Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting

Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes

27 February 2020

MINUTES

Ordinary Council Meeting

Thursday, 27 February 2020

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. 4

Nil

9 Recommendations from Other Committees. 4

Nil

10 Business. 4

10.1 Approval of Tauranga City Council Submission Taumata Arowai - The Water Services Regulator Bill 4

10.2 Adoption of amendments to the Street Use and Public Places Bylaw 2018. 4

11 Discussion of Late Items. 6

12 Public Excluded Session. 6

Nil

MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council

Ordinary Council Meeting

HELD AT THE Tauranga City Council, Council Chambers, 91 Willow Street, Tauranga

ON Thursday, 27 February 2020 AT 2pm

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

IN ATTENDANCE: Susan Jamieson (General Manager: People & Engagement), Christine Jones (General Manager: Strategy & Growth), Gareth Wallis (General Manager: Community Services), Rebecca Gallagher (Policy Analyst), Ariell King (Team Leader: Policy), Coral Hair (Manager: Democracy Services) and Robyn Garrett (Team Leader: Committee Support).

1 Apologies

Apology

Resolution CO2/20/1

Moved: Cr Jako Abrie

Seconded: Cr Steve Morris

That the apology for absence received from Cr Bill Grainger be accepted.

Carried

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 Approval of Tauranga City Council Submission Taumata Arowai - The Water Services Regulator Bill

Staff: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy and Growth

In response to questions

· Explained that the establishment of this regulatory body was an initial stage in government’s programme of water reform. The proposed regulatory body was predominantly focused on setting regulatory standards, best practice in relation to training and qualifications and achieving consistency across the country.

· Water pricing was not addressed in this Bill.

Resolution CO2/20/2

Moved: Cr Steve Morris

Seconded: Cr Jako Abrie

That the Council:

(a) Approves the draft submission to the Taumata Arowai – the Water Services Regulator Bill.

Carried

10.2 Adoption of amendments to the Street Use and Public Places Bylaw 2018

Staff: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy and Growth.

Key points

· Summarised the recommendation from the Policy Committee; there was nothing additional to add to the report.

In response to questions

· Clarification was provided regarding the role of the Policy Committee as the hearing and deliberations entity and Council as the only entity that could adopt a bylaw.

· The measures proposed in Recommendation (e) regarding resourcing would not cover a council-provided street ambassador.

· Any additional resourcing required as an outcome of this decision e.g. to fund a street ambassador function, would need to be included in Council’s Annual Plan for consideration. A “holding figure” would need to be included in the Annual Plan which would be allocated once options for use of those funds had been discussed during the Annual Plan process.

Motion

Moved: Cr Steve Morris

Seconded: Cr Jako Abrie

That the Council:

(a) Resolves that in accordance with section 155(1) of the Local Government Act 2002, a bylaw is not the most appropriate way of addressing the perceived problem in relation to begging and rough sleeping, and therefore amend the Street Use and Public Places 2018 by removing clauses 20.2 and 20.3 as set out in Attachment A.

(b) Determines that the Street Use and Public Places Bylaw 2018 as amended by above is the most appropriate form of bylaw and does not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

(d) Delegates to staff the authority to make any typographical changes or correct any minor editorial changes for the purposes of correction or clarity before the Bylaw comes into force.

(e) Agrees to actions to investigate:

(i) Ways to continue to support and resource agencies in Tauranga working with people experiencing homelessness in alignment with the Western Bay of Plenty Homelessness Strategy; and

(ii) Options to resource the need for enforcement of the Street Use and Public Places Bylaw.

Discussion points raised

· The background to the current Policy Committee recommendation to Council was outlined. Noted that hearings were held in January 2020 following community consultation; and that the Policy Committee had confirmed, by majority decision, that the bylaw was not the most appropriate way to address the issues of begging and rough sleeping.

· The revocation of the begging and rough sleeping clauses moved focus onto positive initiatives to address these issues in the community.

· Noted that Tauranga City Council (TCC) only had two bylaw enforcement officers; by contrast, Hamilton City had 20 and Wellington City 12. This resolution would not address the issue of enforcement; practical measures were also needed to address the issues around begging and rough sleeping.

· Noted that it was one of the responsibilities of councillors to make bylaws for its district; some reservation was expressed about the effectiveness (lack of teeth) of a street ambassador role. Parts of the community had considered the bylaw effective in addressing the problem, particularly in Greerton.

· Noted that the majority of submitters were in favour of keeping the bylaw clauses regarding begging and rough sleeping.

· Suggested that the people most affected by this bylaw – rough sleepers and beggars - were not enfranchised by the submission process and were not reflected in the number of submissions.

· Decisions made regarding this bylaw should be considered in a broader context. The proposed resolution acknowledged a degree of fear in parts of the community and addressed this by the suggested actions and resourcing included in the resolution.

· Emphasised that the police needed to step up and provide an appropriate level of community policing, and should be challenging central government for sufficient resourcing. The bylaw met requirements under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990, and addressed the role local government could play; now there was a need to advocate to central government to also step up to respond to the wider social issues.

· Concern was expressed that Council, through the bylaw, was not adequately addressing the issues raised by local retailers and residents.

· Noted that the police can only act (and enforce) when behaviour tipped into illegal activity. Various action plans were under way to address retailers’ areas of concern; the Mayoral Taskforce on homelessness would also be finding ways to address this issue for the city and the community.

The mover and seconder of the motion agreed to include two additional parts to the motion, to address the issues of provision of a street ambassador function and resourcing.

Resolution CO2/20/3

Moved: Cr Steve Morris

Seconded: Cr Jako Abrie

That the Council:

(d) Delegates to staff the authority to make any typographical changes or correct any minor editorial changes for the purposes of correction or clarity before the Bylaw comes into force.

(e) Agrees to actions to investigate:

(i) Ways to continue to support and resource agencies in Tauranga working with people experiencing homelessness in alignment with the Western Bay of Plenty Homelessness Strategy; and

(ii) Options to resource the need for enforcement of the Street Use and Public Places Bylaw.

(iii) Options to resource a council-funded street ambassador function,

(f) Includes funding consideration for Resolution (e) through the 2020/21 Annual Plan prioritisation process.

In Favour: Mayor Tenby Powell, Crs Jako Abrie, Heidi Hughes, Steve Morris, John Robson and Tina Salisbury.

Against: Crs Larry Baldock, Kelvin Clout, Andrew Hollis and Dawn Kiddie.

6/4

Carried

11 Discussion of Late Items

Nil

12 Public Excluded Session

The Meeting closed at 2.44pm.

The minutes of this meeting to be confirmed at the Ordinary Council Meeting held on 14 July 2020.

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

CHAIRPERSON

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

14 July 2020

10 Business

10.1 Chief Executive's Report

File Number: A11544866

Author: Marty Grenfell, Chief Executive

Authoriser: Marty Grenfell, Chief Executive

Purpose of the Report

1. This report is to provide an update and summary of key areas and activities within Council.

Recommendations

That the Council receives the Chief Executive’s Report.

Annual Plan and Annual Report

2. The revised draft annual plan is currently out for consultation, with Council deliberations scheduled for 15-17 July. The finance team is working with the business to identify final adjustments required to project budgets and the amount of budget remaining unspent in 2019-20, that will now need to flow through to 2020/21. This information will be included as part of an executive report during the deliberations process.

3. Finance staff are also working on the year-end accounts. Given the implications of COVID-19, including the implications of the second draft Annual Plan, timetables are very tight. Audit New Zealand has indicated it is under pressure in order to deliver audit opinions to Council, but we are still working towards an adoption of the 2019/20 Annual Report in October, within current statutory timeframes.

Change proposed to LGFA debt to revenue covenant

4. LGFA shareholders have approved the change to the Net Debt to Total Revenue financial covenant limit applying to councils with a credit rating of “A” equivalent or higher. Attached is a letter from LGFA to shareholders.

Strategic Finance update

5. The Strategic Finance project (aka SAP Project) is planned to go live the week starting 13 July. Leading up to this date, core activities will include:

· Closure of FY20 financial accounts in our legacy systems

· Migration of Data from Ozone in the new SAP system

· Staff training on new system and processes

· Communications with staff and vendors on invoice processing delays through the go-live window. Vendor payments are programmed as usual for 20 July.

6. July will be a very busy time for the Finance and Digital Services teams as they manage the go-live process, whilst still maintaining business as usual activities. The go-live will be followed by a bedding in period and implementation of the Invoice Management System.

Totara Street

7. On 23 June, the Projects, Services and Operations Committee (PSOC) unanimously supported plans to improve the safety of cyclists using Totara Street. As a result, the Totara Street footpath is now approved for people to cycle on, and people who ride along Totara Street are advised to share the footpath instead of riding on the road. In addition, the cycle lanes have had their official status revoked. Painted bicycle symbols will be removed from the cycle lanes, but edge lines and intersection markings will remain for people who choose to ride with general traffic. These temporary changes are to provide an immediate, safer option for people to travel by bike along Totara Street, without riding alongside general traffic and heavy vehicles. These changes apply between Hewletts Road and Kawaka Street (just north of Dominion Salt), and the footpath in that section is classified as a shared path. The on-road cycle lanes will remain between Kawaka Street and Rata Street.

8. A medium-term safety option was also approved. This involves building a 3m-wide shared path between Hewletts Road and Kawaka Street and providing a separated two-way cycleway between Kawaka Street and Rata Street, linking to Coronation Park.

9. The plan will require significant upgrades to every intersection, to limit the potential conflicts between people and heavy vehicles. The council will work with businesses along Totara street towards a final design. The budget is estimated at around $7m, to be co-funded with Waka Kotahi, subject to agreement.

10. Engagement with local businesses and key stakeholders will commence in early-July, and the results will be reported at September’s PSOC meeting. This report will also include Waka Kotahi endorsement of the business case and the economic assessment.

Cycle Plan update

11. In February, the cycle team outlined the process and methodology involved in identifying route options. The options analysis is well underway, and the team has looked at various routes in the Papamoa/Arataki/Mount areas, as well as the Bellevue/Otumoetai/Brookfield routes. They have considered the constraints and advantages of the various available options and pulled the data together into a multicriteria analysis. This was followed by a decision by UFTD in July 2019 that endorsed the corridors and approved progression of route options assessment activities to identify preferred routes. The business case for cycle plan implementation was endorsed by Council in May 2020, and sets out the outcomes and delivery approach for the programme over the next 10 to 20 years.

12. The next step is to establish workshops with our key stakeholders, local hapu, Waka Kotahi and Councillors to seek feedback on the results of the options analysis. These workshops are likely to be held during July and August.

Engagement with Referendum Groups – Kerbside Waste Collection Service Proposal

13. Beginning late-June, the Sustainability and Waste team invited representatives from seven groups which were seeking a referendum on matters relating to rates and kerbside collections, to meet with staff. The meetings were to provide an opportunity for these groups to convey their key concerns and answer any questions they may have about the proposed kerbside waste collection service.

14. A summary of the feedback received, along with feedback from others in the community, will be reported back to Council.

Ocean Beach Road Pedestrian Crossings vs. Pedestrian Islands

15. When looking at the options for improved pedestrian crossing facilities on Ocean Beach Rd, staff considered both pedestrian crossings and pedestrian islands. Our recommended solution was pedestrian islands, as they are considered the safest facility for the combination of the traffic volumes, traffic speeds and pedestrian numbers along this route.

16. After the Project Services and Operations Committee meeting on 23 June 2020, we reviewed the type of facility and our position on the issue of pedestrian crossings remains unchanged. The Network Sustainability & Safety team has assessed the merits and requirements of both formal pedestrian crossings and refuges and has concluded that refuges are the appropriate option for these locations, at this time. The reasons for this include:

· The road sections being considered carry high traffic volumes (10-15,000 vehicles per day), with some sections having a posted speed limit of 60 km/h. The 85th percentile speed on Ocean Beach Rd between Golf Rd and Concord Ave is 53km/h (the posted limit is 50 km/h). Surveys indicate that there are 2-3,000 vehicles per day travelling faster than the speed limit. While there is moderate pedestrian activity in this area, and some demand to cross the road, this demand is relatively diffused, with few significant destinations to focus crossing demands on specific locations. This results in smaller volumes in a number of locations, rather than higher volumes at 1-2 distinct locations. The pedestrian demand is also seasonal in nature (i.e. there is more demand over the summer for a longer period during the day, than in the winter months). Where we don’t have consistent use of pedestrian crossings throughout the day, low pedestrian numbers using crossings can lead to drivers having an expectation of there being no pedestrians when they drive along the road, and becoming conditioned to not having to give way and therefore not looking for pedestrians. This relates not only to these particular crossings, but also other formal crossings in the city.

· There is also a tendency for pedestrians (particularly children) to step onto pedestrian crossings, assuming that vehicles will give way, without fully checking that approaching drivers have seen them and are stopping. Where speeds are higher, this increases the risk of death or serious injury accidents.

· With pedestrian islands, the onus is on the pedestrian to check for vehicles before they cross. While this is not the first choice in the context of prioritising pedestrian movements, it is considered to be appropriate when considering the broader safety context. It also allows pedestrians to only need a gap in traffic on one side of the road and they can cross and wait in the middle for the next gap.

· The width of the island is sufficient to contain family groups and bikes, so they are fully clear of the traffic while they wait.

· The work undertaken on the design of the pedestrian islands has been peer-reviewed to ensure the design is safe and appropriate and a safety audit will be undertaken on the sites and the designs.

· Once the crossing locations are established, if they become well-used and pedestrian volumes increase, we will be able to assess whether they meet the requirements for a formal pedestrian crossing. If that is the case, a pedestrian crossing could be retrofitted through the island.

17. Council is planning to undertake a review of speed limits across the city, and other impacts such as the Baylink project may change traffic flows, making pedestrian crossings a more suitable longer-term solution.

Waiari Treatment Plant Tender

18. We have received two tenders for this project, and these are currently being reviewed for their non-price attributes for the construction methodology. Once this process is completed, the price envelopes will be opened.

19. The tender process is being overseen by an external probity advisor. The award of this tender is expected by the end of August, depending on the outcome of negotiations with the preferred supplier.

National reform of water service provision

20. Central government is undertaking a major programme of water service provision reform and is looking to establish public multi-regional models for water service delivery.

21. This national initiative comes following a number of conversations at local and central government level on rising wastewater standards, ageing infrastructure and the financial challenges arising from the COVID-19 crisis. There is also a need to increase resilience to climate change and natural hazards.

22. A Three Waters Steering Committee has now been formed, which will provide oversight and guidance to support progress towards reform. It will also play a role in engaging with local government, iwi and other water sector stakeholders on options and proposals. The Steering Committee will be chaired by Brian Hanna, and includes a number of local government representatives, including Bay of Plenty representative Councillor Stuart Crosby (Bay of Plenty Regional Council).

Boundary Alteration for tauriko west

23. The Local Government Commission has decided to adopt a reorganisation plan to alter the boundary between Western Bay of Plenty District and Tauranga City at Tauriko West. A reorganisation implementation plan and arrangements will be put in place to guide and deliver the implementation of the transition.

24. The Local Government Commission (LGC) is also undertaking consultation on proposals to bring land into TCC from WBOPDC at Belk Road, Keenan Road and Tara Road. This consultation process commenced on 3 July and closes on 31 July. This involves a broad submissions process as well as targeted engagement with landowners and Tangata Whenua. It is anticipated that this process will result in decisions in the 2020 calendar year.

Bella Vista Prosecution Update

25. The Bella Vista Prosecution recommenced on Monday morning 29 June 2020, in the Tauranga District Court. The Council’s case was part-heard in March 2020 but was adjourned following the national COVID-19 lockdown. The matter is set down for a further 3 weeks.

Building control consents and inspections

26. Following the AL4 lockdown, Building Inspectors had to reschedule 1500 inspections. At the time of preparing this report, there were 1638 inspections scheduled over the next 3-4 weeks.

Recruiting for Building Control Officers

27. Recruiting for both Processors and Inspectors has been a challenge for Council. We have been able to utilise consultants to assist with processing, but there are limited consultants that will undertake inspections. Therefore, the ongoing shortfall in staff results in long wait-times for building inspections.

28. We undertook another round of advertising for Inspectors following the lockdown and for the first time in a long time, we have received applications from some experienced and job-ready applicants. Offers have been made to three Inspectors, who we hope will join the team over the next few weeks. We also have 4 Inspectors who are working through their competency assessments. Obtaining a formal competency is a requirement before inspections can be undertaken unsupervised. The medium-term situation is therefore looking good.

29. In the meantime, we have offered Saturday inspections to builders and reached an agreement with another Council to second two extra Inspectors for a period of three-six months. Saturday inspections haven’t proved popular, but we will continue to promote the option.

Building Act Changes

30. Please find attached a summary of the changes to the Building Act in relation to exemptions from building consent requirements. The changes to the Building Act are expected to come into effect at the end of August 2020.

Remuneration

31. The Remuneration Authority approved the remuneration for the new governance structure resolved by the Council on 16 June 2020. The Authority issued the following determinations, gazetted on 30 June 2020, and these superseded the previous determination:

· Local Government Members (2019/20) Amendment Determination (No 3) 2020

· Local Government Members (Temporary Reduction—COVID-19) Amendment Determination 2020

32. The following table sets out the new remuneration effective from 17 June 2020 for each position, the temporary reduction from 9 July 2020 to 6 January 2021 and the total amount of reduction available. The Authority advises that it has no position on what councils do with the savings in remuneration.

Position	Remuneration From 17 June 2020	Temporary Reduction 9 July 2020 to 6 January 2021	Reduction Per elected member	% Reduction	Total $ Amount per annum
Mayor	$166,500	$158,175	$8,325	5%	$8,325
Deputy Mayor	$121,472	$115,399	$6,073	5%	$6,073
Chairpersons of Standing Committees (3)	$114,078	$108,375	$5,703	5%	$17,109
Deputy Chairperson Projects, Services and Operations Committee (1)	$107,740	$105,871	$1,869	1.735%	$1,869
Deputy Chairpersons Standing Committees (3)	$107,740	$103,871	$3,869	3.59%	$11,607
Councillor with no additional responsibilities (2)	$105,628	$102,814	$2,814	2.665%	$5,628
Total per annum					$50,611
Total for six months 9 July 2020 to 6 January 2021					$25,305.50

Deputy Mayor’s appointment to CDEMG

33. The Mayor advised the Civil Defence Emergency Management Group of the appointment of Cr Tina Salisbury as Deputy Mayor and asked that she replace Cr Larry Baldock as TCC’s alternate member. The Mayor’s letter was tabled at the CDEMG meeting on 26 June 2020. and membership of the Deputy Mayor as alternate was confirmed.

Ombudsman’s Audit

34. The timeframe for receiving the draft report (called the provisional opinion) from the Office of the Ombudsman’s audit of the Council’s Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) processes has been pushed back and is now expected by the end of July 2020. This is a result of the reshuffling of the priorities of the Ombudsman’s Office, due to COVID-19, with other reports being fast-tracked, such as the investigation into aged care facilities.

35. The provisional opinion will be available for TCC to provide management comments in response to any of the recommendations. The Ombudsman’s Office will consider those comments before publishing a final report, which is tabled in Parliament. It is expected that the report will set-out a series of recommendations and the in-house working party will pick these up and progress them.

Te Rangapu Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana (RMW) meetings

36. These are now fully reinstated to meetings in person, in line with pre-COVID scheduling. Thanks to staff and mana whenua for the effort required to adapt through that time. The RMW is currently considering feedback on prioritisation of the policy review schedule and is currently keen to support the review of the External Representative Remuneration Policy and the Koha Policy, as well as the development of a Reo Policy. There has also been robust discussion of the various plan changes currently underway.

Maori Representation

37. RMW has resolved to support the proposal of Maori Wards for the next election cycle, as an appropriate embodiment of Treaty of Waitangi principles in local government. The RMW also strongly advocates for voting rights for current tangata whenua representatives on Council committees, to reflect the requirements of the Local Government Act. These points will be raised for discussion at the next TCC/Tangata Whenua Standing Committee on 24 July 2020.

MatarikI

38. Despite the challenges of COVID-19 we have been extremely pleased to receive a collaborative project, Mataraunui, which is a joint project between Ngai Te Rangi and Ngati Ranginui. The initiative shares stories of marae across Tauranga Moana by following the recital of important places contained in a moteatea “Tu Mokemoke”. The aim is to build understanding of a key Tauranga anthem, whilst encouraging marae to make their stories known to the wider community. You can watch the series by looking up the Facebook pages of either iwi. This initiative has been enabled by the Kaupapa Maori Events Fund, which is a joint initiative between TCC and TECT and administered by the Takawaenga Unit.

Excellence Awards Received

39. Mount Beachside Holiday Park - our award-winning team has done us proud once again, retaining the 4 Star Plus rating for the property, as well as the Gold Sustainable Tourism Business award for the fourth year in a row. Businesses that achieve this award are recognised for delivering an exceptional customer experience and leading the way in making the New Zealand tourism industry a world class, sustainable visitor destination. Congratulations to Mark Hales and the team.

40. Tauranga Airport - New Zealand Institute of Architects has announced the winners of the 2020 Waikato/Bay of Plenty Architecture Awards. Tauranga Airport’s terminal upgrade won the award for the commercial category. The terminal upgrade continues to receive great feedback from throughout the country. You can see more on the NZIA website and an article in the BOP Times. Congratulations to Jasmax architects and Ray Dumble and the team.

Tauranga Marine Precinct Structure Changes

41. From the beginning of June, management of the Tauranga Marine Precinct transitioned closer to the council. The operational staff at the precinct now contract directly to the council and continue to provide quality services and a world-class facility to stakeholders and customers. The precinct focuses are attracting customers to Tauranga to be serviced by local maritime contractors, providing a leading facility, progressing future stages of precinct development and taking advantage of the back-office services the council offers. Precinct stakeholders expressed their support for the changes at a recent facility forum attended by Cr. Salisbury and Cr. Robson.

Wharf Street upgrade update

42. Good progress continues and the project is still on track for summer completion, despite the COVID-19 lockdown. The project is in the phase of renewing and repairing services, with the contractor working carefully around businesses to limit disruption. This has required night works to be undertaken regularly. From here on, the risk of archaeological discovery is low, given the depth and location of the remaining works. A time-lapse camera has been installed to capture progress for the remainder of the project. This can be viewed at the following link: www.tauranga.govt.nz/wharfstreet

WBOP Rapid Response Fund update

43. On 2 June, Tauranga City Council, in partnership with local funders TECT, Acorn Foundation and BayTrust, announced a transition to phase two of their COVID-19 funding support, with an aim to help key Western Bay of Plenty community groups survive the medium-term impact of COVID-19. The fund, which is valued at $777k, is part two of a three-phase approach, with the initial Rapid Response Fund launched by the funders in April providing emergency support to organisations facing immediate challenges. Positive feedback was received from successful Rapid Response Funding recipients, with many stating they appreciated the speed and ease of the process. A highly collaborative system ensured a quick turn-around of approvals, enabling 33 community groups to be supported with over $219k of funding.

44. A similar approach will continue through the second and third phase. The third phase will support the longer-term resilience and reinvention of the sector. Not-for-profit and non-governmental organisations in Tauranga and the Western Bay of Plenty are eligible to apply to the fund. Priority will be given to groups that provide services that are most likely to have a positive influence on longer-term recovery. The fund will complement any government agency support provided for COVID-19 responses and is not for ‘business as usual’ operations. Applications for any business as usual operational costs can continue to be made directly with each funder.

45. Six further applications have been approved to date for total funding of $120,530 ($22,901 of which came from TCC). Another ten applications are awaiting submission or approval. The funders anticipate other funding partners will join the collaborative endeavour and contribute to the fund, providing even greater impact in our region.

Welcoming Communities national status achieved

46. Tauranga City and Western Bay of Plenty District councils have achieved further recognition from central Government for their great work in fostering cultural diversity and understanding through the Welcoming Communities programme. The councils have gained accreditation by Immigration New Zealand as an Established Welcoming Community – a status that acknowledges the efforts of both councils and communities to welcome newcomers and create an inclusive environment for all ethnicities. Events such as the Katikati Festival of Cultures, New to the Bay Expo and Celebrating Cultural Diversity programme are examples of the councils’ commitment to celebrating the region’s diversity of cultures. The accreditation also recognises the efforts of Welcoming Communities to build relationships across tangata whenua, mana whenua, iwi and hapū throughout the region. The Welcoming Communities programme has been run by the Tauranga and Western Bay councils since 2018, led by TCC’s Community Development Advisor, Haidee Kalirai.

International safe city reaccreditation achieved

47. Tauranga City and the Western Bay of Plenty have been reaccredited as a Safe Community for a second time. Safe Communities Foundation New Zealand (SCFNZ) said they were delighted to see evidence of a well-established regional network through the Tauranga Western Bay Safer Communities Strategic Group, that supports wellbeing, placemaking, resilience and community safety initiatives. Since the application pack was completed, the region has moved from responding to the COVID-19 pandemic to the `new normal'.

48. SCFNZ said that: “Tauranga and the Western Bay of Plenty region are well placed to respond to the emerging stressors and trends as they demonstrated a strong commitment to wellbeing and developing resilience in their community. The excellent examples of these included the focus on homelessness, community wellbeing action plans, and reducing family harm and drug-related harm. These, alongside the other goals identified in the action plan, will form the basis to provide an immediate and effective resource to support the Civil Defence emergency recovery response. Tauranga Western Bay Safer Communities has the capabilities, and will need the continuation of resourcing and capacity, to sustain the focus on individual and community wellbeing in the ‘new normal’ post-COVID environment.”

Innovating Streets fund

49. Council has received 90% funding from Waka Kotahi (NZTA) to explore opportunities to improve safety and amenity for all road users along the Mall in Pilot Bay, and a section of Marine Parade up to Tay Street. While a similar scheme was proposed a few years ago, including a one-way traffic system and separated cycle lane along the Mall, the current project is to be co-designed afresh with the public. The underlying objective is to test the practicalities of any proposal with quick and temporary measures. The extent and possible duration of the scheme will be confirmed with the public during the consultative design process.

50. Waka Kotahi’s funding is available until June 30 2021 and currently, we plan to install the project in March 2021. To achieve this, we envisage running intensive public engagement from late-July through to October 2020. No onsite works will be undertaken over the holiday period of December 2020 and January 2021.

Kulim Park Upgrade

51. The Urban Spaces team is progressing the “residents’ design” agreed to by Council. Construction for the upgrade will commence in 2021. In the meantime, the trial phase is underway for keeping vehicles off the grassed areas and monitoring how that impacts on parking, how people use the park and improving drainage. This trial phase has involved installing new bollards in some locations and removing redundant bollards in other locations.

Covid-19 response and recovery

52. Caring for Communities – This welfare-related workstream has officially transitioned from CDEM to the Ministry of Social Development (MSD), effective from 19 June 2020. This aligns the coordination of essential household support and emergency/temporary accommodation support areas alongside pre-COVID welfare provisions for eligible individuals.

53. Foreign Nationals – As of 1 July 2020, the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) will be the lead agency to coordinate ongoing support to foreign nationals who are ineligible for support from MSD (hardship, unemployment accommodation grants etc). Until that date, the Bay of Plenty CDEM Group will coordinate essential support (accommodation and household goods such as food, clothing and heating) to foreign nationals via the Group Emergency Coordination Centre (GECC).

54. Isolation, Quarantine, And Repatriation – The Isolation, Quarantine, and Repatriation (IQR) Workstream is now being led by the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF). As noted in mainstream and social media, Managed Isolation Facilities (MIF) have been established in Rotorua. At this stage, there is no indication of MIF facilities needing to be established in Tauranga. There is no expectation of a direct role for CDEM or local government in the management of these facilities. Clinton Naude, Bay of Plenty CDEM Group Controller, is in discussions with NEMA and NZDF to understand ongoing expectations.

55. Debriefs – a series of debriefs are being initiated to capture observations and insights from the COVID ‘lockdown’ phase. Council has been engaged by the social sector and CDEM Group to participate and provide input. An internal hot-debrief has been collated by Council for the emergency response phase, with insights being finalised for inclusion in a change management report. High-risk insights and lessons identified will be provided once compiled.

Covid economic stimulus opportunities

56. On 14 April 2020, Council approved a package of projects which were submitted as applications to the Crown Infrastructure Partners (CIP) Economic Stimulus process. The application included $674.6 million to support urban growth ‘Creating Communities and Housing for All” (10 projects), and $395.89 million to support “Employing Our People” (14 projects). On 21 May 2020, we received notification of the outcomes of the preliminary assessment of projects, to determine whether they were eligible for consideration for potential funding. Five projects were unsuccessful and six projects were referred to the Provincial Development Unit for consideration, with the remaining 13 successfully proceeding to the next stage.

57. On 1 July, there were announcements of successful funding applications. None of the projects submitted by Tauranga City Council were approved.

58. There was also a joint application of the SmartGrowth Councils, responding to the request for high growth urban areas to identify projects which deliver land for housing and business supply. No decision on this application has yet been received.

59. It is currently unclear whether there are further funding decisions and announcements associated with our applications.

Urban form and transport initiative

60. On 1 July 2020, the SmartGrowth Leadership Group (SLG) approved the Urban Form and Transport Initiative final report. It was subsequently adopted by each of the three partner Councils in formal meetings which immediately followed the SLG meeting.

Sales of Lakes Boulevard and Aneta Way

61. In May, staff report to Council on the divestment process for the properties at Lakes Boulevard and Anita Way. The evaluation of tenders is being undertaken, with negotiation discussions also occurring. A report will be presented to the 30 July Council meeting on the outcome of the tender evaluation process, and seeking a Council decision on the divestment.

Housing infrastructure fund – update

62. The Housing Infrastructure Fund loan agreements have been varied to allow interest savings to be shared by ratepayers. Claims for loan uplift are being made as the capital expenditure on approved projects is incurred.

Attachments

1. New building consent exemptions - A11609881 ⇩

2. LGFA Letter to stakeholders following SGM - 30 June 2020 - A11611326 ⇩

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

14 July 2020

Summary of new exemptions

Single-storey detached buildings

(e.g. sleep outs, sheds and greenhouses)

There will be additional exemptions that increase the size of the current exemption:

• Kitset or prefab buildings with a maximum floor area of 30 square meters where a manufacturer or supplier has had the design carried out or reviewed by a Chartered Professional Engineer

• Buildings with a maximum floor area of 30 square meters where a Licensed Building Practitioner is to carry out or supervise design and construction

• Buildings with a maximum floor area of 30 square meters where only lightweight materials with structural components built in accordance to Building Code compliance B1/AS1 are used, and this work may be done without the help of a professional.

Ground-mounted solar array panels

In both rural and urban zones.

• In urban zones, there will be an exemption for panels up to 20 square meters which can be built without the help of a professional

• In urban zones, there will be an exemption for panels up to 40 square meters where the design has been carried out or reviewed by a Chartered Professional Engineer

• In rural zones, there will be an exemption with no restrictions in panel size which can be built without the help of a professional.

Carports up to 40 square meters

There will be two additional exemptions that increase the size of the building work from the current exemption:

• the design has been carried out or reviewed by a Chartered Professional Engineer

• a Licensed Building Practitioner has carried out or supervised design and construction.

Ground floor awnings up to 30 square meters

There will be two additional exemptions that increase the size of the building work from the current exemption:

• the design has been carried out or reviewed by a Chartered Professional Engineer

• a Licensed Building Practitioner has carried out or supervised design and construction.

Ground floor verandas and porches up to 30 square meters

There will be two additional exemptions that increase the size of the building work from the current exemption:

• the design has been carried out or reviewed by a Chartered Professional Engineer

• a Licensed Building Practitioner has carried out or supervised design and construction.

Outdoor fireplaces or ovens

With a maximum height of 2.5 meters, and maximum cooking surface of 1 square meter.

Flexible water storage bladders

For irrigation or firefighting purposes up to 200,000 litres in storage capacity.

Small pipe supporting structures

For water only and on private land.

Short-span (small) bridges

Which the general public cannot access and does not span on a road or rail area. The design will need to be carried out or reviewed by a Chartered Professional Engineer.

Single-storey pole sheds and hay barns in rural zones

There will be two exemptions:

• the design has been carried out or reviewed by a Chartered Professional Engineer

• a Licensed Building Practitioner has carried out or supervised design and construction.

All exempt building work must meet the Building Code as well as other relevant legislation.

It is the building owner's responsibility to check whether a building consent is required. If the work that they are planning to carry out falls outside of the specified requirements, they will need to get a building consent. If you're not sure if you need consent - ask for advice.

The changes are expected to take effect on 31 August however, more information about the new exemptions, including detailed technical requirements will not be available until sometime in August. There are still many unanswered questions and nit seems quite a lot of detail under some very broad headings above. It is expected that LBP technical requirements will be on the website later this year.

Given the nature of the exemptions and given the low numbers of consent applications received it is considered that there will be minimal impact in terms of revenue for the Council. The unknown is the number of people opting to construct small buildings that may not have under the current legislation.

It is considered that the major impact will be through the need to comply with the City Plan and the potential neighborhood issues regarding the level of complaints around structures being built on and without consent. Also an unknown is any administration requirements of these changes, such as placing information on property files.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

14 July 2020

SmartGrowth Leadership Group (Joint Committee) Agreement

1. Purpose

This Agreement is made pursuant to Clause 30A, Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 (“LGA 2002”). The purpose is to provide for a Joint Committee of Tauranga City Council, Western Bay of Plenty District Council, the Bay of Plenty Regional Council, and tāngata whenua^{^[1]} to undertake and implement strategic spatial planning across the western Bay of Plenty sub-region^{^[2]} in accordance with the SmartGrowth Strategy, outcomes from the Urban Form and Transport Initiative and the joint spatial plan as agreed between the Crown and the SmartGrowth partners. This joint committee is known as the ‘SmartGrowth Leadership Group’.

The Leadership Group has additional public body representation from the New Zealand Transport Agency (NZTA) through its Director of Regional Relationships and the Bay of Plenty District Health Board (DHB). The NZTA and DHB are non-voting members but have speaking rights.

The SmartGrowth Leadership Group has expanded membership for the Urban Growth Management Partnership and associated programmes to include Central Government.

This Agreement focuses on the Leadership Group, including its membership and delegations. Any additional Memoranda of Understanding that are completed will be in addition, and complementary to, this Agreement.

The joint SmartGrowth Leadership Group has been established to focus on strategic spatial planning, including the four well-beings (social, economic, environmental, cultural), and growth management in the western Bay of Plenty sub-region. This will occur through developing and implementing plans and strategies and recommending these to the SmartGrowth partners, as well as monitoring and undertaking reviews in accordance with the delegations set out in section 4 and the principles set out in the Terms of Reference attached to this Agreement as Appendix 1.

The Leadership Group is a formal joint committee pursuant to the Local Government Act 2002 (Clause 30 and 30A, Schedule 7). The Leadership Group will not be discharged at the point of the next election period (in line with Clause 30(7) of Schedule 7, LGA 2002).

2. Membership

The SmartGrowth Leadership Group is to be comprised of three elected member representatives as appointed by the local authorities, including the Mayors and Regional Council Chairperson, and four tāngata whenua representatives to be nominated by Iwi or through any other agreed mechanism. The SmartGrowth Leadership Group may at its discretion appoint an additional tāngata whenua representative.

In addition, up to three Ministers of the Crown who will have voting capacity, are to be appointed by the Crown. Additional Ministers, if and when relevant and required, can be appointed by the SmartGrowth Leadership Group in a non-voting capacity.

An Independent Chairperson (non-elected member) is to be appointed by the SmartGrowth Leadership Group to chair the Committee. The Independent Chairperson has speaking rights and voting capacity. A Deputy Chairperson is also to be appointed by the SmartGrowth Leadership Group at the beginning of each triennium, from the existing voting membership.

The partners shall also appoint alternates. One nominated alternate shall be appointed by Tauranga City Council, one for Western Bay of Plenty District Council, one for the Bay of Plenty Regional Council, one for tāngata whenua and one for the Crown. These alternates will only attend and participate in Leadership Group meetings if the relevant Mayor, Regional Council Chair, Councillor, tāngata whenua, or Ministerial representative is unavailable. The alternates can only speak or vote when deputising for the respective Mayor, Regional Council Chair, Councillor, tāngata whenua or Ministerial representative.

The NZTA is to be represented through its Director of Regional Relationships with speaking rights but in a non-voting capacity. The DHB is also represented on the Leadership Group, by a person to be nominated by the Board with speaking rights but in a non-voting capacity.

The standing membership of the Leadership Group shall be limited to 22 members (including the Independent Chairperson), but with the power to co-opt up to a maximum of three additional non-voting members where required to ensure effective planning and implementation. In accordance with Clause 30A of Schedule 7 to the Local Government Act 2002, the quorum at a meeting of the Leadership Group shall be 11 voting members.

Other representatives of voting and non-voting organisations are permitted to attend meetings of the Leadership Group. Speaking rights of other representatives at Leadership Group meetings (whether in public session or not) shall only be granted with the prior approval of the Chairperson. In respect of SmartGrowth Leadership Group workshops, all members of partner governance groups can attend and participate.

3. Meeting Frequency

Quarterly, or as necessary and determined by the Independent Chairperson.

Notification of meetings and the publication of agendas and reports shall be conducted in accordance with the requirements of Part 7 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and will be undertaken by the agreed administration authority.

4. Delegations

The SmartGrowth Leadership Group is delegated the following functions in support of its overall purpose:

Co-ordinating Sub-regional Spatial Planning

§ Providing sub-regional leadership on spatial planning, growth, infrastructure planning and development, focusing on key issues including the four well-beings^{^[3]} and the sustainable management of natural resources.

§ Undertaking high-level spatial planning and dealing with cross boundary matters.

§ Determining as far as practicable consistency between the various Government National Policy Statements

§ Overseeing and coordinating National Policy Statement on Urban Development implementation.

§ Reviewing and updating the SmartGrowth Settlement Pattern

§ Overseeing infrastructure / facilities and the funding necessary to implement the Settlement Pattern.

§ Setting overarching sub-regional policy, actions and approaches relevant to the SmartGrowth Strategy.

§ Sharing the challenges of implementation and overcoming the barriers moving forward.

Urban Growth Partnership

§ Overseeing the development and implementation of a joint spatial plan for the western Bay of Plenty sub-region and associated work streams, including adopting any drafts for public consultation.

§ Overseeing, including any reviews and monitoring, a joint urban growth programme.

§ Ensuring organisation systems and resources support implementation of the joint spatial plan and any associated urban growth programme.

§ Addressing cross-boundary matters within the western Bay of Plenty sub-region, as well as with other neighbouring regions.

§ Addressing housing affordability matters.

§ Monitoring the implementation of the spatial plan and associated work streams.

§ Reviewing and recommending changes to the spatial plan if circumstances change.

§ Ensuring alignment with existing council plans, strategies and policies, and with existing evidence.

§ Ensuring alignment with initiatives already underway such as the Urban Form and Transport Initiative.

§ Facilitating consultation with the partners and the wider community where relevant.

Future Thinking and Advocacy

§ Having a united voice where issues require joint advocacy.

§ Development and leadership of an agreed sub-regional advocacy programme

§ Engagement on intra and inter-regional matters where there are impacts beyond the sub-region, including matters of Upper North Island or national importance.

§ Facilitating community understanding and discussions/conversations.

§ Facilitating specific consultation with the community on SmartGrowth implementation matters.

§ Establishing, maintaining and engaging with the SmartGrowth Partner Forums.

§ Communicating and engaging with key stakeholders where a sub-regional level view is required.

§ Identifying and resolving any consultation inconsistencies between the SmartGrowth strategies and subsequent public consultation processes of the partner Councils

SmartGrowth Strategy Development, Implementation and Alignment Monitoring

§ Overseeing the implementation of the 2013 SmartGrowth Strategy, in particular the strategy actions, and undertaking any reviews or updates to the Strategy, including adopting any drafts for public consultation.

§ Ensuring organisation systems and resources support strategy implementation.

§ Taking responsibility for progressing those actions specifically allocated to the SmartGrowth Leadership Group in the strategy and making sure implementation does occur.

§ Reviewing and recommending adjustments to the strategy if circumstances change.

§ Champion integration and implementation through partner strategies, programmes, plans and policy instruments (including the Regional Policy Statement, Regional and District Plans, Long Term Plans (LTPs), Annual Plans, transport plans and triennial agreements) and through partnerships with other sectors such as health, education and business.

§ Approving submissions to Local Authorities, Central Government and other agencies on SmartGrowth related matters

§ Monitoring of the strategic outcomes and ensuring a joined-up approach to strategy implementation, including monitoring and reporting implementation progress against key milestones

§ Overviewing the management of the risks identified in implementation.

§ Making specific recommendations to partners on the joined-up thinking needed for resolving issues

Committee Operations

§ Selecting and appointing an Independent Chairperson and a Deputy Chairperson.

§ Implementing any Memoranda of Agreement or Understanding, as adopted by the Leadership Group.

§ Establish protocols and arrangements to ensure that implementation, where necessary, is consistent, collaborative and/or coordinated to achieve optimal outcomes.

Central Government’s participation in the SmartGrowth Leadership Group does not constitute endorsement of initiatives in any way, and all financial, policy and other decisions still need to be approved by Central Government.

5. Variation of this Agreement

This agreement may be varied from time to time, but only with the agreement of each of the partners.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

14 July 2020

10.4 Code of Conduct

File Number: A11129586

Author: Coral Hair, Manager: Democracy Services

Authoriser: Susan Jamieson, General Manager: People & Engagement

Purpose of the Report

1. The purpose of the report is to consider and adopt an updated Code of Conduct for the Mayor and Councillors.

Recommendations

That the Council:

(a) Receives the report on the Code of Conduct; and

(b) Revokes the current Code of Conduct 2016-19 in Attachment 2; and

(i) Agrees to continue with the requirement for a member to declare whether or not they are an undischarged bankrupt.

(ii) Agrees to include a new provision requiring members to complete the Regulatory Register (section 9.2).

EITHER

(d) Agrees that the Council considers and decides on Code of Conduct complaints.

AND/OR

(e) Establishes a Code of Conduct Committee to hear and decide on Code of Conduct complaints with the following membership and delegations:

(i) Membership of the Code of Conduct Committee to be three members consisting of:

1. the Mayor to chair the Committee (except where there is a potential conflict of interest where the Mayor will stand aside, and the committee will be chaired by the Deputy Mayor);

2. two non-elected members appointed by the Council on the basis of relevant experience, knowledge and/or qualifications; and

(ii) Delegates to the Code of Conduct Committee the following powers and terms of reference:

(1) To consider and decide on Code of Conduct complaints referred to the Committee, including the findings of an independent investigator, and determine whether or not a penalty or action should be imposed, and if so, the nature of that penalty or action;

(2) To refer the final Code of Conduct Committee decisions to the Chief Executive for implementation;

(3) To consider any matters relating to the Code of Conduct and/or the behaviour of elected members referred to it by the Council for advice.

And that in fulling the terms of reference the Code of Conduct Committee will:

(4) In considering a report from the Chief Executive, ask, if necessary, the investigator to provide briefing on their findings and invite the complainant and respondent to speak to any written submissions that might have been made;

(5) Conduct its business in open meeting, except where the alleged breach concerns matters that justify the exclusion of the public, in which case it will be a closed meeting;

(6) Ensure that penalties or actions recommended in response to a serious breach of the Code are proportionate to the breach and consistent with the actions set out in the Code.

(iii) Delegates to the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Mayor, the development of the position description (including the experience, knowledge and qualifications/skills sought) for the Code of Conduct Committee non-elected members and the authority to establish an appointment panel to select and recommend to the Council these appointments.

(iv) Authorises the Chief Executive, in consultation with the Mayor, to determine the remuneration for the Code of Conduct Committee non-elected members.

(f) Deletes all reference to a Code of Conduct Committee in the Code of Conduct.

(g) Notes that the Code of Conduct can only be replaced by a vote of at least 75 percent of members present at the meeting.

(h) Notes that the Elected Members’ Interests Disclosure Procedure will be updated to reflect the updated Code of Conduct.

Executive Summary

2. The Council considered this report on 2 June 2020 and resolved to let the report lie on the table as there were a number of amendments proposed during the meeting and members needed time to read and consider these changes. A Council workshop was held on 25 June 2020 to consider the track change version of the draft Code of Conduct (refer to attachment 1) which included the changes proposed at the 2 June 2020 meeting.

3. The Code of Conduct (the Code) for the Mayor and Councillors sets out the standards of behaviour expected from elected members in the exercise of their duties. It is also concerned with the disclosure of information that members receive when they hold office. The updated Code is based on the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) template and includes a range of new features that draws on good practice introduced by councils over the last decade.

4. The Code introduces a new requirement to complete a Regulatory Register (in section 9.2) where there is potential for elected members to be seen to be influencing a regulatory and/or compliance outcome.

5. It is recommended that the requirement for a member to declare whether or not they are an undischarged bankrupt remains in the Code.

6. The Code distinguishes between trivial and serious breaches of the Code and sets up processes for dealing with both types of complaint and a test for “materiality”.

7. The Council will need to decide whether to establish a Code of Conduct Committee to consider and decide on complaints referred to it.

Background

8. The Code sets out the agreed standards of behaviour for the Mayor and Councillors towards each other, the Chief Executive and staff, the media and the general public. It is also concerned with the disclosure of confidential information that members receive when they hold office. It includes a general explanation of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA) and other acts applying to members.

9. The updated Code is based largely on the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) template and includes a range of new features that draws on good practice introduced by councils.

10. LGNZ state that the Code has four objectives: to highlight the importance of achieving ‘good local government’; effective and inclusive decision-making; strengthened community credibility and developing a culture of trust and mutual respect within the local authority.

11. The Code includes the following:

(a) Guidance for managing relationships and ensuring constructive behaviour, including processes for ensuring these are adhered to. This covers relationships with other members, staff, the media and the public;

(b) A statement of the different roles and responsibilities of governance and management. The Code complements and reinforces the rules and statutory provisions set out in the council’s standing orders;

(c) Provisions dealing with confidentiality of information received during the course of a members’ duties, as well as situations when members are required to disclose information to the local authority and each other;

(d) Provisions dealing with conflicts of interest;

(e) Provisions dealing with ethical conduct, such as the way in which expenses may be claimed and soliciting or accepting gifts, rewards, or benefits;

(f) An explanation of the importance of adhering to the Code and details of the procedures for investigating and resolving alleged breaches;

(g) Provisions designed to encourage courteous and constructive behaviours and so reduce the risk of poor behaviour and alleged breaches;

(h) Details of penalties or sanctions, such as what they are, when they might be applied, and the processes for their application (where these processes are within the control of council); and

(i) Provisions for the review of a Code of Conduct.

changes to the code

12. The following changes to the current Code are based on the LGNZ template, except for (i) the inclusion of the regulatory register, which is specific to this Council:

(a) An index.

(b) A new value “equitable contribution” that highlights the importance of elected members “pulling their weight” in section 3.

(c) Simplification of the roles and responsibilities in section 4. However, the Chief Executive’s role has been expanded and is the same as that in the current Code.

(d) New note in section 5.1 “Relationships between members” that nothing in this section of the Code is intended to limit robust debate.

(e) Additional bullet point about avoiding abuse of meeting procedures in section 5.1.

(f) Updated section 5.3 “Relationship with the public”.

(g) Updated section on media and social media (section 6) and Appendix A sets out guidelines on the personal use of social media.

(h) A description of the annual declaration of interest in section 9.1 and the Register of Interest form to be completed in Appendix C.

(i) A new provision requiring members to complete the Regulatory Register (section 9.2).

(j) Encouragement for members to participate in activities to build and maintain a collaborative and cooperative culture within the council (section 11).

(k) A new process for investigating and assessing complaints, including a “materiality” test (section 15) that distinguishes between trivial, frivolous and minor complaints and more material complaints. All complaints are referred to an independent investigator in Appendix D.

(l) Additional guidance on penalties or sanctions (section 15).

(m) Clarification that complaints can only be made by members and the Chief Executive.

13. The Council must when adopting a code of conduct, consider whether it must require a member to declare whether or not they are an undischarged bankrupt. The current Code includes this provision and it is recommended that it remain.

14. There is no requirement to include a Dress Code however, this has previously been in the Code and it is recommended that it be kept. This was discussed at the Standing Orders training session on 30 January 2020 and the current wording “that members will dress in a manner that does not bring discredit to the Council” was seen as broad enough to be inclusive of various ethnic, religious and personal dress preferences.

Regulatory register

15. The Council discussed the inclusion of a Regulatory Register at various times during the training and induction process including a briefing by Linda O’Reilly on local governance on 6 November 2019, the Standing Orders training on 30 January 2020 and the Office of the Ombudsman’s training on 3 March 2020.

16. The Regulatory Register, once included in the Code, will be required to be completed where there is potential for elected members to be seen to be influencing a regulatory and/or compliance outcome. The Regulatory Register requires an open declaration of any potential conflict of interest, actual or perceived, where elected members have a close relationship or involvement with or are advocating for and on behalf of an individual, organisation or company affected by a decision of the Council in its regulatory and compliance roles.

17. The inclusion of the Regulatory Register is recommended in order to:

· promote greater transparency for the public and staff working in the regulatory and compliance areas of Council.

· provide protection for elected members from perceived conflicts of interest.

· provide protection for staff from perceived pressure and interference in regulatory and compliance decisions.

18. A statement has been included in the Code that for clarity the Regulatory Register is not required to be completed where elected members are making routine queries on behalf of their constituents e.g. elected members queries or where the mayor and councillors are undertaking discussions and meetings of a general nature with developers or businesses.

19. A process will be developed once the Code is adopted, to provide clarity on how the Mayor and Councillors fulfil their obligations to complete the Regulatory Register.

breaches of the code

20. The amended Code distinguishes between trivial and serious breaches of the Code and sets out a definition of what constitutes a ‘material’ breach. It also includes a more detailed process for investigating complaints. These changes came about following a report on codes of conduct from the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) who noted that many councils lacked a process for distinguishing between trivial and serious complains and consequently spent considerable energy and resources hearing complaints on what was in effect trivial matters.

21. The OAG stated in their report that^{^[5]}:

We consider that the key factors for councils to bear in mind when dealing with future code complaints (or in reviewing their codes) are:

(a) attempting to resolve issues informally and privately wherever possible, and reserving use of the formal enforcement mechanism for only the most serious cases;

(b) providing in their code some method of preliminary assessment of complaints, with a discretionary power to dismiss those that do not warrant being taken further;

(c) where applicable, carefully selecting the personnel to be involved, to ensure that they have the appropriate skills and experience for the task required of them;

(d) paying careful attention to following a fair process (including, but not necessarily limited to, whatever steps or entitlements are specified in their code), and seeking legal advice if necessary; and

(e) proactively managing the process, to ensure that the matter is dealt with promptly (without compromising the need to act fairly).

22. The Council discussed on 2 June 2020 the LGNZ recommendations to refer initial complaints to the Mayor. The Mayor advised that he preferred not to be involved in the complaints process and it was agreed to amend the Code to refer all complaints to an independent investigator. The complaints process is set out in section 14 and Appendix D. There are different paths where a complaint is found by the independent investigator to be trivial or frivolous or non-material that do not involve the complaint proceeding any further.

23. Where a complaint is found to be material, the independent investigator prepares a report and may at that point undertake further investigation. The Chief Executive then prepares a report to the Council, or a constituted committee, to consider the investigators full report and recommendations, hear any submissions and make a finding on whether a breach has occurred and what actions/penalties may be put in place.

24. If the complaint is potentially a legislative breach, and outside the scope of the Code, the Chief Executive will refer the complaint to the relevant agency.

25. The amended code makes it clear that complaints can only be made by the Mayor and Councillors and the Chief Executive.

code of conduct committee

26. The OAG was critical of the failure to guard against the risk of members with an interest in a complaint taking part in the decision on whether or not to uphold a complaint. Those members who are interested parties in the complaint should not take part in discussions on the matter or decide or determine penalties.

27. To avoid that situation and ensure processes are free of bias, especially when all councillors might be seen to be interested parties, it was recommended by the OAG that councils consider establishing a Code of Conduct Committee.

28. LGNZ has recommended there be three members consisting of the Mayor and two community non-elected members chosen for their knowledge and experience, either by invitation or as a result of a call for expressions of interest. Where the Mayor is directly or indirectly involved in a complaint it is recommended that the Deputy Mayor take the Mayor’s place.

29. The Council will need to decide whether to set up a Code of Conduct Committee and what the make-up of the Committee will be and whether the Committee should have delegated decision-making or only recommendatory powers. The draft Code refers to a Code of Conduct Committee, if one is established, and this provides for the Council to resolve to establish one now or at a later stage in the triennium.

30. If the Council agrees to establish a Committee it is recommended that the Committee be delegated the following decision-making powers:

1. To consider and decide on Code of Conduct complaints referred to the Committee, including the findings of an independent investigator, and determine whether or not a penalty or action should be imposed, and if so, the nature of that penalty or action;

2. To refer the final Code of Conduct Committee decisions to the Chief Executive for implementation;

3. To consider any matters relating to the Code of Conduct and/or the behaviour of elected members referred to it by the Council for advice.

And that in fulling the terms of reference the Code of Conduct Committee will:

4. In considering a report from the Chief Executive, ask, if necessary, the investigator to provide briefing on their findings and invite the complainant and respondent to speak to any written submissions that might have been made;

5. Conduct its business in open meeting, except where the alleged breach concerns matters that justify the exclusion of the public, in which case it will be a closed meeting;

6. Ensure that penalties or actions recommended in response to a serious breach of the Code are proportionate to the breach and consistent with the actions set out in the Code.

31. The Council has the following options which are set out in the recommendations:

(a) Refer all complaints to the Council for consideration and a decision (recommendation (d)).

(b) Establish a Code of Conduct Committee now and have the option of referring complaints to the Council or to the committee (recommendations (d) and (e)).

(c) Establish a Code of Conduct Committee now and refer all complaints to this committee for consideration and a decision. (recommendation (e) – delete recommendation (d)).

(d) Delete all reference to the Code of Conduct Committee in the Code. (recommendations (d) and (f)).

criticism of code of conducts

32. A Massey researcher, Dr Catherine Strong from the School of Communication, Journalism and Marketing, expressed concern in 2016 that some local councils were “gagging” their elected members and stifling free speech by preventing elected members talking to the media about anything negative within their council.

33. Dr Strong undertook a content analysis of codes of conduct of 67 city and district councils in New Zealand. She stated that while most councils clearly stated that elected members have the right to talk freely to the media (with obvious restrictions around confidential information and employment practices), the research found that 10 councils (15 per cent) restrict elected members giving critical opinion to the media. She stated that Tauranga City Council prevented media comments that would “undermine” council policy and this word could be interpreted to prevent any criticism.

34. Ms Strong stated that these restrictions on members speaking publicly meant that the community got the impression all decisions get all agreement and that there are no contrary views to the myriad of policies and decisions a council takes.

35. LGNZ states in their Guidance document that the Code is not a means of preventing members from expressing their views and a Code should promote free and frank debate which should in turn result in good decision making.

36. Provided that a member does not attempt to present a personal view as anything other than their own view (and does not contravene other parts of the Code) they should be able to do so. The rules of conduct are there to promote debate and make it clear that personal views, and the rights of all members to express personal views, are to be respected. The Code does set boundaries on standards of behaviour in expressing and promoting those views and a means of resolving situations when members breach those standards.

elected member interests disclosure procedure

37. The Elected Member Interests Disclosure Procedure available on the council website sets out the procedure relating to completing and updating the declarations of interest for the Mayor and Councillors. This procedure will be updated to reflect the Code of Conduct decisions.

Strategic / Statutory Context

38. Clause 15 of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002 states that a council must adopt a code of conduct for members and that it may be amended or replaced but may not be revoked without replacement and requires a vote of at least 75 percent of members present at the meeting. An elected member must comply with the code of conduct.

Options Analysis

Option 1 – Adopt the amended Code – Preferred option

39. The Committee has the option of adopting the amended Code of Conduct set out in Attachment 2. This Code is based on the LGNZ template and is considered best practice and for this reason it is recommended that this option be adopted.

40. The OAG considered that councils should “re-adopt” their codes after each triennial election, to ensure the “buy in” of newly elected members to the code and to give the opportunity for the rules and principles to be reconsidered and debated.

41. The decision to establish a Code of Conduct Committee can be dealt with separately to the adoption of an amended Code.

Option 2 – Retain the existing Code

42. The Committee has the option of retaining the existing Code in Attachment 1 which includes provisions that are similar to the proposed Code. There would be no issues with continuing with the existing Code. While it is slightly out of date and does not keep pace with the OAG’s recommendations for best practice, it is still considered fit for purpose.

43. The decision to establish a Code of Conduct Committee can be dealt with separately to the decision to retain the existing Code.

Option 3 – Adopt a hybrid Code

44. The Committee has the option of picking and choosing various aspects of the old and new Codes and also has the option of adding new provisions.

Financial Considerations

45. The financial implications of the amended Code will depend on the number and type of complaints and whether a Code of Conduct Committee is established. Costs relating to complaints will be met within the Governance budget where possible.

Legal Implications / Risks

46. The current Code continues in place until an amended Code is adopted by the Council. An elected member must comply with the Code.

47. A breach of the Code does not constitute an offence under the Local Government Act 2002.

48. If a complaint is potentially a legislative breach, and outside the scope of the Code, the Chief Executive will refer the complaint to the relevant agency. If a member is convicted of a criminal offence punishable by two or more years imprisonment, or if they cease to be or lose their status as an elector then an elected member is automatically disqualified from office. Prosecution by the Audit Office for breaches of the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968 which leads to conviction can also lead to the member losing office.

49. Inviting the Auditor-General to prepare a report on any financial loss or damage suffered by a local authority as a result of a breach could potentially lead to the member having to personally make good the loss or damage.

50. The introduction of a materiality test raises the notion of disrepute that involves the Council’s reputation and the risk that specific behaviours will, in the mind of the public, undermine that reputation.

51. Codes of Conduct are helpful in explaining the distinction between governance and management and to make clear the requirements about members’ conduct in relation to staff and are considered to play an important role in reducing legal risk for councils in the area of employment disputes with chief executives and employment law risks.

Consultation / Engagement

52. There is no requirement to consult or engage the community about the contents of the Code of Conduct.

Significance

53. The adoption of an amended Code of Conduct is not considered to be significant in terms of the Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy.

Click here to view the TCC Significance and Engagement Policy

Next Steps

54. Once adopted the Code of Conduct will be made available on the Council’s website and the Elected Member Interests Disclosure Procedure will be updated to reflect the decisions made by the Council on the Code of Conduct.

55. If a Code of Conduct Committee is approved the Chief Executive will recruit the two non-elected members and report back to the Council with recommendations for appointment.

Attachments

1. Code of Conduct Elected Members 2020-22 Tauranga City Council - track changes from 2 June 2020 Council meeting - A11610626 ⇩

2. 2016-2019 Elected Members' Code of Conduct - A11332496 ⇩

PART THREE: RELATIONSHIPS AND BEHAVIOURS

This part of the code sets out the Council’s agreed standards of behaviour. Some of the matters described in this part of the code reflect other legislation such as the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968. The majority of the code is material that the Council has decided to include of its own initiative.

In the performance of their official duties and with all relationships, members should refrain from any form of conduct which may cause any reasonable person unwarranted offence or embarrassment.

Relationships with Other Members

Working together in a constructive style is a critical element to the success of any democratically elected organisation. No Council will be effective unless mutual respect exists between members. With this in mind elected members will conduct their dealings with each other in ways that:

· maintain public confidence in the office to which they have been elected

· are open and honest

· focus on the issues rather than personalities

· avoid aggressive, offensive or abusive conduct including intimidation and/or bullying

· shall maintain the respect and dignity of their office in their dealings with each other, Council officers, and the public

· will act in good faith (i.e., honestly, for the proper purpose, and without exceeding their powers) in the interests of the Council and the community

· members will make no allegations regarding other members or Council officers which are improper or derogatory.

Relationships with Staff

The effective performance of Council also requires a high level of cooperation and mutual respect between elected members and staff. To ensure that level of cooperation and trust is maintained, elected members will:

· recognise that the Chief Executive is the employer (on behalf of Council) of all Council employees, and as such only the Chief Executive may hire, dismiss or instruct or censure an employee

· make themselves aware of the obligations that the Council and the Chief Executive have as employers

· treat all employees with courtesy and respect

· not do anything which compromises, or could be seen as compromising, the impartiality of an employee

· avoid publicly criticising any employee directly especially in ways that reflect on the competence and integrity of the employee

· raise concerns about employees only with the Chief Executive, and concerns about the Chief Executive only with the Mayor or the Chief Executive Performance Review Process.

Elected members should be aware that failure to observe this portion of the code of conduct may compromise the Council’s obligations to act as a good employer and may expose the Council to civil litigation and audit sanctions.

Relationships with the Community

Effective Council decision-making depends on productive relationships between elected members and the community at large.

Members should act in a manner that encourages and values community involvement in local democracy.

Members should not make any commitment to the community on behalf of the collective Council without the consent of all members.

Members should treat members of the community with courtesy and respect at all times.

Contact with the Media

The media plays an important part in local democracy. In order to fulfil this role, the media needs access to accurate, timely information about the affairs of the Council. From time to time, individual members will be approached to comment on a particular issue either on behalf of the Council, or as an elected member in their own right. This part of the Code deals with the rights and duties of elected members when speaking to the media on behalf of the Council, or in their own right.

The following rules apply for media contact on behalf of the Council:

· the Mayor is the first point of contact for the official view of the Council on any issue. Where the Mayor is absent any matters will be referred to the Deputy Mayor or relevant committee chairperson;

· the Mayor may refer any matter to the relevant committee chairperson or to the relevant chairperson(s);

· the chairperson may comment on behalf of the committee in relation to matters where decision making, public consultation or advocacy is a responsibility of the committee;

· no other member may comment on behalf of the Council without having first obtained the approval of the Mayor, or on behalf of a committee without first having obtained the approval of the committee chairperson.

· Individual elected members may respond to enquiries from the media and when doing so, must ensure it is clear whether they express their own personal view or the official view of Council.

Elected members are free to express a personal view in the media, at any time. When doing so, they should observe the following:

· media comments must not state or imply that they represent the views of the Council;

· where an elected member is making a statement that is contrary to the Council decision or policy, the member must not state or imply that his or her statements represent a majority view;

· media comments must observe the other requirements of the code of conduct, e.g. not disclose confidential information, or compromise the impartiality or integrity of staff or be derogatory in respect of another elected member.

Elected members who have a concern about any communication they receive or are aware of should raise the matter with:

· the Mayor if it relates to a communication from an elected member;

· the Chief Executive if it relates to a communication from a staff member.

Use of Social Media

Electronic communications are public information. Emails are archived,

easily recovered and may be requested by the public and media under the provisions

of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.

Elected members will not send, or attempt to send electronic communication

to others that:

· may be viewed as harassment (unwelcome or unreciprocated

behaviour)

· includes potentially offensive or discriminatory material;

· that may bring the Council into disrepute e.g. sending derogatory remarks about people or organisations.

Social media is the term for internet based tools used for publishing, sharing and

discussing information. This includes blogs, wikis and social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter or LinkedIn.

All communication through social media platforms is in the public domain. Whether

talking to the media, speaking in public or using social media, the protocols outlined

below apply; namely:

· show respect and avoid offensive or abusive language;

· make it clear you are expressing a personal opinion;

· do not disclose confidential information;

· do not impugn the integrity or impartiality of fellow elected members or staff;

· do not undermine Council policy or bring the Council into disrepute.

Confidential Information

In the course of their duties members will receive information that may need to be treated as confidential. This will generally be information that is either commercially sensitive or is personal to a particular individual or organisation.

Elected members must not use or disclose confidential information for any purpose other than the purpose for which the information was supplied to the elected member.

Elected members should be aware that failure to observe these provisions will impede the performance of Council by inhibiting information flows and undermining public confidence in the Council. Failure to observe these provisions may also expose Council to prosecution under the Privacy Act 1993 and/or civil litigation.

Conflicts of Interest

Elected members must be careful that they maintain a clear separation between their personal interests and their duties as an elected member. This is to ensure that people who fill positions of authority carry on their duties free from bias (whether real or perceived). Members therefore need to familiarise themselves with the provisions of the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968 which concerns financial interests, and with other legal requirements concerning non-financial conflicts of interest.

The Act provides that an elected member is disqualified from office, or from election to office, if that member is concerned or interested in contracts under which payments made by or on behalf of the local authority exceed $25,000 in any financial year.

Additionally, elected members are prohibited from participating in any Council discussion or vote on any matter in which they have a pecuniary interest, other than an interest in common with the general public. The same rules also apply where the member’s spouse contracts with the authority or has a pecuniary interest. Members must declare their interests at Council meetings where matters in which they have a pecuniary interest arise.

If the member is in any doubt as to whether or not a particular course of action (including a decision to take no action) raises a conflict of interest, then the member should seek guidance from the Chief Executive immediately.

Members may also contact the Audit Office for guidance as to whether that member has a pecuniary interest. If there is a pecuniary interest, the member may seek an exemption to allow that member to participate or vote on a particular issue in which they may have a pecuniary interest. The latter must be done before the discussion or vote. The Chief Executive must also seek approval from the Audit Office for contractual payments to members, their spouses or their companies that exceed the $25,000 annual limit.

Failure to observe the requirements of the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968 could potentially invalidate the particular decision made, or the action taken, by Council. Failure to observe these requirements could also leave the elected member open to prosecution under the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968. In the event of a conviction elected members can be ousted from office.

Non-financial conflicts of interest

Non-financial conflicts of interest, or the perception of a conflict of interest, may impair (or be seen to impair) an elected members’ ability to act faithfully, impartially and in the best interests of Tauranga City.

Potential conflicts of interest are to be declared at the beginning of any Council meeting, or at the first opportunity in a decision-making process. The onus is on individual elected members to identify and declare potential conflicts of interest.

Elected members must declare any non-financial interests they may have in any matters before Council. Open declaration of any potential conflict of interest, actual or perceived, promotes greater transparency in Council decision-making. The elected member may:

· Exclude themselves from the vote and/or discussion; or

· Provide clear reasons why they do not believe exclusion is appropriate; or

· Explain the circumstances of the potential conflict of interest and ask that Council resolve whether a conflict exists.

In certain circumstances, Council may choose to allow an elected member with a conflict of interest to remain present for, and/or contribute to the discussion of the matter. This may occur when it is considered that the contribution of knowledge or experience from the elected member in question would promote more informed or better quality decision-making by the other members of Council. However, it is expected under Standing Orders that an Elected Member will leave the room where a matter is being discussed as a public excluded item.

An elected member who is in any doubt as to whether a conflict of interest exists should approach the Chief Executive for advice.

Ethics

Tauranga City Council seeks to promote the highest standards of ethical conduct amongst its elected members. A person in a position of trust, such as a Councillor, should not make a profit through his or her office. Accordingly, elected members will:

· claim only for legitimate expenses as laid down by the Elected Members Expenses / Resources Policy as approved by the Remuneration Authority

· not influence, or attempt to influence, any Council employee to take actions that may benefit the elected member, or the elected member’s family or business interests

· Only use Council resources (including facilities, staff, equipment and supplies) effectively and economically in the course of their duties, and within other guidelines, and not in connection with any election campaign or other personal business

· not solicit, demand, or request any gift, reward or benefit by virtue of their position

· notify the Chief Executive if any gifts over $100.00 are accepted and record in a gift register

· where a gift to the value of $100.00 excluding GST or more is offered to an elected member, immediately disclose this to the Chief Executive for inclusion in the publicly available register of interests.

Acceptance of substantial gifts, favours or hospitality may be construed as a bribe or perceived as undue influence. Working meals and social occasions should be undertaken in an appropriate manner.

Members are to ensure that information relating to their interests are declared and shown as up to date on the Members’ Interest Register.

Dress Code

It is expected that members will dress in a manner that does not bring discredit to the Council.

Meeting Attendance

The Remuneration Authority deems members’ positions to be close to full time. Elected members are expected to fulfil their obligations as members of the Council by preparing for meetings, attending and taking part in discussion in meetings of which they are a member. It is recognised that despite best endeavours there are occasionally times when other commitments prevent attendance. Nevertheless, persistent non-attendance at meetings by a member can be raised by the Mayor or a committee chairperson as a breach of the Code of Conduct.

Standing Orders

Elected members must adhere to any standing orders adopted by Council under the Local Government Act 2002. These standing orders are subject to the same legal requirements as a code of conduct with regard to their adoption and amendment.

Pre-Election Period

During the three months prior to polling date for local authority elections, Council resources should not be used in any way that could be deemed to give any sitting member an electoral advantage. During this period elected members will:

· not use Council stationery, email, postage or fax/phone facilities or any other Council resource explicitly for campaign purposes

· not attempt to make any use of Council communications that could be construed as giving that member an unfair electoral advantage by raising their profile

· Abide by any Council policies adopted by the Governing Body relating to conduct during the pre-election period.

Note: Complaints in regard to any matter relating to the conduct of the elections are to be made through the Electoral Officer. If any complaint involves the use of Council resources the Electoral Officer will bring the complaint to the attention of the Chief Executive.

Bankruptcy

Elected members who are declared bankrupt shall notify the Chief Executive as soon as practicable after being declared bankrupt.

Disqualification of Members from Office

Elected members are automatically disqualified from office if they are convicted of a criminal offence punishable by two or more years’ imprisonment, or if they cease to be or lose their status as an elector or of certain breaches of the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968.

PART FOUR: COMPLIANCE AND REVIEW

This part deals with ensuring that elected members adhere to the code of conduct and mechanisms for the review of the code of conduct.

Compliance

Elected members must note that they are bound to comply with the provisions of this code of conduct (Local Government Act 2002, Schedule 7, section 15(4)).

Members are also bound by the Local Government Act 2002, the Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968, the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, the Secret Commissions Act 1910, the Crimes Act 1961 and the Securities Act 1978. The Chief Executive will ensure that an explanation of these Acts is made at the first meeting after each triennial election and that copies of these Acts are freely available to elected members. Short explanations of the obligations that each of these has with respect to conduct of elected members is attached in the Appendix to this code.

Compliance will be monitored by the full Council with issues not able to be resolved and referred to an independent advisor.

Material breaches of confidentiality are of a serious nature under this code.

Alleged breaches of this Code during meetings

It is expected that compliance with the provisions of this Code during a meeting shall be dealt with by the Chairperson of that meeting within Standing Orders at the time the breach arises. Members should raise alleged breaches of the Code with the Chairperson at the time. If a member believes that an alleged breach of the Code has not been dealt with adequately by the Chairperson at a meeting, that member may initiate the procedures set out below.

Alleged breaches of this Code at other times

If a member believes that this Code has been breached, that member must first

endeavour to resolve the matter informally by discussion with the member alleged to have breached the Code.

Investigation, advice and decision

The process, following receipt of a complaint, will follow the steps outlined below.

Lodging of Code of Conduct Complaints

A complaint in relation to another member must be addressed to the Mayor.

Any allegation of a breach of the Code must be in writing, make a specific allegation of a breach of the Code and provide corroborating evidence.

Complaints alleging a breach of the Code of Conduct may be made by any elected member or by the Chief Executive acting on behalf of staff or on behalf of a complaint from a CCO conveyed through that CCOs chief executive.

Process for the determination and investigation of complaints

Step 1: Chief executive receives complaint

On receipt of a complaint under this Code the chief executive will refer the complaint to an investigator selected from a panel agreed at the start of the triennium. The chief executive will also:

· inform the complainant that the complaint has been referred to the independent investigator and the name of the investigator, and refer them to the process for dealing with complaints as set out in the Code; and

· inform the respondent that a complaint has been made against them, the name of the investigator and refer them to the process for dealing with complaints as set out in the Code.

Step 2: Investigator makes preliminary assessment

On receipt of a complaint the investigator will assess whether:

1. the complaint is frivolous or without substance and should be dismissed;

2. the complaint is outside the scope of the Code and should be redirected to another agency or process;

3. the complaint is non-material; and

4. the complaint is material and a full investigation is required.

In making the assessment the investigator may make whatever initial inquiry is necessary to determine the appropriate course of action. The investigator has full discretion to dismiss any complaint which, in their view, fails to meet the test of materiality.

On receiving the investigator’s preliminary assessment, the chief executive will:

1. where an investigator determines that a complaint is frivolous or without substance, inform the complainant and respondent directly and inform other members (if there are no grounds for confidentiality) of the investigator’s decision;

2. in cases where the investigator finds that the complaint involves a potential legislative breach and outside the scope of the Code, forward the complaint to the relevant agency and inform both the complainant and respondent of the action.

Step 3: Actions where a breach is found to be non-material

If the subject of a complaint is found to be non-material the investigator will inform the chief executive and, if they choose, recommend a course of action appropriate to the breach, such as;

· that the respondent seek guidance from the Chairperson or Mayor;

· that the respondent attends appropriate courses or programmes to increase their knowledge and understanding of the matters leading to the complaint.

The chief executive will advise both the complainant and the respondent of the investigator’s decision and any recommendations, neither of which are open to challenge. Any recommendations made in response to a non-material breach are non-binding on the respondent and the council.

Step 4: Actions where a breach is found to be material

If the subject of a complaint is found to be material the investigator will inform the chief executive, who will inform the complainant and respondent. The investigator will then prepare a report for the council on the seriousness of the breach.

In preparing that report the investigator may:

· consult with the complainant, respondent and any affected parties;

· undertake a hearing with relevant parties; and/or

· refer to any relevant documents or information.

On receipt of the investigator’s report the chief executive will prepare a report for the council or committee with delegated authority, which will meet to consider the findings and determine whether or not a penalty, or some other form of action, will be imposed. The chief executive’s report will include the full report prepared by the investigator.

Step 5: Process for considering the investigator’s report

Depending upon the nature of the complaint and alleged breach the investigator’s report may be considered by the full council, excluding the complainant, respondent and any other ‘interested’ members, or a committee established for that purpose.

In order to avoid any suggestion of bias, a Code of Conduct Committee may often be the best mechanism for considering and ruling on complaints. Committees should be established at the start of a triennium with a majority of members selected from the community through either an application process or by invitation.

The council or committee will consider the chief executive’s report in open meeting, except where the alleged breach concerns matters that justify the exclusion of the public, such as the misuse of confidential information or a matter that would otherwise be exempt from public disclosure under s.48 of the LGOIMA, in which case it will be a closed meeting.

Before making any decision in respect of the investigator’s report the council or committee will give the member against whom the complaint has been made an opportunity to appear and speak in their own defence. Members with an interest in the proceedings, including the complainant and the respondent, may not take part in these proceedings.

The form of penalty that might be applied will depend on the nature of the breach and may include actions as follows:

In the case of material breaches of this Code the council, or a committee with delegated authority, may require one of the following:

1. a letter of censure to the member;

2. a request (made either privately or publicly) for an apology;

3. a vote of no confidence in the member;

4. removal of certain council-funded privileges (such as attendance at conferences);

5. restricted entry to council offices, such as no access to staff areas (where restrictions may not previously have existed);

6. limitation on any dealings with council staff so that they are confined to the chief executive only;

7. suspension from committees or other bodies; or

8. an invitation for the member to consider resigning from the council.

A council or committee may decide that a penalty will not be imposed where a respondent agrees to one or more of the following:

· attend a relevant training course; and/or

· work with a mentor for a period of time; and/or

· participate in voluntary mediation (if the complaint involves a conflict between two members); and/or

· tender an apology.

The process is based on the presumption that the outcome of a complaints process will be made public unless there are grounds, such as those set out in the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA), for not doing so.

In accordance with this Code, councils will agree to implement the recommendations of a Code of Conduct Committee without debate.

Review

Once adopted, a code of conduct continues in force until amended by the Council. The code can be amended at any time but cannot be revoked unless the Council replaces it with another code. Once adopted, amendments to the code of the conduct require a resolution supported by 75 per cent or more of the members of the Council present.

Council will formally review the code as soon as practicable after the beginning of each triennium. The results of that review will be presented to Council for their consideration and vote.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

14 July 2020

10.5 Waste Activity Update

File Number: A11565086

Author: Rebecca Maiden, Manager: Sustainability and Waste

Authoriser: Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Purpose of the Report

This report provides an update regarding the waste activity within the council, including proposed waste infrastructure and kerbside collection services.

Recommendations

That the Council receives the Waste Activity Update report.

Discussion

Kerbside Waste Collection Services and Waste Facilities Project

RFP Evaluation

Scope of Services

1. The scope of services for council is defined in Table 1. The awarding of leases associated with waste activities (Table 2) is also included as part of the RFP, as well as the cleansing services (public litter bin, and loose litter collection).

Services	Scope
Kerbside rubbish collection	· Fortnightly collection · Choice of bin size · Pay as you throw (PAYT)
Kerbside mixed recycling collection	· Fortnightly collection · Choice of bin size · Collection of paper, cardboard, plastics grade 1 and 2, tin and aluminium cans (only those items that have guaranteed end markets) · Out of scope: collection of plastic grades 3 - 7
Kerbside glass collection	· Fortnightly collection · 45L glass crate
Kerbside organics collection	· Weekly collection · 23L food waste bin and kitchen caddy · Option for supplier to supply a green waste service as part of the solution
Litter bin servicing and loose litter collection	· Servicing of public litter bins throughout the city
Transfer stations, and resource recovery facilities	· Upgrade and operation of the Maleme St and Te Maunga transfer stations, building upon existing diversion at these sites and creating more integration between site activities · Consolidation and bulk haulage of kerbside and litter service collected waste and glass · Awarding of site leases
Bin and crate supply	· Initial bulk bin supply and distribution · Ongoing bin and crate supply (new, additional or replacement) and maintenance during the contract term

Table 1: Kerbside waste services and facilities included in the procurement scope

Leases site description	Lease site available from
Te Maunga green waste composting site (land only)	March 2021
Te Maunga untreated wood processing site (land only)	March 2021
Te Maunga flat glass recycling area (land only)	March 2021

Table 2: Land leases included in the procurement scope

Non-price Evaluation

2. The evaluation teams for each council completed the non-price attribute (quality) evaluations and Respondent presentations on 2 June 2020.

Price Evaluation

3. Following the finalisation of the non-price scores, the sealed price envelopes were opened for each council on 3 June 2020.

4. Following the opening of prices, the council evaluation teams discussed and finalised a set of price clarification questions. Questions were sent to Respondents on 12 June 2020, in advance of the price clarification meetings held the week of 22 June 2020.

5. The price clarification meetings provided an opportunity to clarify the contract scope and price details for the shortlisted Respondents, including consideration of the responses to any price clarification questions. Subject matter experts (SME) for Health and Safety, Assets and ICT met with Respondents to clarify the proposals relating to their fields of expertise. A set of questions from SME’s was sent to respondents ahead of the meetings.

6. After the price clarification meetings, the price evaluation for each Respondent may change. The evaluation spreadsheet will be updated to reflect any amended price/scoring.

Subject Matter Experts – Review of Proposals

7. Our Finance Team have been supplied the pricing schedules submitted by Respondents to begin financial modelling, and our legal team have engaged the services of Simpson Grierson to review Respondents proposals.

8. Negotiations with the preferred Respondents for each service will take place the weeks of the 13, 20 and 27 July. This includes finalisation of the scope of work, contract documentation and the proposed contract price, including any bundling discounts. The price will then be confirmed.

Negotiations

9. Final negotiations will be entered into with the Preferred Supplier for each service with the intention of being able to reach agreement on the proposed price of the scope of works, and the conditions of contract. If this cannot be achieved in a ten working day period from the date of notification to the Preferred Supplier of its Preferred Supplier status, with the parties using their best endeavours, the option then exists for either council to commence negotiations with the next highest rated Respondent for a particular service. The period for negotiation with the preferred party may be extended by mutual agreement.

10. All agreed outcomes of negotiations shall be documented in writing between the parties.

11. Morrison Low (procurement consultants) will then prepare Proposal Recommendation Reports for staff which will be used in the development of the recommendations for the consideration of council on 25 August 2020.

Recommendations for Services, Facilities, and Litter Management

12. Council must consider and agree the recommendations of staff relating to the preferred supplier and associated service and facility proposals.

13. Following the decision (if contracts/leases are to be awarded), the successful Respondents will be sent a letter to confirm award of the contract. All other unsuccessful parties shall be sent a letter to confirm they have been unsuccessful.

Stakeholder Engagement and Market Research

Stakeholder Engagement

14. The project team are working with the Engagement Team on the stakeholder engagement approach. The immediate steps are outlined below:

· Website update – information will be updated to reflect revised timeframes (specifically relating to delays caused by COVID).

· Media release – to be issued the week of the 6 July 2020. The release will serve as a project update, including a brief explanation of the proposal and timeframes. Further community communication will be issued ahead of the council meeting on 25 August 2020.

· Referendum groups – the project team will engage representatives of the seven groups over July. These will be individual meetings to hear their concerns first-hand, and understand what their main concerns are.

· Interested community groups – the project team will engage groups previously supportive of the proposal over June and July, to see if they feel the same way post COVID, or if their views have shifted. Initial phones calls will be followed up with meetings where required.

Market Research – Current Residential Costs and Services

15. Key Research have been engaged to provide current data on the waste services residents currently use, and how much they pay for these services. This will provide updated data on that collected in 2017 which concluded that the average household pays approximately $313 (including GST). Interviews were conducted over 10-21 June 2020, with a targeted sample size of 1,500 residents. Preliminary data is due 13 July 2020, and the final report due 17 July 2020. Results will be reported to the council as a part of the recommendations on 25 August 2020.

Multi-unit Dwellings and Private Roads

How many do we have in Tauranga?

16. There are currently 187 named private roads in Tauranga (with approximately 1800 residential units, June 2019), and an unknown number of un-named private roads. Additionally, there are currently 91 multi-unit dwellings (MUD’s; which includes retirement complexes and apartments, totalling 5,133 residential units, June 2019). These properties are generally classified under the banner of a ‘non-standard service’ as they normally require more bespoke solutions to service them. MUDs and private roads represent approximately 10% of all households in Tauranga.

Considerations for servicing MUDs and private roads

17. The following are key considerations when deciding how to service MUDs and private roads:

· The servicing of private roads could cause issues of legal liability if there are instances of damage caused to a private road during the collection of waste.

· There is normally a challenge of limited access and turning space, making it difficult for collection trucks to service private roads and MUDs, thus creating health and safety concerns.

· How will we manage waivers granting access to private property for waste collection.

· How will any ‘permission’ granted regarding the servicing of private roads be passed on to future owners of properties.

Maintenance of MUDs and private roads

18. Private roads and MUD’s are the property of the homeowners, and they are responsible for all maintenance required. Due to the size and weight of waste contractor vehicles, there is always the possibility the vehicles may damage these private roads over time.

What do other councils do?

19. All Councils in New Zealand face similar challenges when seeking to address the servicing of MUDs and private roads. Council staff have engaged with various councils to understand their challenges and ways of resolving, some solutions for consideration are provided below:

· If a private road is unsafe to service (due to limited space), residents must bring their bins to the nearest public road to be serviced.

· Some public roads will need to be retrofitted to provide a safe collection point on the nearest public road, and not be a hazard to pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles.

· Council take on the responsibility of maintaining private roads if any damage occurs due to the collection vehicles.

· All of the private road property owners must sign a waiver for a truck to service the private road.

· MUD’s are able to have a central collection point of bins.

· MUD’s are excluded from the kerbside collection service.

· Private roads are excluded from the kerbside collection service.

What has our community engagement told us?

20. The Talking Trash Survey specifically asked residents on private roads whether they would prefer to:

· sign a waiver that council wouldn’t be responsible for any damage on the road to receive the collection directly outside their house, or,

· take their bins to the nearest public road for collection instead.

21. We had 700 responses to this question (making it statistically significant). 62% said they would prefer to sign the waiver, to enable the collections to occur from their kerbside.

22. On private roads with limited access, we asked if residents would prefer to pay for a more expensive, bespoke service allowing their bins to be collected directly outside their house, or pay the standard cost and take their bins to the nearest public road for collection. 72% indicated they’d prefer to take their bins to the nearest public road. We also asked the residents who preferred a more expensive, bespoke kerbside collection service (28%) if they’d be happy for us to use their driveway for turning to make the collections possible, and 77% said yes.

How is the RFP is seeking to address service provision to MUDs and private ways?

23. In the RFP, potential respondents were informed on the number of MUDs and private roads in the Tauranga area. They were asked to provide solutions, based on their experience, for the best way to service these properties. If the adopted solution is to collect waste from private property, we will need to gain consent from property owners to enter the private road, with all on the private road being required to sign a waiver before a kerbside collection service is allowed to occur on their road. Options for the level of service to MUDs and private ways will be provided to the council to consider at the August Council meeting.

Kerbside Glass Collection Service

Background

24. The Tauranga community have been recycling glass since the early 1990’s, starting at the closed landfills. With the closure of the landfills, the glass recycling was moved to the two Tauranga transfer stations where the public are still taking their glass for recycling today. From late 1999, the private sector started kerbside sorted glass collection with 100% of the glass recycled. In 2008 the private operator (Waste Management) changed to comingled kerbside recycling collections (sorted at facility rather than the kerbside). This resulted in approximately 50% of the glass going to landfill rather than being recycled due to the processing of the mixed recycling material. In March 2018, Waste Management stopped collecting glass with the rest of kerbside recycling materials, and did not start a separate glass kerbside collection for the public. Council agreed to provide a service to the community through rates in as a part of the 2018-28 LTP, and the kerbside colour sorted glass collections started on 1 October 2018.

Pre commencement of service

25. Once it was agreed to fund the service through rates, there was only three months to tender and approve a contractor, for the contractor to arrange a brand-new custom fleet, set up the Council system to manage the service, and to prepare the public for the new service. Council was fortunate to receive funding from both the Glass Packaging Forum and Waste Minimisation Fund (MfE) towards the cost of the glass crates. Two issues that required a lot of time to work through were; private roads, because Council requires all owners to sign a waiver for access and no liability for long term damage to road; and MUD sites (retirement villages and apartments), because they require a bespoke service. We have worked with various home and property owners over the past 18 months to iron out any issues with the service. The contractor was able to deliver over 51,000 crates in three weeks to all eligible properties before the service started.

Kerbside glass collection service

26. The first month of glass collection saw very heavy use (see monthly tonnes table below) due to people stockpiling glass before the service began. This is an issue for any future services council provides. The Contractor and Council adhered strongly to the rules regarding contamination in crates and overfull crates. Initially this caused some negative feedback from the public but has set the standard moving forward, and has meant high volumes of glass accepted at OI (glass processing plant in Auckland) for recycling and reduced the health and safety risks to the contractor carrying out the service. We are fortunate to receive ongoing revenue for the glass cost, a number of councils receive no income or pay for it to be recycled.

Glass tonnes collected at the kerbside

27. Kerbside glass volumes rose significantly over COVID-19 Levels 3 & 4 due to the transfer station recycling centres being closed and people at home using more glass containers. During this period, the contractor ceased colour sorting at the kerbside as they could not handle any glass due to the risk of COVID-19, and the increased volume of glass would have fatigued drivers and put them behind on their runs. Fortunately, OI (glass processing plant in Auckland) allowed mixed glass to be accepted from kerbside collections and processed as green cullet. This did not affect the revenue generated from the glass collection service.

	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Nov	Dec	Jan	Feb	Mar	Apr	May	Jun	Ave.	Total
18/19	-	-	-	311	270	293	382	290	270	275	260	221	286	2572
19/ 20	249	243	244	267	281	322	390	298	310	406	359	-	306	3369

*Data from June 2020 is not available at the time of writing.

Collection rates

28. Over summer, the put out rates for the service average at 70% with a peak of 98% in the Papamoa week 2 collection. Over winter, the average put out rate drops to 55%-60% (the NZ average put out rate is 40%). This is confirmed from the glass tonnes collected table above. There are some areas with consistently high put out rates like Papamoa East and Matua, which are both further from the transfer stations and therefore use only the kerbside service. Areas like Greerton and Welcome Bay have consistently low put out rates, and are closer to the transfer stations. High property growth in Papamoa East and The Lakes has meant Tuesday and Thursday Week 2 are big collection days for the contractor so changes to the collection days may be required to account for future growth. This will be considered by the project team when looking at the proposed new services.

Surveys undertaken by Council

29. 2016/2017 was the last full year of private kerbside glass collections and 2019/2020 is the first full year of council kerbside glass collections. Both TCC transfer stations and private kerbside collections include glass from the WBOPDC. The private kerbside glass tonnes are based on total mixed recycling, and use the New Zealand average of 35% glass of a mixed recycled collection, and then reducing it by 50% because the recycling facility operator advised that no more than 50% of the kerbside glass was recycled. Whereas the other three streams of glass are 100% recycled at OI. Therefore taking 16/17 monthly average 431.17 minus 19/20 monthly average 591.57 gives a monthly average increase of 160.4 or 1924.80 tonnes p.a. more glass recycled via the Council collection system than the private collection system.

Date of Survey	Disposal Arrangements	Percentage of glass in kerbside rubbish bags and bins
November 2016 to August 2017	Transfer station glass recycling/Private kerbside collection	5.8%
May/June 2018	Transfer station glass recycling/No Private kerbside collection	8.1%
Dec 2019 / March 2020	Transfer station glass recycling/Council kerbside collections	4.8%

Lessons Learnt

30. There are a number of lessons learnt from the roll out of the kerbside glass collection service:

(a) There are properties that have not had the glass service provided due to not fitting in with the business logic applied. They have come to our attention when the resident requests the service. We are working on the ability to generate a report to check the system for these anomalies to ensure they receive the service in the future.

(b) There are difficult to access streets that the contractor either can’t service or have to provide a special service in order to safely service. These streets need to be identified before initiating service to ensure there is a safe way to service.

(d) Due to high number of visitors to the area over New Years, a special sweep is conducted downtown Mt Maunganui on New Years Eve to collect glass to prevent issues from people walking the streets and smashing glass.

(e) It is easy for residents to order a replacement glass crate when they don’t need it. A charge for replacement crates would reduce this occurring.

Public Feedback

31. Overall the public feedback regarding the service has been positive. The contractor has noted numerous occasions where residents have thanked them for their work. A small minority are unhappy they have the service on their rates as they currently take their recycling to the transfer stations, but this may change if the decision is made to provide full kerbside services to households. There was also very good feedback from the community via the Talking Trash survey with 88% stating that they were happy with the service.

Summary

32. The Council glass service is well used and accepted by Tauranga residents and has increased glass recycling volumes and decreased waste to landfill. Opportunities for improvement are how private roads are managed around the waiver system and use of smaller vehicles to access them; and how we manage MUD’s as a bespoke service to cater for their different needs. There is also an opportunity to work with the rates team to ensure we are servicing all of the eligible properties on Maori land.

SWAP Survey

33. The annual waste composition surveys were undertaken in March 2020. Updated infographics of the current composition of waste that is sent to landfill is provided in Attachment A.

34. Currently, 64.9% of waste collected at the kerbside, and 48.1% of waste taken to the transfer station, could be recycled or composted.

Next Steps

35. On 25 August 2020 we will present a report including recommendations for you to consider on the following:

(a) kerbside waste collection services for rubbish, mixed recycling, glass recycling, food waste, and garden waste;

(b) the upgrade of the council’s two transfer stations at Maleme Street and Te Maunga; and

Attachments

1. Attachment A: Waste Composition KS and TS - A11615292 ⇩

[1] This is a reference to western Bay of Plenty sub-region tāngata whenua.

[2] The ‘sub-region’ refers to the territorial areas of Tauranga City Council and Western Bay of Plenty District Council.

[3] The four well-beings refer to cultural, economic, environmental and social matters.

[4] The ‘sub-region’ refers to the territorial areas of Tauranga City council and Western Bay of Plenty District Council.

[5] Local authority codes of conduct, June 2006, p 9

[6] Section 41A of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendments Act 2012. The use of these powers is discretionary.

[7] The Audit Office publication Financial Conflicts of Interests of Members of Governing Bodies (2001) provides further guidance on this Act.


AGENDA Ordinary Council Meeting Tuesday, 14 July 2020
I hereby give notice that an Ordinary Meeting of Council will be held on:
Date:	Tuesday, 14 July 2020
Time:	9.30am
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.

Chairperson: Doug Leeder	Chief Executive: Fiona McTavish
Dated: Tauranga City Council by:	Dated:
Mayor: Tenby Powell	Chief Executive: Marty Grenfell
Dated:	Dated:
Western Bay of Plenty District Council by:
Mayor: Garry Webber	Chief Executive: Miriam Taris
Dated:	Dated:

· 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.