments considered continue to generate sufficient income to replace that lost by properties sold.

Consideration under the policy may be given to the purchase by Council of the Lessees interest in land held in the portfolio. This may be considered where this will result in a better outcome for the future of the property in the best interests of Council and City development.

5.4 Significance and Engagement

The matter of Leasehold Land (The Investment Property Portfolio) was a key issue in terms of public consultation relating to the Long Term Plan 2018-2028.

5.5 Implications

Financial

The total portfolio represents significant value in terms of an Investment, currently worth approximately $40m. Current passing ground rent amounts to approximately $1.9m PA.

The historic financial performance of the portfolio has been the subject of various reports which were made available as background information during the public consultation relating to the Long Term Plan 2018-2028.

The underlying goal with regard this policy is to ensure that any re investments continue to generate sufficient income to replace that lost from properties sold.

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

Risks with this policy relate to the possibility that reinvestment of any sale proceeds do not generate sufficient income to replace that lost from properties sold.

5.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a. Adopt the policy as presented

b. Decline to adopt the policy as presented and make amendments.

5.7 Development of Preferred Option

As mentioned above, the matter of Leasehold Land has been consulted on with the public as part of the Long Term Plan 2018 – 2028. Council passed a resolution on 1 June 2018 and confirmed its resolution with the adoption of the Long Term Plan on 29 June 2018. These resolutions required the adoption of a policy.

No discussion was held on this item.

5.8 Attachments

a Investment Property Portfolio Policy

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

6. Sale of Endowment Land

Type of Report:	Operational and Procedural
Legal Reference:	Napier Borough Endowments Act 1876, Napier Borough Endowments Amendment Act 1999, Sections 140 and 141 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA). Section 40 of the Public Works Act 1981 (PWA).
Document ID:	622679
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Bryan Faulknor, Manager Property

6.1 Purpose of Report

To seek Council’s approval to sell certain land which is subject to the Napier Borough Endowments Act 1876 and is part of Council’s Investment Property Portfolio. Any sale is to be considered on a case by case basis and is subject to the terms and conditions of the Investment Property Portfolio Policy.

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Wise / Hague

The Finance Committee:

Resolve:

a. To allow the sale, after consideration on a case by case basis, of the land included in the schedule below, being endowment land which is subject to the Napier Borough Endowments Act 1876.

b. That considerations and process is to comply with Council’s Investment Property Portfolio Policy.

c. To record that this decision represents a discretion to be executed by Council on a case by case basis, nothing in this decision represents a right for any person to insist or require Council to sell to them and the sale by Council of any land under this decision does not create precedence or expectation that other land held by Council (whether of a similar nature or not) will be sold.

d. That the process requirements set out in Sections 140 and 141 of the Local Government Act 2002 are to be complied with.

e. To record that Council has considered the issue of an offer back obligation to the Crown under Section 40 of the Public Works Act 1981. Legal advice has confirmed that in the particular circumstances surrounding the land, there are relevant exceptions to any offer back obligation based on the criteria set out in Section 40(2) and (4) of the Public Works Act 1981, and therefore there is no offer back requirement.

Schedule of land:

48 West Quay Lot 1 DP 478612, CFR664012

40 West Quay Lot 2 DP 4786142, CFR 664012

14 Bridge Street Lot 2 DP 17631, CFR HBK2/1415

16 Bridge Street Lot 1 DP 17631, CFR HBK2/1415

22 Bridge Street Part Town Section 610 Napier, CFR HBC4/1148

9B, 9FD and 9 E Riddell Street Lot 1-2 DP 5357, CFR HBA4/1405

160 Wellesley Road Town Section 569 Town of Napier CFR HB97/42

Carried

6.2 Background Summary

Nine properties included in Council’s Investment Property Portfolio consist of endowment land which was vested in the Council from the Crown under the Napier Borough Endowment Act 1876.

The purpose of the endowment in the 1876 Act is expressed in particularly broad terms; for the “use benefit and improvement of the Borough of Napier”

Ground rental income has historically been applied as a credit against the general rating requirement of Council.

The land is subject to individual perpetually renewable ground leases.

The address and legal description of the endowment land is:

48 West Quay Lot 1 DP 478612, CFR664012

40 West Quay Lot 2 DP 4786142, CFR 664012

14 Bridge Street Lot 2 DP 17631, CFR HBK2/1415

16 Bridge Street Lot 1 DP 17631, CFR HBK2/1415

22 Bridge Street Part Town Section 610 Napier, CFR HBC4/1148

9B, 9FD and 9 E Riddell Street Lot 1-2 DP 5357, CFR HBA4/1405

160 Wellesley Road Town Section 569 Town of Napier CFR HB97/42

Whilst the land above forms part of the Investment Property Portfolio and is subject to the Council resolutions of 1 June and 29 June 2018 and thus the Investment Property Portfolio Policy, it is thought prudent to obtain a separate resolution of Council with regard this land.

The Investment Property Portfolio Policy only allows sales to the registered Lessee at the time of sale.

6.3 Issues

Council has sought legal advice as to whether or not it can sell the endowment land.

The legal opinion concludes that Council can sell the land provided it uses the proceeds of sale in accordance with section 141 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA), and otherwise complies with the requirements of section 141 of the LGA.

The 1876 Act neither specifically prohibited, nor permitted, a sale of the Endowment Land by the Council’s predecessor (the Mayor, Councillors, and Burgesses of the Borough of Napier). However there was a historic general presumption that there was no general power of sale in the 1876 Act.

There has been a significant shift in the presumption by the enactment of the LGA. The LGA now contains a power of general competence that essentially removed the historic approach of closely prescribing a local authorities powers, so that a local authority has the capacity to do anything it considers appropriate subject only to the constraints in the LGA and any other relevant law.

Further section 140 (4) (b) of the LGA (in relation to restrictions on disposal of endowment property) states:

‘unless expressly prohibited by the instrument that vested the property in the local authority, the local authority may sell or exchange the property and use the proceeds of the sale or exchange for a purpose identified by the local authority in accordance with section 141.

Section 141 of the LGA as applied to the present circumstances requires that:

(a) any sale proceeds must be allocated to a use that is consistent with the purpose of the endowment.

The purpose of the endowment is for the ‘use benefit and improvement of the Borough of Napier’. The legal opinion states that in their view the use is broad enough to cover any of Council’s lawful activities.

(b) As the Endowment land was vested in the Council from the Crown, the Council must notify the Minister for Land Information and the Minister in Charge of Treaty Negotiations of its proposal to sell the Endowment Land.

The notified Ministers are not obliged to take any action in relation to the proposal to sell, nor do they have any power to stop the sale, or to direct how the Council must apply the proceeds of sale.

Council has considered the issue of an offer back obligation to the Crown under Section 40 of the Public Works Act 1981. Legal advice has confirmed that in the particular circumstances surrounding the land, there are relevant exceptions to any offer back obligation based on the criteria set out in Section 40(2) and (4) of the Public Works Act 1981, and therefore there is no offer back requirement.

6.4 Significance and Engagement

The matter of Leasehold Land (The Investment Property Portfolio) was a key issue in terms of public consultation relating to the Long Term Plan 2018 – 2028. The nine properties subject to this report are included in the portfolio.

6.5 Implications

Financial

The underlying goal of the Investment Property Portfolio Policy is to ensure that reinvestment of any sale proceeds continue to generate sufficient income to replace that lost from properties sold.

Social & Policy

N/A

Risk

Risks relate to the possibility that reinvestment of any sale proceeds do not continue to generate sufficient income to replace that lost from properties sold.

Further risks relate to a remote possibility that Council’s ability to sell the endowment land may be legally challenged. To mitigate this risk Council has sought expert legal opinion.

6.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a. To authorise the sale of the endowment land after consideration on a case by case basis and in compliance with Council’s Investment Property Portfolio Policy.

b. Decline to authorise the sale of the land.

6.7 Development of Preferred Option

The matter of leasehold land has been consulted on with the public as part of the Long Term Plan 2018-2028. The endowment land as listed above is leasehold land and forms part of the Investment Property Portfolio.

It believed prudent however to obtain a specific resolution with regard authority to sell the endowment land.

Legal advice confirms that Council is able to sell the Endowment land, provided it complies with the process requirements set out in sections 140 and 141 of the Local Government Act 2002.

Council will reinvest any sale proceeds and continue to use the income in a manner that is consistent with the original purpose of the endowment.

In response to questions from Councillors, the Manager Property clarified that in the interest of transparency, it was prudent to raise this as a separate agenda item and have a separate resolution to the Investment Property Portfolio Policy item.

6.8 Attachments

Nil

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

Reports from Community Services Committee held 4 September 2018

1. Community Services Grants - Allocation

Type of Report:	Operational
Legal Reference:	N/A
Document ID:	604443
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Natasha Carswell, Manager Community Strategies

1.1 Purpose of Report

To assess the adequacy of the current budget allocation for the Community Services Grants scheme and to identify options for any increase.

Substitute Motion

Councillors Boag / Jeffery

The Community Services Committee:

a. Increase the allocation to the Community Services Grants scheme using a combination of population and CPI adjustments and increasing the per head allocation to $1.80.

Carried

1.2 Background Summary

The Community Services Grants scheme provides grants to Community and voluntary organisations that provide support services to Napier residents, often in their time of need. Grants contribute to the operational costs of organisations and is considered a ‘top up’ or funding for costs or organisations not provided for by other funders.

Rates subsidies are also available to groups who own a property in Napier that is used to provide community services in Napier.

The current allocation is $97,200 per annum and set at $1.60 per head of population.

All applications are assessed using a robust ranking system along with a committee assessment. Decisions are made by a Grants Committee and endorsed by Council.

1.3 Issues

At the grants allocation meeting, the Grants Committee Chair, Councillor Boag suggested the Committee request an increase in allocation. It was agreed that officers would analyse recent funding rounds to determine a basis for an increase.

The demand for funding has declined over the last five years with the amount requested declining sharply in 2015/16 and then returning to around 90% of the demand experienced five years ago. The number of eligible applications has increased over time with lower grants being requested by groups.

The following graph shows the demand and funding allocations over the past five funding rounds.

It has never been practice in this fund to fully fund all applications, although some very small requests (in the 100s) have been fully granted. If all medium/high to low risk applications were fully funded in the last funding round an allocation of $125,000 would have been required ($2 per head of population). The Committee managed the allocation and provided higher levels of funding to those with applications that aligned strongly with the fund’s purpose and presented low risk for grant funding in this last round.

The population figures will be available following the Census publication later this year. It is projected that Napier’s population will increase to 63,100 raising the allocation to $100,960 to be applied in 2019/20 through the annual plan process (increase of $3,760)

Given the above information, officers recommended that there was not sufficient cause to increase the allocation at this time but that this should be reviewed after the next funding round and should there be an increase recommended at this time, the increase could be included in the relevant annual plan.

The Committee agreed to this approach.

The matter was raised at the last Community Services Committee meeting. It was suggested the amount of funding should be increased to $1.80 per head of population and CPI could also be applied. Should Council wish to increase the allocation, it is strongly recommended that the existing formula be used as the mechanism for any increase rather than introducing a combination of mechanisms (i.e. population and CPI adjustments) that overcomplicate this relatively small funding scheme.

1.4 Significance and Engagement

This matter is an operational matter with low significance in terms of financial or social impact given the amount of funding concerned.

1.5 Implications

Financial

Raising the amount per head of population to $1.80 was discussed at the Community Services Committee meeting.

Applying this in 2018/19 based on projected population increases would increase the allocation to $113,580 requiring an additional $16,380 pa. There is no funding available within current budgets to meet this increase.

Social & Policy

An increase in allocation may encourage more groups to apply to the scheme and/or groups to apply for higher grants. This grant scheme does not fully fund operations of organisations so they still need to source funding from other providers.

Risk

Introducing a new formula for the allocation may have unintended consequences, for example in a Census year there is the potential for two increases to be applied – population increase and CPI adjustments.

1.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a. Status Quo - Continue to apply the population formula at the current per head of population rate, resulting in an increased in the allocation and review following the next funding round to determine any increase in demand. (preferred option)

b. Increase allocation using a combination of population and CPI adjustments and increasing the per head allocation to $1.80.

c. Increase the allocation using the current formula but increasing the amount to $1.80 per head of population.

1.7 Development of Preferred Option

The analysis conducted for the last five funding rounds does not provide sufficient cause to increase the allocation at this time outside of the current process. A small increase in the total allocation will be achieved through population growth.

Should Council wish to increase the allocation for the Community Services Grants, it is recommended the current formula be used as the mechanism to achieve this by increase the per head of population rate.

A substitute motion was moved to replace the officer’s recommendation with option b, increasing the allocation using a combination of population and CPI adjustments and increasing the per head allocation to $1.80. It was confirmed that the proposed increase would need to be allocated from Council contingencies as this is not currently budgeted for.

The following points were made in favour of increasing the allocation:

· The proposed increase will cost an additional $16,380 per annum, based on the current population statistics.

· While hardship has increased since the rate was set in 2014, the fund has remained static.

· Staff analysis show that the number of applications has increased over the last few years from 45 to 65. An increasing number of applications made in these rounds were ineligible and the committee are taking steps to reduce this.

· Although there are larger numbers of applications, the amounts requested are less therefore the committee were advised to raise the proposed increase for the next Annual Plan. However, the committee will not meet again until June next year which is after the Annual Plan adjustment, making 2020 the earliest opportunity to propose an increase.

· It was noted that although the applications are requesting lesser amounts, this is not for lack of need.

· The social housing register was tabled at the meeting, which lists the people and families in every city waiting for state houses. In June 2014 there were 87 people on the list in Napier, in 2018 this number has risen to 245. This places increased pressure on our not-for-profits.

In response to questions from Councillors the Manager Community Strategies clarified the following:

· The proposed increase would be applied to the 2019/20 year budget as the 2018/19 allocation has already been made. This will be covered off in the Annual Plan.

· The preference would be to use one or the other of population or CPI as a combination of the two complicates a relatively small fund.

· Applying the CPI figure could affect the timing of the funds as the CPI may not be received until the end of September. The increase in CPI annually is usually very low.

· Currently population is applied when the census data is received, which is every five years. It was suggested that Council could consider population increase based on annual projections, rather than using a combination of population and CPI.

1.8 Attachments

Nil

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

2. White Night - Provision of Food Trucks

Type of Report:	Procedural
Legal Reference:	Local Government Act 2002
Document ID:	623967
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Fleur Lincoln, Strategic Planning Lead

2.1 Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is to obtain a resolution of Council to allow the sale of food and drink to the public within Herschell Street as part of the White Night event on the 20^th October 2018.

Committee's recommendation

Mayor Dalton / Councillor Hague

The Community Services Committee:

a. Resolve to allow the sale of food and drink to the public within Herschell Street at the White Night event on Saturday 20^th October 2018.

Carried

2.2 Background Summary

Napier City Business Inc will once again host, in association with the 2018 Hawke’s Bay Arts Festival, the Napier White Night on Saturday 20^th October 2018 in Napier, an arts and entertainment event set in the heart of Napier’s arts precinct, Herschell Street. Selected Napier venues within the Arts Quarter will open their doors and showcase the diversity of art and culture in our local community. This is the second White Night held in Napier, the first being held in 2017 and attended by more than 3000 people. White Night is part of the Hawke’s Bay Arts Festival and is free to the community. Herschell Street will be closed to traffic and food trucks will operate from within this street from 5.00pm till 10.00pm. No alcohol will be served. Napier City Council is a silver sponsor of the 2018 Hawke’s Bay Arts Festival.

The Trading in Public Places Bylaw prohibits the sale of goods to the public within the city centre unless a resource consent or a specific resolution of Council has been obtained. This report to Council seeks a specific resolution of Council to allow the sale of food and drink to the public on this day and within this time period.

2.3 Issues

Napier City Business Inc will host this event in association with 2018 Hawke’s Bay Arts Festival. They have communicated with all hospitality operators within the city and have received full support.

2.4 Significance and Engagement

2.5 Implications

Financial

N/A

Social & Policy

The Trading in Public Places Bylaw prohibits the sale of goods to the public within the city centre unless a resource consent or a specific resolution of Council has been obtained.

The presence of food trucks at this event will add to the festival atmosphere and will provide a ‘street eats’ experience for festival-goers.

Risk

N/A

2.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a. Resolve to allow the sale of food and drink to the public at the White Night event

b. Do not allow the sale of food and drink to the public at the White Night event

2.7 Development of Preferred Option

The inaugural White Night event in Napier’s city centre in 2017 was very successful, and saw more than 3000 people enjoying the streets, art galleries, shops, and restaurants in a time when Napier’s CBD typically sees fewer numbers of visitors. The provision of food trucks within the closed Herschell Street will provide street food to the public, and add to the vibrancy (and smells) of the street during this event. Napier City Business have consulted with the city’s hospitality sector, who have been supportive of this event. White Night is part of the Hawke’s Bay Arts Festival, and as a free event, give access to arts to a much wider spectrum of the community than the paid performances available in the festival programme.

It was noted that reports regarding events should confirm the steps being taken towards being zero waste conscious, in accordance with the newly adopted Waste Minimisation Plan.

2.8 Attachments

Nil

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

3. Youth Policy Review - Public Feedback

Type of Report:	Operational
Legal Reference:	N/A
Document ID:	620996
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Jessica Wilson, Community Advisor

3.1 Purpose of Report

To advise Council on the process undertaken in reviewing the Youth Policy and to request approval to release the draft Strategy (attachment one) for stakeholder and public feedback prior to adoption by Council.

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Hague / Tapine

The Community Services Committee:

a. Approve the release of the draft Napier Youth Strategy for stakeholder and public feedback.

Carried

3.2 Background Summary

The existing Youth Policy has developed over time and was last updated in 2010. A Youth Services Plan was put in place in 2012. The focus areas of the 2010 Policy were:

· Wellbeing

· Participation

· Diversity

· Communication

· Safety

· Being connected

This revised draft Strategy builds on previous policies and programmes and is the source document for Council’s youth development planning and activity.

3.3 Issues

The Youth Policy required updating and a new strategy to recognise the current and future needs of young people to support youth development through services, facilities and activities delivered by Council

The strategy has been developed through engagement with students, young professionals and parents of young people through surveys, activities and focus groups. The information and feedback (attachment two) helped inform the development of the strategy.

Youth Council have been a key contributor to the Strategy and will continue their involvement through consultation and subsequent delivery of the final strategy.

3.4 Significance and Engagement

This matter has significance for a sector of the community and as such, engagement with youth is a priority in gaining community feedback. In addition, we are taking a ‘for youth, by youth’ approach and will support young people to lead some of the engagement activity.

Key stakeholders will be invited to provide feedback, while public feedback will be sought over a four-week period - see feedback plan (attachment three). Following community feedback, any significant changes will be integrated into the Strategy for Council adoption. An Action Plan will be developed following adoption of the Strategy.

3.5 Implications

Financial

The Action Plan may require funding; this will be included in current budgets or externally sought.

Social & Policy

The final Strategy will include an Action Plan that incorporates relevant actions arising from feedback received. These actions may link to other Council processes and policies.

Risk

Feedback may be misaligned with the draft; however, pre-engagement activity has reduced this risk.

3.6 Options

The options available to Council are as follows:

a. Notify the draft Strategy for stakeholder and public feedback before finalising for adoption by Council.

b. To not notify the draft strategy at this time.

3.7 Development of Preferred Option

Considerable research, stakeholder engagement and work has been completed to get the draft strategy to this stage and it is recommended that further feedback be sought on the draft before it is finalised by Council.

The Napier Youth Council presented two videos to Council regarding the draft Napier Youth Strategy, noting how they plan to identify the current and future needs of youth in Napier.

Councillors supported the draft strategy and acknowledged the work that the Youth Council have been doing. The following points were noted by Councillors:

· Council should consider how they can contribute to employment pathways for youth.

· The current perception is that there is nothing for youth in Napier. The Youth Council is well positioned to help promote the work that Council is doing in this area.

· It is important that our stories and culture are not lost to our youth and it was suggested that this could be highlighted in the strategy.

3.8 Attachments

a Draft Napier Youth Strategy

b Draft Youth Strategy Appendices

c Feedback Plan

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

APPENDIX A: DATA SUMMARY

Demographics

Population

The total population of Napier in 2013 was 57,240. Of this, 9,291 or 16% were youth between 12 to 24 years of age. There is a large concentration of youth in Nelson Park Ward (34%) and Taradale Ward (34%) (table 1).

Napier has a smaller percentage of young people in the 'tertiary education and independence (18 to 24)' age group (7.7% compared to 9.6%). This reflects the trend of young people leaving the area for work, study, travel or other opportunities, not likely to return until later in life - figure 1.

Figure 1

Table 1: Population of youth in Napier

	Secondary schoolers (12-17)	Tertiary education and independence (18-24)	Total 12-24 years	Percentage of 12-24 years in Napier
Ahuriri Ward	714	612	1326	14.2
Nelson Park Ward	1,623	1581	3204	34.4
Onekawa- Tamatea Ward	843	765	1608	17.3
Taradale Ward	1737	1437	3174	34.1

Table 2: Percent population of youth in Napier

	Secondary Schoolers (12-17)	Tertiary education and independence (18-24)	Percentage of 12-24 years in each area
Ahuriri Ward	7.5	6.4	13.9
Nelson Park Ward	9.4	9.2	18.6
Onekawa- Tamatea Ward	8.8	7.9	16.7
Taradale Ward	8.3	6.9	15.2

Ethnicity

Napier has a larger proportion of European and Māori compared to New Zealand and Hawke’s Bay and smaller proportion of Asian and Pacific Peoples.

Table 4: Ethnicity

	European	Māori	Pacific peoples	Asian	Middle Eastern/ Latin American/ African	New Zealander	Other ethnicity
Napier City	79.0	18.2	2.9	3.3	0.5	2.0	0.1
Hawke's Bay	73.4	22.9	4.1	3.4	0.4	1.8	0.0
New Zealand	70.0	14.1	7.0	11.1	1.1	1.6	0.0

Educational attainment

Napier has a higher percentage of youth achieving NCEA Level 1 and 2 than the national average but is lower in achieving NCEA Level 3 or higher.

Napier has a greater proportion of people employed in the retail, accommodation & food sectors, and fewer managerial, professional opportunities. Employment opportunities here don’t necessarily require a highly skilled workforce and these findings reflect this.

Table 5: Educational attainment

	No formal qualification	Level 1	Level 2	Level 3	Higher qualification
Napier City	6.9	16.4	22.9	34.0	19.7
Hawke's Bay	9.1	17.7	22.9	32.6	17.6
New Zealand	7.1	14.4	18.4	35.3	24.8

Youth not engaged in employment, education or training (NEET)

Youth in Napier are more likely than youth across the country to not be engaged in employment, education or training. However, they are slightly more engaged across Hawke’s Bay.

Table 6: NEET rates for youth in Napier

NEET	15 - 24
Napier City	12.5%
Hawke's Bay	12.7%
New Zealand	10.3%

Income

Napier has a lower proportion of people earning a high income (those earning more than $70,000 per annum) as well as a lower proportion of low income people (those earning less than $15,000 per annum) – figure 2.

The average annual median earnings from wages and salaries for youth in Napier is close to the national average and slightly higher than the Hawke’s Bay average.

Table 7: Median personal income of youth

	15-19	20-24	Total 15-24
Napier City	$4,331	$19,120	$23,451
Hawke's Bay	$4,375	$18,500	$22,875
New Zealand	$4,538	$18,993	$23,531

APPENDIX B: ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY

Napier Youth Survey 2017

The Napier youth survey was developed by Zeal Hawke’s Bay and YCON. The survey was for 12 to 24 year olds and asked a range of questions to find out more about young people in Napier.

The survey took place from July to September 2017 and received 307 responses. The largest proportion of respondents were 17 years of age and over and two thirds of respondents were female. Over 70% of respondents were of NZ European decent, while 20% were of Māori descent.

The sample size is not sufficient for statistical confidence and differs from other data sources. While the survey provides useful information, the wider context has also been considered in developing the priorities for this strategy.

The survey found that young people in Napier generally feel supported through their networks including friends and school. Young people would like more leadership and employment opportunities, and support around education and pathways to employment. The survey also found the majority hold some form of drivers licence.

There is a need to look further into why young people do not always feel positive about the future. The survey identified a lack of connection to the community and young people want more organised activities and events. The key findings of the survey are listed below and have been grouped into the focus areas of relevance to this strategy:

Healthy and safe

· Half of respondents drink alcohol

· A third have tried illegal drugs

· Less than 20% are regular or social smokers

· Young people generally feel supported

· Over two thirds said they have good friends and support networks

· Half feel positive about their future while half feel positive sometimes or never

Leadership

· Sports, creative arts and voluntary work were the top three activities for young people

· Less than half said Napier has leadership opportunities for young people while a third were not sure

Education

· Half of the respondents know what they want to do after finishing school or training while half do not or are unsure

· Two thirds feel supported by school or their training provider

Employment

· Over half of the respondents are in employment

· A third of those that are not in employment, would like a job

· Two thirds of respondents have some level of driver’s licence

· Half of the respondents said there aren’t enough employment opportunities in Napier

Community

· A third of respondents feel connected to the community

Fun

· Two thirds don’t think there are enough activities for young people

· Two thirds don’t think there are enough events for young people

Discussion groups

Information from five different groups was also used to inform this strategy. Discussions were held with students; young professionals, and parents of young people.

The hour-long sessions saw participants providing feedback on each of the proposed focus areas of the strategy. These engagement activities again found young people wanting:

· Mentoring, and leadership opportunities

· Advice - particularly around pathways to employment and what study leads to what jobs as well as life skill courses

· More jobs and work experience opportunities

· Activities, events and hang-out spaces that are free or low cost

· Accessibility to opportunities e.g. providing transport

· Younger youth also showed an interest in the environmental space.

There appeared to be a lack of knowledge and information particularly around leadership, employment and community e.g. volunteering. There is a need to better educate, advertise, and promote what opportunities are available to young people. Removing barriers to participation and recognition for leadership also featured.

The key findings of the discussion groups are listed below, followed by a full table of feedback:

· Healthy & Safe

Organised youth events and safe spaces for teens to hangout. Self-defence for all age groups. Support services and online education. Low cost public transport to get around, having a phone and never going out alone.

· Leadership

Mentoring, leadership opportunities e.g. leadership conferences. Educating young people and promoting what opportunities are available to them. Incentives to get young people to participate as well as recognising those for giving their time e.g scholarships for students in mentoring or leadership roles.

· Education

Ensuring learning is fun and interactive. Offering a range of learning options and methods. Providing more advice to young people and encouraging them to follow their interests. Work experience, life skill courses and opportunities to support this.

· Employment

More jobs, higher pay and less unemployment – while also keeping safe in the workplace. Advertising of job opportunities and communicating what is available, career talks in school and seminars, and mentoring. Work experience, internships, graduate programmes (to retain locals and draw young people back here to work).

· Community

More marketing and promotion of opportunities to get involved. Activities including sports and recreation, clubs, youth groups, and volunteering. Interest in the environmental space e.g clean & green and horticulture. Accessibility e.g transport is a barrier for young people - introduce incentives to encourage interest and involvement.

· Fun

A need for more facilities and activities including wet weather options, as well as low cost and affordable options. Access to free wifi is also important to young people.

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

Summary of discussion groups

Area

12-14 years

15-17 years

18-24 years

Parents

Healthy & safe

· Road safety is important for all users

· Self-defence for boys (currently only offered to girls)

· Increase street safety

· Improve public transport across the city, that everyone knows how to use and get around on

· Affordable transport at night e.g bus or uber

· Self- defence

· Promote support services and online education around health, wellbeing and safety

· Cheap, good transport. Night buses.

· A bus app for parents to load money onto

· Cycleways – need to be safe, lit, and accessible as kids use bikes as transport

· Self-defence

· Safe places for young people

· Community cohesion

· Free wifi across the city including facilities

Leadership

· Buddy systems

· Mechanisms for kids to have a voice.

· Better links between Council and schools.

· Student-led presentations to Council

· Youth Week events

· Advertise Youth Week

· Leadership conferences

· Promote and observe Council meetings

· Scholarships for school leaders, mentors etc

· Leadership conferences for young professionals

· Mentoring

· Positive role modeling from parents

· Encourage YCON, school leadership, volunteering etc

Education

· Fun, quality learning

· More breaks

· Environmental education

· Technology

· Quality education,

· Guest speakers presenting on their field of expertise

· Career advice (including 21+) – what subjects relate to what career

· Offer free courses

· Promote EIT better

· University in Hawkes Bay

· Life skills courses

· Work experience and mentoring opportunities

· Offer life skill courses or sessions - C.V writing, financial literacy etc

Employment

· Safety in the workplace

· Jobs for youth, work experience and education on jobs

· More subjects and insight into careers

· More jobs, apprenticeships, cadetships, graduate programmes

· Job seeking support – C.V writing, cover letters etc

· Career seminars for 18+

· More communication on jobs

· More support with driver licensing and learning to drive

· Home ownership, affordable housing

· Offer work placements / mentoring

· Support young people to get their licence

Community

· Advertise what opportunities there are to get involved

· More info on what activities are available

· Informative videos

· More information on Youth Council, youth grants etc

· Promote how to get involved using multiple channels e.g. social media

· Campaign promoting clubs etc and make it cool, have ambassadors, highlight the social benefits, encourage creating clubs, use of facilities, and connect existing groups

· Incentives - food, rewards, include transport

· Manage screen time. Use technology to bring kids together to interact through those interests

· A place for teens to find about what’s going on e.g. an app, or an alert about what’s on

Fun

· Free, low cost, cheap events or things to do

· Outdoor activities & facilities, parks and recreation

· Places to hang in town

· More outdoor pools, cheap or free

· Outdoor activities

· Split social events for youth under 18, and over 18

· More evening stuff including in winter

· Wet weather options e.g. activities and spaces

· Local spaces to hang

· More organised outdoor activities and events and need to be low cost/free, safe, for 12 years and over

· A broader range of activities

· Pop-ups to hang out in town or in the suburbs e.g. reserves

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

APPENDIX C: POTENTIAL STRATEGY STAKEHOLDERS

The Strategy’s implementation encourages collaboration between organisations - including councils, government agencies, education providers, community and business groups to improve outcomes for youth. Potential stakeholders are:

· Directions Youth Health

· Education providers (intermediate, secondary, alternative education, tertiary)

· Hastings District Council

· Hastings Youth Council

· Hawkes Bay District Health Board

· Hawkes Bay Regional Council

· Health Hawke’s Bay

· Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment

· Ministry of Education

· Ministry of Social Development

· Ministry of Youth Development

· Napier Family Centre

· Napier Youth Council

· Ngati Kahunguni Iwi Incorporated

· New Zealand Police

· RoadSafe Hawke’s Bay

· Sport Hawkes Bay

· Sport New Zealand

· Te Taiwhenua o Heretaunga

· Te Puni Kōkiri

· Te Kupenga Hauora Ahuriri

· YMCA Hawkes Bay

· Zeal

APPENDIX D: STRATEGIC LINKS

Youth Development Strategy Aotearoa 2002 (Ministry of Youth Development)

Developed by the Ministry of Youth Affairs in 2002 this strategy identifies how government and society can support young women and men aged 12 to 24 years inclusive to develop the skills and attitudes they need to take part positively in society, now and in the future. The Youth Development Strategy Aotearoa has six key principles:

1. Youth development is shaped by the ‘big picture’

Wider social and economic contexts and dominant cultural values set the big picture within which young people grow up.

2. Youth development is about young people being connected

Healthy development is shaped by young people having positive connections with many social environments.

3. Youth development is based on a consistent strengths-based approach

Youth development addresses both ‘risk’ and ‘protective’ factors, as well as the range of skills young people need.

4. Youth development happens through quality relationships

Supporting and equipping people for successful relationships with young people.

5. Youth development is triggered when young people fully participate

Providing opportunities for young people to increase their control of what happens to them and around them, through advice, participation and engagement.

6. Youth development needs good information

Youth development is continually informed by effective research, evaluation and information gathering.

In combination, these principles contribute to the desired result of positive youth development, where young people gain a: sense of contributing something of value to society; feeling of connectedness to others and to society; belief that they have choices about their future; and feeling of being positive and comfortable with their own identity.

A positive youth development approach: forms the platform for consistent youth policies and programmes and for improving our ability to achieve better outcomes for all young people; seeks to foster the ideal environment for young people to learn, grow and contribute, thus supporting them to move into responsible adulthood; and acknowledges individual young people’s evolving capacity to initiate change and the interaction of the wider social and economic factors that either restrict or enable positive outcomes.

Youth Health: A Guide to Action (Ministry of Health)

While this document is primarily for the health sector, it recognises that working together across sectors will be the most effective way of creating an environment in which all young people can grow and flourish. The goals of the action plan are:

1. A safer, more supportive environment for New Zealand’s young people

2. A measurable improvement in young people’s mental health

3. A measurable improvement in young people’s physical health

4. Young people influencing development and implementation of health

5. A higher level of knowledge about youth health and youth health services

6. High-quality, youth-friendly, accessible health services

7. A measurable improvement in the health of rangatahi

8. A measurable improvement in the health of Pacific young people

9. A measurable improvement in the health of disabled young people

10. Better health outcomes for young people with multiple disadvantage

The actions identified in this document for community, hapū and iwi are to promote the active participation of young people in community development initiatives; promote programmes that provide opportunities for disadvantaged young people to extend their skills; positively promote the contribution that young people of different cultures and ethnicities make to the life of the community; support the development of community-based youth health centres; and strengthen working relationships across sectors on youth-specific projects.

Youth Health Strategy 2016-2019 (Hawke’s Bay District Health Board)

The vison of the Youth Health Strategy is “excellent health services working in partnership to improve the health and wellbeing of our people and to reduce health inequalities within our community”.

In Hawke’s Bay, youth show some health trends and risk factors higher than the New Zealand average: this includes teenage pregnancy, sexually transmitted diseases, suicide rate, diagnosed mental health disorders e.g. anxiety, depression, smoking prevalence, sole parent benefits for under 25, unemployed, and involvement with justice e.g. apprehension. All of these things can affect a young person’s ability to function well in society and can impact on their future.

There are five key goals under this strategy, these are healthy & safe; with connections; productive; health system resiliency; and community inclusiveness. There are also five key outcomes with focus areas under each, these are:

· Thriving

Active/healthy living, social/emotional health and safety/injury prevention

· Engagement & Inspiring

Positive identity, positive relationships, social/emotional development and cultural competence, community connectedness, social responsibility and leadership development

· Learning & Working

Engagement in learning, learning and innovation skills, academic achievement, tertiary access and success, career awareness, workforce readiness, and employment

· Leadership & Youth Involvement

Commitment to adolescents and youth development, partnerships and collaborations for health and development, programs and services, advocacy, youth involved in governance and leadership, and youth as community change agents

· Innovation & Integration

Whanau and community supported, resources and opportunities, strength based focus, youth as part of the community, collaborative and multi-sectoral, and outcome driven.

Youth in Hawke’s Bay report healthy as feeling supported and accepted; positive relationships with parents and connections with others; good headspace; positives influences; independence; and taking responsibility.

The Youth Health Strategy provides a framework to enhance collaboration, alignment and collective impact across organisations working with youth. The goals of the Youth Health Strategy align well to the key principals of this strategy.

Long Term Plan

Napier City Council’s Long Term Plan (LTP) 2018-2028 was developed as a requirement under the Local Government Act 2002. The plan sets out Council priorities and strategic direction for the next 10 years. Contained within the plan are community outcomes which are reviewed every three years, these are:

· A vibrant, innovative city for everyone

Napier is a vibrant city through excellent strategy and planning; social cohesion is achieved for all ages and ethnicities; innovative services are provided using technology whilst protecting the environment; technology connects Napier to the rest of New Zealand and the world; Napier is an appealing tourist destination; business-friendly economic development is encouraged.

· Excellence in infrastructure and public services now and in the future

Facilities and infrastructure will support community and visitor needs, focusing on excellent service and accessibility; Napier’s transportation system is safe and affordable; all transport choices are catered for: cars, cycles, pedestrians and disabled users

· A sustainable city

Our natural resources are renewed and enhanced. We act as steward for our environment for future generations; Napier values its character and history; Napier is an affordable city to live in

· Council works with and for the community

Council guides the city with effective leadership; Council encourages community consultation and collaboration to assist in shaping the future direction of the city

· A safe and healthy city that supports community well being

Services and facilities support social and recreation opportunities; community safety is supported and improved; social services are supported.

Each of Council’s activities contributes to some or all of the Community Outcomes to meet the needs of the community. Council recognises that youth are a significant part of the community and fostering youth development is a community development priority.

Other relevant Policies, Strategies and Plans

Matariki REDS

Social Inclusion Strategy

Safer Napier Strategic Plan

Joint Alcohol Strategy

Smokefree Policy

Disability Strategy (in development)

Youth Activities Strategy (in development)

Māori Consultative Committee - 11 September 2018 - Open Agenda

Karakia

Te Whetu Henare-Winitana opened proceedings with a karakia.

Apologies

T Aranui / T Henare-Winitana

That the apologies from Mayor Dalton, Councillor Tapine and the Strategic Māori Advisor be accepted.

Conflicts of interest

Nil

Public forum

Tihau Bishop presented his proposal for an Avenue Of Remembrance to the Committee for their consideration. The proposal included design plans for a memorial that he believes could be built in time for Armistice Day at the Floral Clock on Marine Parade; the key points being:

- Community concerns that there would not be a place for the public to attend a Armistice Day service as the new memorial with Eternal Flame may not be constructed in time. This design could be erected in time for this service.

- The memorial proposed was designed to fit in with the new memorial and be complementary to the plans.

- The memorial design included 12 Pou as commemorative elements from the Musket Wars through to World War I and World War II and recent conflicts & peacekeeping missions.

- The memorial would be build out of Coromandel Granite.

- Costs for the memorial would be available by the end of June and private funding from the community would be sought.

The Committee thanked Mr Bishop for his time and thoughtful proposal, special mention to the memorial including other conflicts and service people.

The Chief Executive provided the Committee with an update on the War Memorial Project, he advised that this proposal was out of scope for the current work but there may be the potential for some design elements to be incorporated.

Announcements by the Chairperson

Nil

Announcements by the management

The Chief Executive provided an update to the Committee on the Council’s Long term Plan process, including three days of public hearings; noting this is due to be adopted at the Extraordinary Council Meeting on 29 June.

Confirmation of minutes

T Aranui / T Henare-Winitana

That the Minutes of the meeting held on 8 May 2018 were taken as a true and accurate record of the meeting.

Reports from standing committees

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 29 May 2018

1. Hawke's Bay Airport Limited - Director

Type of Report:	Legal
Legal Reference:	Local Government Act 2002
Document ID:	473345
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Adele Henderson, Director Corporate Services

1.1 Purpose of Report

To endorse the reappointment of Tony Porter as director to Hawke’s Bay Airport Limited (HBAL).

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

The Chief Executive provided a summary of key points at of the paper noting the recommendation for Tony Porter to remain as Director for the reasons that:

- Major period of growth with redevelopment work scheduled to take place.

- Facility upgrade will require comprehensive stakeholder engagement in which Mr Porter has proved strengths.

The committee agreed unanimously that the Airport is doing very well as the gateway to Hawke’s Bay.

In response to questions from the Committee the Chief Executive confirmed that there is no plan to create an international airport, the idea had been investigated three years ago and determined not economically viable.

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

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

Committee's recommendation

Mayor Dalton / Councillor Taylor

The Strategy and Infrastructure Committee:

a. Approve the reappointment of Tony Porter as Director to Hawke’s Bay Airport Limited for a further term of two (2) years until 30 June 2020.

Carried

2. Te Komiti Muriwai O Te Whanga (Ahuriri Estuary Committee)

Type of Report:	Legal and Operational
Legal Reference:	Draft Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Legislation
Document ID:	467265
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Kim Anstey, Planner Policy/Analyst Richard Munneke, Director City Strategy

2.1 Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is to update Council on details of the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill that establishes the Te Komiti Muriwai o Te Whanga (the Ahuriri Estuary Committee) and for Council to appoint a Councillor to represent Napier City Council on Te Komiti.

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

The Chair spoke to the work being undertaken to improve the Ahuriri Estuary. He confirmed Councillor Claire Hague had been appointed to the committee as the Council Representative. A key factor to improving the health and wellbeing of the Estuary is through collaboration amongst stakeholders and the report outlines positive steps to achieving this goal. Once the health of the Estuary is restored success would be visible through the provision of healthy food stocks and clean water.

There were no questions or comments from the committee.

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

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

Committee's recommendation

Councillors White / Taylor

The Strategy and Infrastructure Committee:

a. Note the draft provisions for the establishment and administration of the Te Komiti o Te Whanga as provided for in the Ahuriri Hapū Claims Settlement Bill

b. Appoint Councillor Claire Hague to Te Komiti Muriwai of Te Whanga as the Napier City Council Representative.

Cr Hague did not participate in the vote

Carried

3. Heritage Improvement Fund - Progress Update

Type of Report:	Operational
Legal Reference:	N/A
Document ID:	470588
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Fleur Lincoln, Strategic Planning Lead

3.1 Purpose of Report

The purpose of the report is to update Council on the Robert McGregor Heritage Fund’s first year of operation, and to seek a resolution of Council to allocate funds towards the Robert McGregor Heritage Fund for a further 3 years.

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

The Chair provided an update on the structure of the Heritage Improvement Fund and outlined the objectives of the group. Concerns were raised about the high cost to members of the public to engage in this process. Undergoing archaeological studies for resource consent were based on assumptions and there was a requirement to ensure a measure of common sense was applied to ensure best outcomes for everyone involved.

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

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

T Henare-Winitana / T Aranui

Committee's recommendation

Councillors White / Wise

The Strategy and Infrastructure Committee:

a. Resolve that Napier City Council allocate $20,000 to the Art Deco Trust each year for a further 3 years (from the 2018/19 financial year through to the 2020/2021 financial year) to contribute to the Robert McGregor Heritage Fund.

Carried

Reports from Regulatory Committee held 29 May 2018

1. Napier City Black Friday Fiesta

Type of Report:	Operational
Legal Reference:	Local Government Act 2002
Document ID:	468801
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Fleur Lincoln, Strategic Planning Lead Andy Long, Project Planning Facilitator

1.1 Purpose of Report

To obtain a Council resolution to allow food trucks and other mobile food operators to operate within Market and Emerson Street at the upcoming Napier City Black Friday Fiesta to be held on the 13^th July 2018 in accordance with the Trading in Public Places Bylaw 2014.

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

In response to questions the Committee were advised that the event is aimed at encouraging people to come out and support local business in the winter. It was noted that a series of similar events were run successfully over summer.

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

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

T Henare-Winitana / T Aranui

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Brosnan / Wise

The Regulatory Committee:

a. Resolve to allow mobile trading (food and drink) within the public spaces of Market and Emerson Streets on the 13^th July 2018 as part of the Black Friday Fiesta event to be held by Napier City Business Inc.

Carried

2. Street Naming-240 and 250 Guppy Road Taradale

Type of Report:	Procedural
Legal Reference:	N/A
Document ID:	472545
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Paul O'Shaughnessy, Team Leader Resource Consents

2.1 Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is to obtain Councils approval for two new street names within two recently approved residential subdivisions at 240 and 250 Guppy Road Taradale.

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

Concerns were raised about the Officers comments under section 2.5 of the paper stating:

..that this street naming is not considered to require consultation by Councils Maori Consultative Committee and no risk was envisaged by the use of these two names.

In response to questions about the comment the Chief Executive advised that as this was a private subdivision Council had less involvement in the choice of the name. The Committee recommended that this comment be omitted and that both Council and private developers should always consult this Committee to ensure names are both appropriate and culturally sensitive.

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

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

T Henare-Winitana / T Aranui

Committee's recommendation

Councillors Taylor / Brosnan

The Regulatory Committee:

a. Approve two new street names within the subdivisions at 240 and 250 Guppy Road as follows:

Road 1 - Young Place (240 Guppy Road)

Road 2 - Chue Place (250 Guppy Road)

Subject to confirmation from the Māori Consultative Committee.

Carried

3. Parking controls

Type of Report:	Legal and Operational
Legal Reference:	Traffic Regulations/ Parking Control Bylaws 2014
Document ID:	470409
Reporting Officer/s & Unit:	Hayleigh Brereton, Manager Regulatory Solutions

3.1 Purpose of Report

To seek Council approval to revoke parking time restrictions in the Napier CBD so as to allow all day parking in a number of streets and to add additional pay and display areas in Vautier Street and Marine parade (between Albion and Vautier Street) to ensure consistency with surrounding parking provision.

At the Māori Consultative Committee meeting

There was no discussion on this item.

Māori Consultative Committee's recommendation

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