Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting

UNCONFIRMED Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes

17 December 2019

MINUTES

Ordinary Council Meeting

Tuesday, 17 December 2019

Order Of Business

1 Apologies. 3

2 Public Forum.. 3

3 Acceptance of Late Items. 3

4 Confidential Business to be Transferred into the Open. 3

5 Change to the Order of Business. 3

6 Confirmation of Minutes. 3

Nil

7 Declaration of Conflicts of Interest 3

8 Deputations, Presentations, Petitions. 3

Nil

9 Recommendations from Other Committees. 3

Nil

10 Business. 4

10.1 11 Mission Street - Review of Options. 4

11 Discussion of Late Items. 5

12 Public Excluded Session. 5

MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council
Ordinary Council Meeting
HELD AT THE Tauranga City Council, Council Chambers, 91 Willow Street, Tauranga
ON Tuesday, 17 December 2019 AT 10.30am

PRESENT: Mayor Tenby Powell, Cr Larry Baldock, Cr Abrie (by audio link), Cr Kelvin Clout, Cr Bill Grainger, Cr Andrew Hollis, Cr Heidi Hughes, Cr Dawn Kiddie, Cr Steve Morris, Cr John Robson and Cr Tina Salisbury.

1 Apologies

Nil.

2 Public Forum

Nil.

3 Acceptance of Late Items

Nil.

4 Confidential Business to be Transferred into the Open

Nil.

5 Change to the Order of Business

Nil.

6 Confirmation of Minutes

Nil.

7 Declaration of Conflicts of Interest

Nil.

8 Deputations, Presentations, Petitions

Nil.

9 Recommendations from Other Committees

Nil.

10 Business

10.1 11 Mission Street - Review of Options

Staff: Danna Leslie, Team Leader: City Development

Brigid McDonald, Manager: Strategic Investment & Commercial Facilitation

Key points

· Report was requested at 10 Dec 2019 Council meeting and provided a range of options for 11 Mission St.

· Included legal advice regarding the process of revocation and option consideration; and also on conflicts of interest.

· Included letters received from the Elms Foundation and the Otamataha Trust.

In response to questions

· 240 submissions on prewritten forms were received.

· A motion to revoke the previous Council decision and transfer 11 Mission St to the Otamataha Trust was foreshadowed.

· A motion to leave the report to lie on the table due to new councillors not being sufficiently up to speed regarding this issue was foreshadowed.

Discussion points raised

· History of 11 Mission St transactions and Council decisions was outlined.

· No Council promise had been made and no Council resolution passed.

· Noted the number of submissions received regarding 11 Mission St, and the number of submissions received on other issues.

· The new post-election Council should be able to review a position taken by the previous Council. Noted election statements from Mayoral candidates regarding 11 Mission St and iwi status.

· Considered the Tauranga community wanted unity and to move forward in partnership with iwi.

· Clarified that the Elms was privately owned by the Elms Foundation and was not included in any gift to the Otamataha Trust.

· Noted the obligation to Māori imposed under the Local Government Act 2002.

· Concern expressed that the process was rushed onto the new councillors.

· Considered there was a question of good governance and timely information.

· 50/50 entity mechanism was the only way to solve the issue in a fair way that promoted unity.

· The Elms Foundation had indicated it was comfortable to work with the Otamataha Trust. Was a patchwork of land ownership in Mission St; but was all managed as one unit.

· There was a need to be aware of any precedent effect of this decision. Ownership of any other pieces of land should be determined in their own right one at a time.

· Concern expressed that a transfer to the Otamataha Trust would be breaking the understanding of the community at the time.

· Considered there was a need to be pragmatic; the two main stakeholders were in favour of the land being transferred to the Otamataha Trust and working together. Both Chairs had confirmed that the transfer of the ownership of the land to the Otamataha Trust and lease back to the Elms Foundation was acceptable and supported.

· Considered it was time to honour the commitment to being a progressive and unified city; and involve iwi fully in the development of the city.

Resolution CO6/19/1

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr Tina Salisbury

That the Council:

(a) Receives Report – 11 Mission Street – Review of Options;

and

(c) Revokes Council Resolution M19/63.3 of 24 September 2019 that Council “Either gifts or leases the land at 11 Mission Street to an entity which represents the interests of both the Elms Foundation and the Otamataha Trust.”

and

(d) Gifts the land at 11 Mission Street to the Otamataha Trust, subject to a lease to the Elms Foundation on the terms specified in the Heads of Agreement dated 11 June 2019 between Tauranga City Council, the Trustees of the Otamataha Trust and the Elms Foundation.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Heidi Hughes, Steve Morris and Tina Salisbury.

Against: Crs Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis and John Robson.

Abstained: Cr Dawn Kiddie.

Carried

7/3

11 Discussion of Late Items

Nil.

12 Public Excluded Session

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Resolution CO6/19/2

Moved: Cr Kelvin Clout

Seconded: Cr Tina Salisbury

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

The general subject matter of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific grounds under section 48 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution are as follows:

General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under section 48 for the passing of this resolution
12.1 - Mobile Library Procurement	s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
12.2 - Our Place Update	s7(2)(b)(ii) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
12.3 - Harington Street Transport Hub - Status and Next Steps	s7(2)(g) - the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
12.4 - Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency project funding	s7(2)(c)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information, or information from the same source, and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
12.5 - Chief Executive's performance reset (report to be circulated separately)	s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons	s48(1)(a)(i) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7

Carried

The meeting closed at 1.35pm.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed at the Council meeting held on 16 June 2020.

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

CHAIRPERSON

Unconfirmed Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes

19 May 2020

MINUTES

Ordinary Council Meeting

Tuesday, 19 May 2020

Order Of Business

1 Apologies. 3

2 Public Forum.. 3

2.1 Request for a Referendum - Presentation from Mr Rob Paterson, Citizens Advocacy Tauranga; Mr Richard Prince, Welcome Bay Rating Advocates; and Mr Philip Brown, Papamoa Residents/Ratepayers Association. 3

2.2 Mr Grant Pegler – Planting in the West Palm Beach section of Te Ara o Wairakei 4

3 Acceptance of Late Items. 4

4 Confidential Business to be Transferred into the Open. 5

5 Change to the Order of Business. 5

6 Confirmation of Minutes. 5

Nil

7 Declaration of Conflicts of Interest 5

8 Deputations, Presentations, Petitions. 5

Nil

9 Recommendations from Other Committees. 5

Nil

10 Business. 5

1.10 Chief Executive Report 5

10.1 Request for public-initiated referendum.. 6

1.10 Te Ara O Wairakei Landscape Plan. 8

10.2 Notice of Motion: West Palm Beach section of Te Ara o Wairakei 9

1.10 Te Ara O Wairakei Landscape Plan. 10

10.3 Proposed Elizabeth Street Upgrade. 10

10.4 Wharf Street - Proposal to declare section of Wharf Street as a Pedestrian Mall 12

10.5 Accessible Streets Consultation Submission. 13

10.6 Appointment of Deputy Chairperson for Nga Poutiriao o Mauao. 13

10.7 Development Contributions Policy extension of adoption approval 14

11 Discussion of Late Items. 14

12 Public Excluded Session. 14

12.1 City Centre Development Opportunity - Extension of time for sale and

purchase agreements …………………………………………………………………….14

MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council
Ordinary Council Meeting
HELD AT THE Tauranga City Council, By video conference
ON Tuesday, 19 May 2020 AT 9am

PRESENT: Mayor Tenby Powell (Chairperson), Cr Larry Baldock (Deputy Chairperson), Cr Jako Abrie, Cr Kelvin Clout, Cr Bill Grainger, Cr Andrew Hollis, Cr Heidi Hughes, Cr Dawn Kiddie, Cr Steve Morris, Cr John Robson, and Cr Tina Salisbury

IN ATTENDANCE: Marty Grenfell (Chief Executive), Paul Davidson (General Manager: Corporate Services), Barbara Dempsey (General Manager: Regulatory & Compliance), Susan Jamieson (General Manager: People & Engagement), Nic Johansson (General Manager: Infrastructure), Christine Jones (General Manager: Strategy & Growth), Gareth Wallis (General Manager: Community Services), Nick Swallow (Manager: Legal & Commercial), Jeremy Boase (Manager: Strategy and Corporate Planning), Doug Spittle (Team Leader: Urban Places), Ana Hancock (Urban Spaces Project Lead), Andy Vuong (Programme Manager - Cycle Plan Implementation), Karen Hay (Team Leader: Cycle Plan Implementation), Wally Potts (Team Leader: Drainage Services), Coral Hair (Manager: Democracy Services), Robyn Garrett (Team Leader: Committee Support), Raj Naidu (Committee Advisor), and Jenny Teeuwen (Committee Advisor)

1 Apologies

Nil

2 Public Forum

A copy of Mr Brown’s presentation for this item can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this council meeting.

Attachment

1 Presentation - Mr Philip Brown

Key points

Mr Richard Prince

· The Residents Perception Monitor survey saw satisfaction drop from 66% to 47%.

· Requested a zero rates increase for both residential and commercial rates.

· Acknowledged that these were challenging times – not business as usual.

Mr Rob Paterson

· Mr Paterson spoke on behalf of the resident and ratepayer groups listed in the referendum request.

· Requested that the proposed compulsory rubbish/recycling collection project be abandoned.

· Suggested that this was not the time to place extra burden on ratepayers.

Mr Philip Brown

· Mr Brown’s presentation outlined the results from online residents’ polls taken over the last six weeks. The referendum was requested on the basis of these results.

· It was a time of economic uncertainty for all.

· Tauranga city rates were amongst the highest in the country.

· The percentage increase in rates would be considerably more if the cost of the proposed rubbish/recycling collection was added.

In response to questions

· It was acknowledged that a residential/commercial rates differential would be acceptable on the basis that businesses were able to claim back some expenses and GST whilst this option was not available to residents.

· There were a number of residents who managed their own rubbish and recycling and did not use the current rubbish and recycling options. These residents would be disadvantaged by any compulsory rubbish/recycling scheme.

The Mayor thanked Messrs Prince, Paterson and Brown for their presentations.

2.2 Mr Grant Pegler – Planting in the West Palm Beach section of Te Ara o Wairakei

Key points

· Mr Pegler spoke on behalf of the Papamoa Residents and Ratepayers Association and in support of the Notice of Motion from Crs Steve Morris and Dawn Kiddie.

· This section of the West Palm Beach waterway was the only dedicated park in the area.

· Grassed slopes where people could relax and picnic were preferred over the current three metre strips of tussock grass on both sides of the waterway.

· Requested that the plantings be removed and the grassed slopes be reinstated.

· Challenged that the planting was a condition of the resource consent and believed the resource consent had not been implemented properly.

· People in the area did not believe adequate consultation had been undertaken and that the consultation that had occurred was imbalanced towards tangata whenua.

In response to questions

· Other plant options and where these might be located would not be considered as the desired outcome was for no plantings at all.

The Mayor thanked Mr Pegler for his presentation.

3 Acceptance of Late Items

Resolution CO9/20/21

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr Tina Salisbury

That the following items be included in the agenda:

1.10 Chief Executive Report

1.10 Te Ara O Wairakei Landscape Plan

Carried

4 Confidential Business to be Transferred into the Open

Nil

5 Change to the Order of Business

It was agreed that the order of business would be changed so that item 1.10 – Te Ara O Wairakei Landscape Plan, would be moved to before item 10.2 - Notice of Motion.

It was further agreed that for item 1.10 – Te Ara O Wairakei Landscape Plan, the report would be discussed but the recommendations would lie on the table pending the discussion and decisions of item 10.2 – Notice of Motion. The recommendations of item 1.10 – Te Ara O Wairakei Landscape Plan, would then be considered.

6 Confirmation of Minutes

Nil

7 Declaration of Conflicts of Interest

Crs Andrew Hollis and Dawn Kiddie requested that it be brought to the notice of this Council meeting that they were both members of the Mount Maunganui Ratepayers Association, with Cr Hollis being the Chairperson of the Association, but had taken no part in the referendum poll referred to in the Public Forum section and in item 10.1 - Request for public-initiated referendum, of this meeting.

8 Deputations, Presentations, Petitions

Nil

9 Recommendations from Other Committees

Nil

10 Business

1.10 Chief Executive Report

Staff Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy and Growth

Key points

· The Strategic Finance Project (SAP) ‘Go Live’ date had been delayed due to impacts of COVID-19.

· Staff continued to work through requests for rent relief.

· The New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency (LGFA) was proposing to increase debt-to-revenue limits for the 2020/21 and 2021/22 financial years. The proposed changes would be considered in June.

· Annual Plan hearings and deliberations had been placed on hold. A further round of consultation may be required.

· A report on the costing options to remedy the seismic strength deficiencies of the Harington Street Transport Hub would be presented to Council in June.

· An update report on the kerbside waste collection services and facilities Request for Proposal (RFP) would be presented to the first Projects, Services and Operations Committee meeting when Council’s normal meeting schedule resumed.

· Viable operating models for Our Place would now be reported through the Annual Plan service review process.

· Preferred parties identified from the Registrations of Interest for the former Bella Vista site had now been provided with Council’s RFP. The deadline for submissions was 11 June 2020.

· A preliminary design for the Cameron Road short-term multi-modal project would be presented to Council in July.

In response to questions

· Tauranga City Council’s (TCC) vermicomposting trial had currently diverted 25% of TCC’s biosolids from landfill. The trial has also saved approximately 8.5% in disposal costs to landfill to date.

· The free school bus service was funded by Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC) through a targeted rate.

· Service costs for the proposed kerbside waste collection service had not yet been determined.

· The role of the Waste Project Advisory Board was not necessarily to solve problems or be subject matter experts but to have a good breadth of input as to the risks that the project could encounter.

· A virtual building inspections trial was underway. Only low risk inspections were currently part of the trial. The trial outcomes would be reported back to Council.

· The Mayor and Councillors Register of Interests would be available on TCC’s website by the end of the week.

Resolution CO9/20/22

Moved: Cr John Robson

Seconded: Cr Tina Salisbury

That the Council receives the Chief Executive Report.

Carried

10.1 Request for public-initiated referendum

Staff Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy and Growth

Paul Davidson, General Manager: Corporate Services

Key points

· The referendum was seeking a review of the recommended 7.6% rate increase.

· There were legal considerations under the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) that Council needed to take into account when considering the referendum.

In response to questions

· It was unlikely that feedback from the referendum, if initiated, would be available prior to rating levels decisions for the 2020/21 financial year being made.

· In regards to pre-determination principles, all councillors that had issued or made any statements around rates increases would need to keep open minds during any Annual Plan deliberations.

· Scenarios and options that could be implemented, and their impact on rating levels, could be included in consultation documentation if a second round of Annual Plan consultation occurred.

Discussion points raised

· It was important to listen to the requests of ratepayers.

· Council was currently dealing with changing information all the time due to COVID-19 and this would make decision making difficult.

Motion

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr Kelvin Clout

That the Council:

(a) Receives this report Request for public-initiated referendum; and

(b) Declines the proposal for a public-initiated referendum on the basis that this gives rise to significant legal and timing issues around adopting an annual plan, and is unnecessary given legislative consultation obligations Council is required to follow.

Amendment

Moved: Cr John Robson

Seconded: Cr Steve Morris

That the Council:

(c) Requests staff to report on the specific issues and options raised by the petitioners for possible inclusion in the Annual Plan consultation material.

The Amendment was adopted by the mover and seconder.

The substantive motion, as amended, was then put.

Resolution CO9/20/23

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr Kelvin Clout

That the Council:

(a) Receives this report Request for public-initiated referendum; and

(c) Requests staff to report on the specific issues and options raised by the petitioners for possible inclusion in the Annual Plan consultation material.

Carried

At 10.50am, the meeting adjourned.

At 11.00am, the meeting resumed.

Staff presented the following item and discussion took place to enable a decision to be made on the Notice of Motion received. The recommendations of this item were left to lie on the table until following the Notice of Motion decision.

1.10 Te Ara O Wairakei Landscape Plan

Staff Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Wally Potts, Team Leader: Drainage Services

A copy of the tabled document – Stage 1 Wairakei Stream Landscape Plan Consultation Timeline - can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this council meeting.

Attachment

1 Stage 1 Wairakei Stream Landscape Plan Consultation Timeline

Key points

· Council holds a resource consent to address the management and discharge of treated stormwater in the Papamoa catchment. As a consent condition, a final Stage 1 plan was lodged with BOPRC in December 2017. Full implementation of Stage 1 was required by 2025.

· Stage 1 refers to the geographical location of the stream corridor and extends approximately 10kms from Pacific View Road to the boundary of Te Tumu.

· The specific area of residents’ concerns was within the Palm Beach West reserve from Bermuda Drive to Palm Beach Boulevard.

· Significant consultation was undertaken during plan development and before and during its implementation.

· Consultation with Tangata Whenua representatives was to ascertain cultural values for the corridor and facilitate the development and implementation of cultural elements.

· The engagement process was not continued during the year that plants were being propagated.

· When planting started, in response to concerns raised by residents and their request that planting be stopped, Council halted the planting programme.

· There would be no further planting until mid-2021; however maintenance would continue.

· Further consultation would be undertaken during that period and this would be reported back to Council.

In response to questions

· Minor changes could be considered under the resource consent, including open water areas.

· Riparian planting improved water quality as well as improved the aesthetics and amenity value.

· Various plants were used in riparian planting, but predominately wetland style plants that could cope with “wet feet”.

· Plants around the water margins would only be 600 – 800mm in height. Taller flax species would not be planted in these areas.

· Algae bloom did occur, particularly during periods of low rainfall.

· Most stormwater ponds being developed now were fully planted by developers before these were handed over to Council.

· Weeds that had occurred between plantings were currently being brought under control.

· Targeted consultation with Tangata Whenua was appropriate.

· An application for a variation to the resource consent would be a significant piece of work over a couple of years.

The Recommendations for this item were left to lie on the table until after a decision on the Notice of Motion was taken.

10.2 Notice of Motion: West Palm Beach section of Te Ara o Wairakei

The Notice of Motion was introduced by Cr Steve Morris.

Key points

· Te Ara o Wairakei had been a good project overall for the Papamoa waterways. Many of the areas had been enhanced but there were issues with the 500m stretch that was the subject of the Notice of Motion.

· There was a strong sense of community ownership of the waterways.

· Once size fits all did not work for the whole of the 10km stream.

· Consultation had happened but an overwhelming number of people felt they have not been consulted with.

· This was an opportunity for enhanced community engagement – for them to drive the solutions that all interested parties would be looking for and be happy with.

In response to questions

· The cost of a resource consent variation would be no less than $250k as best guess based on previous experience.

Discussion points raised

· There was a lot of misinformation available in the community.

· A resource consent variation would incur considerable cost and require city-wide consultation.

· Nature had to be taken into consideration. This was a biodiversity corridor which could not be broken in the middle.

· Riparian planting made a difference to water quality and was required to maintain that water quality.

· A project advisory panel with expert independent participation would have been helpful.

Resolution CO9/20/24

Moved: Cr Steve Morris

Seconded: Cr Dawn Kiddie

That the Council:

(a) Receives the Notice of Motion;

(b) Consults with residents of Palm Beach West and Tangata Whenua on reinstating and enhancing this section of Te Ara o Wairakei;

(d) Undertakes no further planting in Palm Beach until this matter has been reported back to the committee;

(e) Continues to engage with the community on Te Ara o Wairakei project moving forward.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris and Tina Salisbury

Against: Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Heidi Hughes and John Robson

carried 7/4

Carried

1.10 Te Ara O Wairakei Landscape Plan

Resolution CO9/20/25

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr John Robson

That the Council:

a) Receives and accepts this report

b) Endorses continued engagement with residents in the Palm Beach West area and the wider community until such time as a further update on the project is received from staff in mid-2021. The objective of continued engagement will be to consult as per the Notice of Motion resolution and also to consult on development of a plan for planting the Palm Beach West reserve area that meets the requirements of the resource consent and the expectations of the community. This engagement will be carried out under advisement of the Project Engagement Specialist and will utilise a combination of the methods previously used to date.

Carried

10.3 Proposed Elizabeth Street Upgrade

Staff Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy and Growth

Gareth Wallis, General Manager: Community Services

Doug Spittle, Team Leader: Urban Places

Ana Hancock, Urban Spaces Project Lead

External Travis Wooller, Isthmus Group

A copy of the staff presentation for this item can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this council meeting.

Also included in the Minutes Attachments is the tabled item – Letter to Brett Nicolls regarding Farmers Development Agreement.

Attachments

1 Presentation - Elizabeth Street Upgrade

2 Letter - to Brett Nicholls regarding Farmers Development Agreement

Key points

· Three options – A, B and C – were presented.

· Public consultation results were included in Attachments 3 and 4.

· Feedback preference was for Option B.

· Option B can be completed prior to the Farmers opening day planned for April 2021.

· All options reduced parking on Elizabeth Street, but no change to parking on Devonport Road. The Farmers development would increase carparks by 69 on what was already provided for pre-development.

· Budgets did not include water and wastewater infrastructure replacement which would occur prior to streetscape changes.

In response to questions

· Future development of Option A would require some elements to be removed; Option B was compatible for extension without the need to remove anything; a do minimum option would be compatible for future development but would require further cost.

· More investigation in to the underground infrastructure had occurred in comparison to Durham Street. The cost for water/wastewater replacement was estimated at $2.4 million. The cost of the infrastructure replacement would come from a different programme of work.

· The rates take for the new Farmers development was estimated to be over $700,000. This would be a re-apportionment of rates but the Farmers site would pick up a greater portion than the original site as it would have a higher capital value.

· The options put forward for public consultation reflected the best estimated level of investment that could be delivered by Council.

· The Farmers development had not indicated a preferred option; however they did prefer that any work undertaken be completed by their opening day.

· Option B did not include any changes to the roundabouts as these changes could not be completed within the timeframe.

· The cost for just the laneway and re-instatement of the existing streetscape was estimated at $1.08 million.

· The Farmers group expectation was that any enhancements made to the laneway and streetscape would be in keeping with their development.

· Safety enhancements and improvement assessments were predictive, and did not only look at historical data.

· During the engagement planning process, Council was interested in obtaining the views of city centre office workers as well as adjacent business. The Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC) offices were included as they had offices on Elizabeth Street. It was important to note that any feedback received was from staff and not the BOPRC.

· A five month construction timeline had been assigned to both options A and B. Council would have greater confidence regarding timeframes when a contractor was in place. Farmers did not yet have an updated timeframe following COVID and were still working toward the April 2021 timeframe.

· The consultation process had been partly carried out during the COVID lockdown. Reconsulting with retailers and businesses in the area on the proposed streetscape, to see if their views had changed due to COVID, could hold up the decisions on the project which were required now to make deadlines. Ongoing consultation would continue regardless of the option chosen.

· Funding opportunities from the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) were limited. NZTA provided TCC $1.5 million per year for minor safety improvements to be spent at Council’s discretion (which included 30 to 40 projects across the city). The Standard Safety Improvements Fund was already fully subscribed within the current National Land Transport Plan (NLTP). This fund would not be available again until after the review of the NLTP in 2021.

procedural Motion

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr Kelvin Clout

That in accordance with Standing Orders 25.1 and 25.2(b) the debate on item 10.3 – Proposed Elizabeth Street Upgrade, be closed as two speakers had spoken for the motion and two against.

The procedural closure motion was not put to the vote.

The motion on the proposed Elizabeth Street upgrade was put:

At 2.15pm, Cr John Robson left the meeting.

Resolution CO9/20/26

Moved: Cr Heidi Hughes

Seconded: Cr Larry Baldock

That the Council:

(a) Receives the attached reports summarising the community feedback received during public consultation in March 2020.

(b) Approves Option B – Comprehensive streetscape upgrade with potential for future staging options, to proceed to detailed design for the Elizabeth Street Upgrade Project.

(c) Approves an additional $7,420,000 to be brought forward into the 2020/2021 Annual Plan to enable completion of the Elizabeth Street Upgrade Project.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Heidi Hughes and Tina Salisbury

Against: Crs Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Dawn Kiddie and Steve Morris

Absent: Cr John Robson

carried 6/4

Carried

At 2.16pm, Cr John Robson re-entered the meeting.

At 2.17pm, Cr Steve Morris left the meeting.

At 2.20pm, Crs Andrew Hollis and Dawn Kiddie left the meeting.

10.4 Wharf Street - Proposal to declare section of Wharf Street as a Pedestrian Mall

Staff Doug Spittle, Team Leader: Urban Places

The report was taken as read.

Resolution CO9/20/27

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr Kelvin Clout

That the Council:

(a) Receives Report – Wharf Street – Proposal to declare a section of Wharf Street as a Pedestrian Mall.

(b) Adopts the Statement of Proposal in Attachment A for consultation using the special consultative procedure under the Local Government Act 2002.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Heidi Hughes and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

Abstained: Crs Bill Grainger and John Robson

carried 6/0

Carried

10.5 Accessible Streets Consultation Submission

Staff Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Karen Hay, Team Leader: Cycle Plan Implementation

The report was taken as read.

In response to questions

· One of the key changes included that anyone riding a transport device on a footpath must give way to pedestrians.

· The 1.5m minimum overtaking gap meant motorists would not be able to pass cyclists on around 40% to 50% of TCC’s roading network without crossing the centre line. Motorists would be required to wait for an appropriate time when there was space and distance to pass safely.

Resolution CO9/20/28

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr Jako Abrie

That the Council endorses Tauranga City Council’s submission on the Accessible Streets Regulatory Package.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Heidi Hughes and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

Abstained: Crs Bill Grainger and John Robson

carried 6/0

Carried

10.6 Appointment of Deputy Chairperson for Nga Poutiriao o Mauao

Staff Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy and Growth

The report was taken as read.

Cr Kelvin Clout did not participate in the vote for this item.

Resolution CO9/20/29

Moved: Cr John Robson

Seconded: Mayor Tenby Powell

That the Council appoints Councillor Kelvin Clout as the Deputy Chairperson of Ngā Poutiriao ō Mauao.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Bill Grainger, Heidi Hughes, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

carried 7/0

Carried

10.7 Development Contributions Policy extension of adoption approval

Staff Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy and Corporate Planning

The report was taken as read.

Resolution CO9/20/30

Moved: Cr John Robson

Seconded: Cr Jako Abrie

That the Council:

(a) Adopts the attached Statement of Proposal to enable public consultation on the amendment of the 2019/20 Development Contributions Policy so that it can be applied beyond 30 June 2020;

(b) Authorises the Chief Executive to approve minor drafting amendments to the Statement of Proposal prior to distribution if necessary;

(c) Notes the deferral of adoption of the 2020/21 Development Contributions Policy to align with the adoption date of the Annual Plan if required.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Heidi Hughes, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

carried 8/0

Carried

11 Discussion of Late Items

Nil

12 Public Excluded Session

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Resolution CO9/20/31

Moved: Cr Tina Salisbury

Seconded: Cr Heidi Hughes

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

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

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

10.7 - Development Contributions Policy extension of adoption approval – Attachment 1 – Legal advice regarding late adoption of the DC Policy

s7(2)(g) - the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege

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

12.1 - City Centre Development Opportunity - Extension of time for sale and purchase agreements

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

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Heidi Hughes and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

Abstained: Cr John Robson

carried 7/0

Carried

The meeting closed at 3.15pm.

The minutes of this meeting to be confirmed at the Ordinary Council meeting held on

16 June 2020.

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

Chairperson

Unconfirmed Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes

28 May 2020

MINUTES

Ordinary Council Meeting

Thursday, 28 May 2020

Order Of Business

1 Apologies. 3

2 Public Forum.. 3

2.1 Mary Dillon – Sustainability issues in the Annual Plan. 3

2.2 Nigel Tutt, Priority One – Economic Overview.. 3

3 Acceptance of Late Items. 4

4 Confidential Business to be Transferred into the Open. 4

5 Change to the Order of Business. 4

6 Confirmation of Minutes. 4

6.1 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 5 May 2020. 4

7 Declaration of Conflicts of Interest 5

8 Deputations, Presentations, Petitions. 5

Nil

9 Recommendations from Other Committees. 5

Nil

10 Business. 5

10.1 Draft 2020/21 Annual Plan update. 5

11 Discussion of Late Items. 16

12 Public Excluded Session. 16

Nil

MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council
Ordinary Council Meeting
HELD AT THE Tauranga City Council, by Video Conference
ON Thursday, 28 May 2020 AT 1pm

IN ATTENDANCE: Marty Grenfell (Chief Executive), Paul Davidson (General Manager: Corporate Services), Barbara Dempsey (General Manager: Regulatory & Compliance), Susan Jamieson (General Manager: People & Engagement), Nic Johansson (General Manager: Infrastructure), Christine Jones (General Manager: Strategy & Growth), Gareth Wallis (General Manager: Community Services), Jeremy Boase (Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning), Kathryn Sharplin (Manager: Finance), Coral Hair (Manager: Democracy Services), Robyn Garrett (Team Leader: Committee Support), Raj Naidu (Committee Advisor), and Jenny Teeuwen (Committee Advisor)

1 Apologies

Nil

2 Public Forum

2.1 Mary Dillon – Sustainability issues in the Draft Annual Plan

Key points

· Believed Council was currently looking for savings in the wrong areas, targeting the small things first and not the areas where there were real savings i.e. contractors and consultants.

· Requested Council look in a different place for savings.

· Presented a proposal in relation to sustainability. Requested that Council did not abandon its resources for sustainability but rather built on the current resource.

· Believed a sustainability framework was needed that had an unwavering commitment from staff and councillors.

· Suggested three ways forward - a rates rebate scheme; a rates postponement policy; and to look at council’s contracts.

In response to questions

· Ms Dillion did not believe that Tauranga City Council (TCC) would be ready to consider environmental outcomes in the next Long Term Plan (LTP).

The Mayor thanked Ms Dillan for her presentation.

2.2 Nigel Tutt, Priority One – Economic Update

A copy of Mr Tutt’s presentation for this item can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this council meeting.

Attachments

1 Presentation - Priority One Economic Update

Key points

· Mr Tutt’s presentation covered what a recession might look like in the Western Bay of Plenty (WBOP), what was currently occurring, and what roles Council / Priority One played.

· Following COVID-19, recession and higher unemployment were inevitable.

· Pre COVID-19, Western Bay of Plenty had a high growth economy with low unemployment.

· The outlook varied by sector based on structure and market conditions but was more optimistic than thought.

· The labour market was the single biggest challenge – 7-8% unemployment rate expected which equated to 5,000 extra jobless.

· An infrastructure stimulus would play a vital role in increasing business confidence, leading to better employment outcomes.

· Going forward, Council needed to be leaders and play a strong role, speed things up and minimise red tape. Priority One would support businesses, maximise employment, assist the rebuild with a greater emphasis on sustainability opportunities.

In response to questions

· Tauranga City Council received lower commercial rating revenue compared to other cities. It was recommended that Council consider this as part of the next LTP (10 year view), rather than take a one year view now.

· Mr Tutt had no data to hand but commented that employment figures for Māori youth usually sat at a few percent lower than youth unemployment overall.

The Mayor thanked Mr Tutt for his presentation.

3 Acceptance of Late Items

Nil

4 Confidential Business to be Transferred into the Open

Nil

5 Change to the Order of Business

Nil

6 Confirmation of Minutes

6.1 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 5 May 2020

Resolution CO10/20/1

Moved: Cr Kelvin Clout

Seconded: Cr Andrew Hollis

That the minutes of the Council meeting held on 5 May 2020 be received and confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

7 Declaration of Conflicts of Interest

Nil

8 Deputations, Presentations, Petitions

Nil

9 Recommendations from Other Committees

Nil

10 Business

10.1 Draft 2020/21 Annual Plan update

Staff Paul Davidson, General Manager: Corporate Services

Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy & Growth

Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning

Kathryn Sharplin, Manager: Finance

A copy of the staff presentation for this item can be viewed on Tauranga City Council’s website in the Minutes Attachments document for this council meeting.

Also included in the Minutes Attachments are copies of documents tabled at the meeting.

Attachments

1 Presentation - Annual Plan

2 Tabled item 1. - NZ Police response regarding Tauranga New Year Eve event options

3 Tabled item 2. - CCO Annual Plan Update - supplementary information

4 Tabled item 3. - BVL Revised Price Schedule

5 Tabled item 4. - Annual Plan Table 2 - Executive recommended negotiable programme - Amended

6 Tabled item 5. - Our Place Overview 2020 - Public Excluded

7 Tabled item 6. - Our Place - revised P&L (August 2020 - July 2021) - Public Excluded

Key points

· The Draft 2020/2021 Annual Plan was approved for public consultation on 24 March. Public consultation closed on 3 May 2020.

· This meeting’s report covered adjustments to the Draft Annual Plan following COVID-19, including rating levels, capital expenditure levels, operational costs and service level reviews, capital expenditure reviews and LTP implications.

· Revenue modelling and financial risk – best case scenario showed a reduction of 20%, worst case scenario 40%, with the risk reserve at negative $28.5m (accrued).

· Savings in the Draft Annual Plan included interest savings of $3.6 million and salary savings of $5 million. It was noted that some cost savings were temporary in nature and would reverse in future years.

· Five rating options were outlined – 7.6% increase, 5.2% increase, 4.9% increase, 3.5% increase, and 0% increase. 4.9% was the preferred option, noting that the general residential rate would reduce under this option.

· The following options were available to help with affordability:

- rates remission and postponement polices

- existing hardship policies

- national rates postponement (timing unclear)

- rates instalment deferral options under existing policies

- Central government Rates Rebates Scheme

- Central government Accommodation Supplement.

· Over 50 service level reviews had been undertaken.

· Three capital expenditure options were outlined – $170 million (4.9% Rates), $200 million (5.1% Rates), and $250 million (5.3% Rates).

· The Local Government Funding Authority (LGFA) increase of the revenue/debt ratio from 250% to 300% for the next two years would help in the short term.

· Four lenses for capital investment scenarios were outlined - balanced approach, essential service investment, development ready, and multi-modal and social investment.

· LTP impacts included:

- accelerated financial issues due to COVID-19

- growth management and future planning remained critical

- issues of housing and transport remained

- TCC’s ability to fund and finance remained and would need to be addressed

- longer term financial prudence and strategy.

· User fees had no material alterations from the first draft, including the proposed increase to parking charges.

· A decision to reconsult or not on the recommended Annual Plan changes was required. The Annual Plan was required to be adopted prior to 31 July 2020.

In response to questions

· Whilst sustainability was not specifically mentioned, there was a lot of work going into sustainability resilience and projects considered sustainability as they unfolded.

· It was recommended that the sustainability operating cost be reduced from $200,000 to $100,000 and be refocussed to other areas of work, including a sustainability framework.

· Total operating costs in the first Draft Annual Plan had now been reduced by $10 million.

· The $5 million salary savings would come from new recruitment, wage increases and training only. Contractors would be subject to the same recruitment ‘gateway’ as standard recruitment. Consultants would only be used if absolutely required.

· 80% salary reduction and 4 day week options had been considered but would not be taken up at this point. If changes were made to the levels of service, changes to the levels of resources required to provide those services could result.

· Treasury’s inflation forecast post COVID-19 was moving into low negative levels - 0 to -1.

· Commercial rates were generally tax deductible both from a company tax and GST perspective. The average combined GST rebate and being a taxable activity would equate to a 1.6% rates differential.

· There was no-one on the rates hardship postponement scheme at the moment, possibly as there were easier and less costly options for relief available.

· Rates relief options were advertised on TCC’s website, on the front of the water and rates invoices, and rates newsletters.

· The WINZ accommodation supplement could be used to pay rates. You did not have to be a beneficiary to access this.

· Normally TCC collected up to 3% in late payment penalties in a year. This amount moved down to 1% by year end.

· It was staff’s desire to assist people to pay rates. More effort would be put in this year to make sure people knew about all the rates relief options available.

· It was not yet clear what form the Crown Infrastructure Partners (CIP) funding would take – grant, off balance sheet loan, or co-funding.

· All projects under the four capital investment scenarios were selected using a number of criteria. The criteria were given different weightings for the different scenarios.

· TCC’s commitment to Smartgrowth was still intact.

· Any contribution to the risk reserve (-28.5%) would also contribute to debt reduction.

· Regarding funding for the implementation of projects that flowed from Smartgrowth’s strategic programmes, some was already in the current Annual Plan for the projects already underway. Many more projects would go into the LTP and these would be reported to council over the next six months. Partnering with central government for these projects was critical.

· Reducing operational expenditure would reduce levels of service.

At 3.05pm, the meeting adjourned.

At 3.15pm, the meeting resumed.

· The funding make up of the CIP proposals varied on the type of project. A 20% shortfall in development contributions was not typical but erred on the side of caution for the purpose of the CIP bid.

· Development contributions were tagged to a particular growth area and could only be spent on that growth area.

· Project priorities were aligned to community aspirations through the LTP public consultation process. The LTP was consulted on every three years.

· Land acquisition for infrastructure and putting the infrastructure in place needed to happen now to ensure housing in growth areas was available within the next three years.

· The Mainstreet organisations were funded through a targeted rate.

· New Year’s Eve events – a reduction in budget by 25% would allow for three community events (rather than 5), safety, and the midnight fireworks display; a 40 % reduction - two community events, safety and the midnight fireworks display; a 50% reduction - 1 community event, safety and the midnight fireworks display.

· All recommendations were up to councillor discretion, debate and decision. If council made decisions today that impacted on services or projects, there would still be an opportunity to re-consult with the community and meet the 31 July deadline to adopt the Annual Plan.

· If councillors proposed a particular sum of savings for an activity or service, direction would be sought from councillors to ascertain where councillors would like to see a reduction in that service delivery.

· A previous council resolution gave council all the responsibility for decommissioning the Our Place site. The council resolution also committed $100,000 towards the owner’s costs to decommission.

· The Strand to Memorial Park walkway feasibility funding of $400,000 would be split over the next two financial years, $200,000 per year. $538,000 had been spent on Memorial Walkway project to date (since 2007).

· The Cycle Action Plan operational funding would go towards the creation of a business case (application for funding). Where a long-term benefit was created, there was flexibility, via a council resolution, to debt fund the business case cost.

· A decision to re-consult could be made regardless of the changes made to the Draft Annual Plan.

The following Motions were taken in parts. Item (h) was taken first.

Resolution CO10/20/2

Moved: Cr Kelvin Clout

Seconded: Cr Bill Grainger

That:

(h) The revised 2020/2021 Draft Annual Plan will be consulted with the community.

Carried

Resolution CO10/20/3

Moved: Cr Jako Abrie

Seconded: Cr Larry Baldock

That the Council:

(a) Approves a revised draft 2020/21 Annual Plan with the following criteria as a starting point:

(i) Total capital budget of $225 million (including carry forwards) noting that $170 is planned to be financed in 2020/21 with $30m carried forward from the 2019/20 budget and $25m unfinanced. An additional $17 million of projects had been identified to be brought forward if applicable.

(ii) Total rating requirement increase of 4.9% after growth

(iii) Debt-to-revenue ratio of up to 250%.

Carried

Operating budgets

Cr Morris and Cr Clout moved/seconded all recommendations (b)(i)-(xi) from the staff report; a vote was taken separately for each item:

Resolution CO10/20/4

Moved: Cr Steve Morris

Seconded: Cr Kelvin Clout

That the Council:

(b) In addition to the above, supports the following changes to draft 2020/21 operating expenditure budgets as a result of service level reviews (see Attachment 7):

(i) Reduction in Events Framework Funding of $200,000 (temporary)

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

carried 11/0

(ii) Reduction in New Year’s Eve event funding of $444,000 (note that of this, $40,000 has already been reduced in the recommendation (a) ‘base-case’) (permanent).

Amendment

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr John Robson

(ii) Retains the full budget for New Year’s Eve event funding

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Cr Bill Grainger

carried 10/1

The amendment became the substantive motion, which was then put:

(ii) Retains the full budget for New Year’s Eve event funding

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

carried 11/0

(iii) Reduction in budget for other Council-organised events of $100,000 (note that all of this reduction has already been included in the recommendation (a) ‘base-case’) (temporary)

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

carried 11/0

(iv) Reduction in the functions and events budget at the Historic Village of $40,000 (note that of this, $15,000 has already been reduced in the recommendation (a) ‘base-case’) (temporary) (note non-rates funded)

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

carried 11/0

(v) Reduction in the Emergency Management community education budget of $45,000 (note that of this, $25,000 has already been reduced in the recommendation (a) ‘base-case’) (temporary)

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

carried 11/0

(vi) Reduction in the harbour encroachment budget of $50,000 (temporary)

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris and Tina Salisbury

Against: Cr John Robson

carried 10/1

(vii) Removal of the $61,000 budget for the tropical display house in Robbins Park and withdrawal of that service (permanent)

In Favour: Crs Jako Abrie and Kelvin Clout

Against: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

lost 2/9

(viii) Removal of the $89,000 budget for hanging baskets in the city centre and withdrawal of that service (permanent)

In Favour: Crs Jako Abrie and Kelvin Clout

Against: Crs Tenby Powell, Larry Baldock, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

lost 2/9

At 5.15pm, the meeting adjourned.

At 5.25pm, the meeting resumed.

(ix) Reduction in potential budget for energy, carbon, and sustainability management and advisory services of $100,000 while a refreshed approach to these services is considered (temporary)

Amendment

Moved: Cr Heidi Hughes

Seconded: Cr John Robson

(ix) a) That this Council allocate 0.5% of its annual operational budget to the creation and implementation of a sustainable framework lead by a TCC Independent Sustainability Advisory Board (ISAB).

b) That the ISAB must have an independent chair, and a majority of independent members.

c) That the ISAB’s purpose is to:

(i) facilitate the provision of independent information to TCC to inform decision making at all levels, including, but not limited to, strategy, programme and project.

(ii) facilitate the provision of independent information to inform TCC’s engagement and consultation processes at all levels, including but not limited to, strategy, programme and project.

d) It is envisioned that the ISAB is initially tasked with the delivery a stock take on the organisation and the development of a high level framework and action plan that is linked to the current 2021 - 2031 LTP process.

e) That all work is informed directly by the Government policy statements, the living standards framework, and the UNESCO sustainable development goals.

Point of discussion

0.5% equated to $1.4 million of operational budget and a rate increase of 0.8%.

Procedural Motion

Moved: Cr Jako Abrie

Seconded: Cr Larry Baldock

That clause (ix) and amendment lie on the table.

In Favour: Nil

Against: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

lost 0/11

The amendment was then put.

Amendment

Moved: Cr Heidi Hughes

Seconded: Cr John Robson

(ix) a) That this Council allocate 0.5% of its annual operational budget to the creation and implementation of a sustainable framework lead by a TCC Independent Sustainability Advisory Board (ISAB).

b) That the ISAB must have an independent chair, and a majority of independent members.

c) That the ISAB’s purpose is to:

(i) facilitate the provision of independent information to TCC to inform decision making at all levels, including, but not limited to, strategy, programme and project.

(ii) facilitate the provision of independent information to inform TCC’s engagement and consultation processes at all levels, including but not limited to, strategy, programme and project.

e) That all work is informed directly by the Government policy statements, the living standards framework, and the UNESCO sustainable development goals.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout and Bill Grainger

carried 7/4

The amendment then became the substantive motion.

An amendment to the substantive motion was then put.

Amendment

Moved: Cr Kelvin Clout

Seconded: Cr Jako Abrie

(ix) a) That this Council allocate $200,000 of its annual operational budget to the creation and implementation of a sustainable framework lead by a TCC Independent Sustainability Advisory Board (ISAB).

b) That the ISAB must have an independent chair, and a majority of independent members.

c) That the ISAB’s purpose is to:

(i) facilitate the provision of independent information to TCC to inform decision making at all levels, including, but not limited to, strategy, programme and project.

(ii) facilitate the provision of independent information to inform TCC’s engagement and consultation processes at all levels, including but not limited to, strategy, programme and project.

e) That all work is informed directly by the Government policy statements, the living standards framework, and the UNESCO sustainable development goals.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris and Tina Salisbury

Against: Crs Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes and John Robson

carried 8/3

The substantive motion, as amended. was then put

b) That the ISAB must have an independent chair, and a majority of independent members.

c) That the ISAB’s purpose is to:

(i) facilitate the provision of independent information to TCC to inform decision making at all levels, including, but not limited to, strategy, programme and project.

(iii) facilitate the provision of independent information to inform TCC’s engagement and consultation processes at all levels, including but not limited to, strategy, programme and project.

e) That all work is informed directly by the Government policy statements, the living standards framework, and the UNESCO sustainable development goals.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris and Tina Salisbury

Against: Crs Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes and John Robson

carried 8/3

(x) Reduction in budget for the Waterline education programme of $45,000 (temporary)

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris and Tina Salisbury

Against: Cr John Robson

carried 10/1

(xi) Closure of the Our Place site (permanent)

Amendment

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr John Robson

(xi) Closure of the Our Place site subject to the consultation process.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Crs Jako Abrie, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes and Dawn Kiddie

carried 7/4

The substantive motion, as then amended, was then put.

(xi) Closure of the Our Place site subject to the consultation process.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Steve Morris and Tina Salisbury, Mayor Tenby Powell (casting vote)

Against: Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes and Dawn Kiddie

Abstained: Cr John Robson

The Mayor exercised his casting vote in favour of the motion.

CARRIED 6/5

Carried

At 6.30pm, the meeting adjourned.

At 6.45pm, the meeting resumed

Item (c) was taken in parts.

Resolution CO10/20/5

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr Jako Abrie

(i) Increase in the budget for feasibility and community engagement on the proposed Strand-to-Memorial walkway of $200,000 (temporary)

In Favour: Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie and Kelvin Clout

Against: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

lost 3/8

(ii) Inclusion of $600,000 of cycle action plan implementation budget that is operational but was originally considered capital expenditure (temporary).

Amendment

Moved: Cr John Robson

Seconded: Cr Tina Salisbury

(ii) Inclusion of $600,000 of cycle action plan implementation budget be debt-funded and the appropriate accounting treatment be reported back once established.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

carried 11/0

The substantive motion, as amended, was then put.

(ii) Inclusion of $600,000 of cycle action plan implementation budget be debt-funded and the appropriate accounting treatment be reported back once established.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Jako Abrie, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Nil

carried 11/0

Carried

Resolution CO10/20/6

Moved: Cr Jako Abrie

Seconded: Cr Kelvin Clout

(d) Notes that where expenditure budget reductions are temporary there will be a consequent increase in expenditure budgets in future years (likely in the range of 2-3% rates rise).

Carried

Resolution CO10/20/7

Moved: Cr Steve Morris

Seconded: Cr Larry Baldock

(e) Considers boat ramp charges in the 2021/31 LTP.

Carried

Capital budgets

Motion

Moved: Cr Jako Abrie

Seconded: Cr Tina Salisbury

(f) Confirms the recommended capex per Attachments 2 and 4 for inclusion in the revised draft Annual Plan, noting that the total projects planned total $225 million while only $200 million is budgeted for financing purposes. An additional $17m of projects has been identified to be brought forward if applicable.

Amendment

Moved: Cr Steve Morris

Seconded: Cr Dawn Kiddie

(f) Confirms the recommended capex per Attachments 2 and 4 for inclusion in the revised draft Annual Plan, noting that the total projects planned total $225 million while only $200 million is budgeted for financing purposes; and adds the Emergency management capital outlined in Table 4 of $2.25million to the $225 million capital programme. An additional $17m of projects has been identified to be brought forward if applicable.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury

Against: Cr Jako Abrie

carried 10/1

The substantive motion, as amended, was then put

Resolution CO10/20/8

Moved: Cr Jako Abrie

Seconded: Cr Tina Salisbury

(f) Confirms the recommended capex per Attachments 2 and 4 for inclusion in the revised draft Annual Plan, noting that the total projects planned total $225 million while only $200 million is budgeted for financing purposes; and adds the Emergency management capital outlined in Table 4 of $2.25million to the $225 million capital programme. An additional $17m of projects has been identified to be brought forward if applicable.

Carried

Other matters

Resolution CO10/20/9

Moved: Cr John Robson

Seconded: Cr Jako Abrie

(g) Notes that, in preparing the revised draft 2020/21 Annual Plan, the commercial differential and the uniform annual general charge remain at the levels included in the originally adopted draft 2020/21 Annual Plan (of 1:1.2 and 10% respectively).

Carried

Note: item (h) was the first item voted on in the resolutions.

Resolution CO10/20/10

Moved: Cr Larry Baldock

Seconded: Cr Andrew Hollis

(i) Includes an additional $130,000 for economic development investment in the draft Annual Plan for consultation.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Larry Baldock, Kelvin Clout, Bill Grainger, Andrew Hollis and Tina Salisbury

Against: Crs Jako Abrie, Heidi Hughes, Dawn Kiddie, Steve Morris and John Robson

carried 6/5

Carried

Resolution CO10/20/11

Moved: Cr John Robson

Seconded: Cr Andrew Hollis

(j) Includes the proposals received from the CCOs in the consultation material for the draft Annual Plan.

Carried

11 Discussion of Late Items

Nil

12 Public Excluded Session

Nil

The meeting closed at 8.15pm.

The minutes of this meeting to be confirmed at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 16 June 2020.

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

CHAIRPERSON

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

16 June 2020

10 Business

10.1 Adoption of draft Annual Plan 2020/21

File Number: A11552582

Author: Josh Logan, Team Leader: Corporate Planning

Authoriser: Paul Davidson, General Manager: Corporate Services

Purpose of the Report

1. This report seeks your approval of a revised draft Annual Plan 2020/21 prior to consultation.

Recommendations

That the Council:

(a) Approves a revised draft 2020/21 Annual Plan with:

(i) A total capital budget of $244 million made up of $209 million for new capital (noting that $170 million is planned to be financed in 2020/21 and $39 million unfinanced) and $35 million carried forward from the 2019/20 budget.

(ii) A total rating increase of 4.7% after growth.

(b) Adopts the revised draft Annual Plan 2020/21 Consultation Document (CD) for public consultation from 17 June to 1 July 2020;

(d) Not reconsult on the draft 2020/21 Development Contributions Policy, the draft User Fees and Charges schedule, or the draft Revenue and Finance Policy due to them still being valid. Staff will still accept any new submissions on the Development Contributions Policy, User Fees and Charges, and the Revenue and Finance Policy and include them in Hearings and Deliberations material.

(e) Authorises the Chief Executive to approve minor drafting, financial and presentation amendments to the draft Annual Plan 2020/21 Consultation Document prior to printing if necessary.

Executive Summary

2. The COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on Council’s planning for its 2020/21 Annual Plan. These impacts have been identified and better understood since the adoption of the draft 2020/21 Annual Plan in March 2020.

3. The draft Annual Plan consultation document noted that, before the final Annual Plan is considered and adopted, further work would be undertaken to understand the impact of COVID-19 and Council’s appropriate response in that document.

4. On 28 May 2020, Council considered various options to address the current financial situation for 2020/21 in response to social, economic and financial disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and to ensure Council is preparing for future years as it develops the Long-term Plan 2021-31. Council resolved to approve a draft 2020/21 capital programme of $244m and an associated total rate increase of 4.7% after growth.

5. This report presents the draft Annual Plan and Supporting Financial Information for adoption for consultation following the decisions made at the Council meeting on 28 May 2020. The proposed Consultation Document (CD) (Attachment 1) requires adoption in order to progress to public consultation. A revised draft Annual Plan 2020/21 summary document (a shortened version of the Consultation Document) will be tabled at this meeting and will accompany our consultation material.

6. In addition, a separate report titled Extension of the 2019/20 Development Contributions Policy is presented at this meeting which will allow the existing 2019/20 Development Contributions Policy to continue to be used to collect development contributions until the 2020/21 Development Contributions Policy is adopted by Council which will supersede it.

Background

7. On 24 March 2020, following work that started in the third quarter of 2019, Council adopted its draft 2020/21 Annual Plan for the purposes of public consultation. That date was one day after the government announced the nation had moved into COVID-19 Alert Level 3 and two days before the Alert Level 4 lockdown commenced.

8. Consultation on the draft annual plan commenced on Friday 3 April and closed on Sunday 3 May. To date, 291 submissions have been received from individuals and organisations. Hearings and deliberations on those submissions have been put on hold while Council re-considers the contents of the draft Annual Plan and determines whether a further period of re-consultation is warranted.

9. On 21 April 2020, Council received a report titled Draft 2020/21 Annual Plan – COVID-19 update. That report identified a potentially significant revenue decline for Council in the 2020/21 year with consequential impacts on Council’s debt-to-revenue ratio and its proposed capital expenditure programme. The report outlined a potential process that Council could use to work through the many issues that the COVID-19 disruption had created.

10. On 5 May 2020, Council received a report titled Annual Plan Review Process. That report provided a summary of the proposed framework for a revised approach to the 2020/21 Annual Plan taking into account the significantly altered financial scenarios that COVID-19 restrictions have resulted in.

11. On 12 May 2020, the Finance, Audit & Risk Committee received a report titled Financial Update – COVID-19. That report updated information on the short-term impacts of COVID-19 (to 30 June 2020) as well as further updates regarding the 2020/21 Annual Plan process.

12. On 28 May 2020, Council was presented with a Report - Draft 2020/21 Annual Plan update that outlined the work that had been done to adapt the draft annual plan to a post-COVID environment. It builds on Council’s Recovery Plan’s three key elements of:

(a) Assist business and the community in the short term (largely in the 2019/20 year)

(b) Adapt services provided to and for our communities (through a reassessment of budgeted operating and capital expenditure)

(c) Stimulate Tauranga’s post-COVID recovery through strategic infrastructure investment (through a reassessment of the capital programme and ongoing discussions with central government regarding stimulus opportunities).

13. In preparing this revised draft annual plan Council have considered the following key themes and questions:

Our services What services are we delivering now, what do we need to focus on, and what can Council afford to support and help the community recover?

Our investment What is our best capital programme? How does this help to stimulate the economy? What debt levels do we want to maintain?

Recovery How does our Annual Plan support recovery? Is it the best mix of services, investment and affordability for the community?

Direction The environment is uncertain and changing; how do we ensure we build the best base for our long-term future in line with our direction and focus on housing, transport, and communities?

Affordability How do we maintain affordability so that those that can pay do, and relief is provided to those who cannot?

14. The draft Annual Plan 2020/21 has been produced in line with the resolutions (Attachment 3) from 28 May 2020. A Consultation Document has been produced accordingly which aims to consult with the community regarding Council’s preferred approach for 2020/21 and how we best position ourselves for future years.

2020/21 Annual Plan Capital program

15. A change has been proposed to the presentation of the capital programme that was agreed at the 28 May council meeting. Council identified $17m of supported projects for which funding was not available as a “bring forward list of capital projects”. However, as part of the development of the Consultation Document it has been proposed to simplify the presentation and include these projects in the total capital programme to be delivered. To achieve this without increasing funding costs, the non-funded portion of the programme has been increased to $39m. This amount will be reflected in a lower closing debt at the end of 2019/20 and therefore does not increase funding costs from those currently included in the draft Annual Plan. The carried-forward budget from 2019/20 was revised to $35m from the $30m previously reported.

CONSULTATION DOCUMENT

16. The purpose and content of the Annual Plan Consultation Document is set out in section 95A of the Local Government Act 2002. It must provide a basis for public participation in decision-making, identifying significant or material differences between the proposed Annual Plan and the content of the LTP for the relevant financial year.

17. Given the resolution from Council’s meeting on 28 May, the impacts of COVID-19 on Council’s planning, the significance of both the short-term and long-term impact on debt, and proposed rates increase, the Annual Plan 2020/21 will go through re-consultation to enable Council to obtain feedback from the community regarding its preferred approach for 2020/21.

18. The attached revised Annual Plan 2020/21 Consultation Document (Attachment 1) has been drafted to seek community feedback.

Supporting Financial Information

19. The attached Supporting Financial Information (Attachment 2) provides the information that is relied upon by the content of the proposed Consultation Document.

20. The Supporting Financial Information sets out the updated financial reports and how these compare to those presented in the 2018-28 Long Term Plan (LTP). The proposed Annual Plan budget for 2020/21 is based on year three of the LTP.

21. Since the development of the LTP, Council is experiencing significantly higher costs relating to its capital programme. Council signalled in the 2019/20 budget that this continues to put pressure on debt levels. For 2020/21, the risk of Council exceeding its debt-to-revenue ratio limit either in-year or in the following year, was much higher and necessitated reconsideration of the capital expenditure programme (and therefore debt levels) and/or the level of revenue.

22. In response the impacts of COVID-19 the Local Government Funding Agency (“LGFA”) has announced that it was recommending to shareholders changes in maximum permissible debt-to-revenue ratios from the existing 250% to 300% (for two years) and then reducing gradually to 280%.

23. The proposal by the LGFA to increase Council’s permissible debt-to-revenue ratio limit from 250% to 300% for the next two years creates capacity for Council to increase its capital programme and total debt levels higher than previously assumed. This was considered on 28 May 2020 with those resolutions providing the basis for the Supporting Financial Information.

24. The Supporting Financial Information will be made publicly available on our website in order to provide the community access to the financial detail relied upon by the Consultation Document.

STATEMENTS OF PROPOSAL

25. Staff have reviewed the capital expenditure budget changes made through the annual plan meetings and determined that the impact on the Development Contribution (DC) levies is relatively minimal. This is because the majority of the changes to growth funded projects are timing changes rather than total cost. This means that the only impact on DC fees is due to cost of capital and inflation components. As the impact is relatively minimal, staff are not recommending that Council re-consult on Development Contributions Policy. Therefore, the Statement of Proposal and Draft Policy adopted by Council on 24 March 2020 are still valid. Given that there is a re-consultation on the annual plan, staff would consider it practical to also accept any new submissions by the community in regard to the content of the proposed 2020/21 Development Contributions Policy. Those who have already submitted will also be given the opportunity to revise submissions if they choose to.

26. Staff are also not recommending that Council reconsult on the 2020/21 User Fees and Charges schedule or the Revenue and Finance Policy. Therefore, the Statements of Proposal and Drafts adopted by Council on 24 March 2020 are also still valid. As mentioned above, it seems practical to also accept any new submissions by the community in regard to the content of the proposed User Fees and Charges 2020/21 and Revenue and Finance Policy. Again, those who have already submitted will also be given the opportunity to revise submissions if they choose to.

27. Staff also recommend that the processes for hearings and deliberations on all three mentioned above are aligned with the processes for the Annual Plan. This is because the policies and user fees and charges are intertwined, and most submissions cover issues that span all the documents. The budgets within the Development Contributions Policy are the same budgets that are approved in the Annual Plan and therefore the DC Policy cannot be adopted ahead of the Annual Plan.

Other implications on the draft annual plan

Kāinga Tupu: Growing Homes

28. Council will be looking to build upon the work of the Mayoral Taskforce on Homelessness and has identified addressing homelessness as a key focus for coming years.

29. Since the Council meeting of 28 May 2020 to consider the draft Annual Plan, Council has received a briefing on the independently prepared multi-agency strategy and action plan, Kainga Tupu: Growing Homes.

30. Council will consider identifying funding to support this initiative in this annual plan and through next year’s Long-term Plan.

Matters raised by petitioners for a referendum

31. On 19 May 2020, seven ratepayer groups asked us to hold a referendum about topics including rates increases, operating expenses, kerbside rubbish and recycling collections, and capital expenditure.

32. A referendum would have cost an estimated $190,000 to $210,000, delayed the adoption of this annual plan, and would have repeated some topics already covered in our planned consultation process. Council therefore decided not to grant this request.

33. The complete list of requested referendum questions, together with explanations of what is included in the draft Annual Plan, is attached to this report (Attachment 4).

Strategic / Statutory Context

34. The Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) requires local authorities to prepare and adopt an Annual Plan for each financial year. This report is in relation to the 2020/21 financial year, which is the third year of the LTP. Developing an Annual Plan requires consultation on changes that are significantly or materially different from the LTP. If there are no such changes, a local authority is not required to consult.

Legal Implications / Risks

35. In accordance with the LGA, Council must consult with the community if the Annual Plan includes significant or material differences from the content of the LTP for the financial year to which the proposed Annual Plan relates.

Consultation / Engagement

36. The Annual Plan will go through re-consultation to enable Council to obtain feedback from the community regarding its preferred approach for 2020/21 and the long-term financial sustainability issue.

37. The 291 people that have made a submission during the initial consultation period from 3 April 2020 to 3 May 2020 will all be contacted by staff to inform them that Council have chosen to re-consult on the annual plan and will also be given the option to keep, revise or withdraw their current submission.

38. As the Statements of Proposal for User Fees and Charges, the Revenue and Financing Policy, and for the Development Contributions Policy are still deemed to be valid, it is not recommended to re-consult on these documents. It is considered practical to also accept any new submissions by the community in regard to the content of the proposed User Fees and Charges, the Revenue and Financing Policy, and for the Development Contributions Policy. Those who have already submitted will also be given the opportunity to revise submissions if they choose to.

39. The following is the timetable for re-consulting and final development of the 2020/21 Annual Plan.

Action	Date
Approve consultation document	16 June 2020
Open consultation	17 June 2020
Community Engagement	17 June - 1 July 2020
Consultation and submissions close	1 July 2020 – 5:00 pm
Hearings	2-7 July 2020
Deliberations	15-17 July 2020
Adoption of 2020/21 Annual Plan	30 July 2020

Significance

40. Tauranga’s Significance and Engagement Policy determines whether a matter is significant. In making the assessment against this policy, there is no intention to assess the importance of this item to individuals, groups, or agencies within the community and it is acknowledged that all reports have a high degree of importance to those affected by Council decisions. Materiality is defined as being something that would influence the decisions or assessments of those reading or responding to the consultation document.

41. In terms of the Significance and Engagement Policy the financial matters raised, and the budget adjustments identified and recommended through previous reports that have led to the draft annual plan are deemed to be significant. It is therefore proposed that the draft annual plan is presented to the community for consultation.

Next Steps

42. Following adoption of the draft Annual Plan 2020/21 documents, consultation will take place between 17 June 2020 and 1 July 2020. This will be followed by hearings on 2-7 July 2020, deliberations on 15-17 July 2020 and final adoption on 30 July 2020.

Attachments

1. Revised Draft Annual Plan 2020-21 Consultation Document - A11559878 ⇩

2. Draft supporting financial information - A11560553 ⇩

3. Resolutions from Council meeting 28 May 2020 - A11560545 ⇩

4. Response to referendum questions - A11563373 ⇩


AGENDA Ordinary Council Meeting Tuesday, 16 June 2020
I hereby give notice that an Ordinary Meeting of Council will be held on:
Date:	Tuesday, 16 June 2020
Time:	11am
Location:	Tauranga City Council Council Chambers 91 Willow Street Tauranga
Please note that this meeting will be livestreamed and the recording will be publicly available on Tauranga City Council's website: www.tauranga.govt.nz.
Marty Grenfell Chief Executive

Chairperson	Mayor Tenby Powell
Deputy chairperson	Cr Tina Salisbury
Members	Cr Jako Abrie Cr Larry Baldock Cr Kelvin Clout Cr Bill Grainger Cr Andrew Hollis Cr Heidi Hughes Cr Dawn Kiddie Cr Steve Morris Cr John Robson
Quorum	Half of the members physically present, where the number of members (including vacancies) is even; and a majority of the members physically present, where the number of members (including vacancies) is odd.
Meeting frequency	Six weekly or as required for Annual Plan, Long Term Plan and other relevant legislative requirements.

· To ensure the effective and efficient governance of the City

· To enable leadership of the City including advocacy and facilitation on behalf of the community.

· Oversee the work of all committees and subcommittees.

· Exercise all non-delegable and non-delegated functions and powers of the Council.