Agenda of Ordinary Council Meeting

UNCONFIRMED Ordinary Council Meeting Minutes

10 May 2021

MINUTES

Ordinary Council Meeting

Monday, 10 May 2021

Order of Business

1 Opening Karakia. 3

2 Apologies. 3

3 Public Forum.. 3

4 Acceptance of late items. 3

4.1 Acceptance of Late Items. 3

5 Confidential business to be transferred into the open. 3

6 Change to the order of business. 4

7 Confirmation of Minutes. 4

7.1 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 27 April 2021. 4

7.2 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 4 May 2021. 4

8 Declaration of conflicts of interest 4

9 Deputations, Presentations, Petitions. 4

9.1 Petitions - 12th Avenue - Homeless people and liquor ban. 4

10 Recommendations from Other Committees. 5

Nil

11 Business. 5

11.1 Mainstreet Report July to December 2020. 5

11.2 Direction on the Hearings Panel for Plan Changes 26, 27 and 30. 7

11.3 Submission on the discussion document Supporting Sustainable Freedom Camping in Aotearoa New Zealand - Proposed Changes to support effective management of freedom camping in New Zealand. 8

12 Discussion of Late Items. 9

13 Public excluded session. 9

13.1 Public excluded minutes of the Council meeting held on 27 April 2021. 9

13.2 Appointments to Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee. 9

13.3 Board appointments to a council-controlled organisation: Bay Venues Limited. 10

14 Closing Karakia. 10

MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council

Ordinary Council Meeting

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

ON Monday, 10 May 2021 AT 10.30am

PRESENT: Commission Chair Anne Tolley, Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston, Commissioner Stephen Selwood and Commissioner Bill Wasley

IN ATTENDANCE: Marty Grenfell (Chief Executive), Paul Davidson (General Manager: Corporate Services), Barbara Dempsey (General Manager: Regulatory & Compliance), Susan Jamieson (General Manager: People & Engagement), Nic Johansson (General Manager: Infrastructure), Christine Jones (General Manager: Strategy & Growth), Michael Vujnovich (Manager: Project Tauranga), Janine Speedy (Team Leader: City Planning), Rebecca Gallagher (Policy Analyst), Ariell King (Team Leader: Policy), Stuart Goodman (Team Leader: Regulation Monitoring), Coral Hair (Manager: Democracy Services), Robyn Garrett (Team Leader: Committee Support), Raj Naidu (Committee Advisor) and Jenny Teeuwen (Committee Advisor)

1 Opening Karakia

Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston opened the meeting with a Karakia.

2 Apologies

Nil

3 Public Forum

Nil

4 Acceptance of late items

4.1 Acceptance of Late Items

Resolution CO8/21/1

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the following item be included in the Public Excluded agenda:

· 13.3 - Board appointments to a council-controlled organisation: Bay Venues Limited.

Carried

5 Confidential business to be transferred into the open

Nil

6 Change to the order of business

Nil

7 Confirmation of Minutes

7.1 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 27 April 2021

Resolution CO8/21/2

Moved: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the minutes of the Council meeting held on 27 April 2021 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

7.2 Minutes of the Council meeting held on 4 May 2021

Resolution CO8/21/3

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

That the minutes of the Council meeting held on 4 May 2021 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

8 Declaration of conflicts of interest

Nil

9 Deputations, Presentations, Petitions

9.1 Petitions - 12th Avenue - Homeless people and liquor ban

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

Maggie Stewart

Key points

· Ms Stewart spoke to the petition signed by the residents of 12^th Avenue.

· There had been issues with people drinking on the street in 12^th Ave over the past year; however there now seemed to be drunk people in the street every day.

· Bad language was being used and drink bottles and food containers were left lying around on a daily basis.

· There were many elderly living in the street and they felt scared and unsafe.

· Police response to residents’ phone calls had been positive.

· Requested that a liquor ban be placed on the street.

In response to questions

· The situation had been discussed with council staff.

· The police required a legal basis for removing people from the street and a liquor ban would provide this.

The Commission Chair thanked Ms Stewart for her presentation.

Paul Billinghurst

Key points

· Mr Billinghurst spoke to the petition from business owners.

· Staff felt unsafe and intimidated, particularly female staff.

· The tabled photos of the area showed the mess that was being left behind on a daily basis.

· The police response had been good but they had no legal basis for moving the people on without photo evidence taken when things were actually happening.

· Requested an alcohol ban from 11^th Avenue to 13^th Avenue.

In response to questions

· The issue had been ongoing for a number of years but had escalated in last six months. It was now happening every day and there were more people involved; from two to a dozen daily.

· The carpark was privately owned. If the people were moved on by the police, they just moved to the footpath or to alongside the Chorus box.

The Commission Chair thanked Mr Billinghurst for his presentation.

The Commision chair requested that staff provide a report back to council on the issues and options for a liquor ban in 12^th Avenue.

Staff Action

Staff to report back to council on the issues and options for a liquor ban in 12^th Avenue..

Attachment

1 Petition - Liquor ban in 12th Avenue - tabled photos

10 Recommendations from Other Committees

Nil

11 Business

11.1 Mainstreet Report July to December 2020

Staff Michael Vujnovich, Manager: Project Tauranga

Mainstreet Presentations

Downtown Tauranga – Sally Cooke and Brian Berry

For a copy of the Downtown Tauranga presentation for this item, please contact Downtown Tauranga.

Key points

· Provided overview of their report.

· Believed there was further opportunity for collaboration with council and the other Mainstreet organisations.

· Looked for continued support from Tauranga City Council (TCC) and would be applying to the Long Term Plan (LTP) for funding for the next three years.

In response to questions

· The submission to the LTP for the Activate Vacant Spaces project would include analysis of the pilot; however, it would be difficult to present accurate foot traffic results as there were no foot traffic counters in the city centre.

· The Commissioners would like to see evidence from all Mainstreet organisations on vacancy rates, whether business turnover was increasing, and if not, why not, and foot traffic data was essential.

· Downtown Tauranga would like to be involved in the proposed review of the Mainstreet programme.

· There had been a range of data measures in place for the Buy Local Tauranga campaign, including digital, electronic, and social media platforms, as well as feedback from the different Mainstreets.

· Each Mainstreet organisation had different issues they were addressing. Collaboration was reflected more in the coordination of promotions that suited all Mainstreets and were jointly funded.

· Downtown Mainstreet favoured a targeted rate.

The Commission Chair thanked Ms Cooke and Mr Berry for their presentation.

Greerton Village – Sally Benning

Key points

· The report was taken as read.

· Believed Greerton was tracking along pretty well - did not lose a single business post COVID, although it had been a difficult time for some.

· Greerton was busy most of the time. Carparks were full for most of the day with a high turnover.

· Traffic could be heavy, particularly at morning and afternoon commute times, but believed most businesses had learnt to live with it.

· Reported that the majority of the Greerton business community was not in favour of the proposed name change for Greerton village.

In response to questions

· Lamp post cleaning and pavement scrubbing had still not occurred. The last communication with TCC staff had been two weeks ago. Staff would follow up on this.

· The March 2021 vintage, retro and steampunk event had gone well following a two year gap due to COVID. Unfortunately, there had been no vintage cars on display in Chadwick Rd and this had resulted in a slight reduction to crowd numbers.

· Business After Five events were still considered valuable and were held every month, with 12 to 20 people attending.

· Pedestrians and mobility scooter users were much happier with the transportation change through Greerton. Businesses had suffered while the work had been carried out but it seemed that business was back to normal as time had gone by.

The Commission Chair thanked Ms Benning for her presentation.

Papamoa Unlimited – David Hill

Key points

· The report was taken as read.

· Papamoa Mainstreet worked well because it was incorporated in with the shopping centre and provided a united front for all Papamoa. Everyone on Papamoa Mainstreet committee was a retailer.

· Three to four events were held each year, with one new event each year. The Santa Parade was the jewel in the crown with approximately 20,000 attending.

In response to questions

· Papamoa Mainstreet would like be involved in any review.

· The Commissioners would like to see more reporting on outcomes as this built a case for investment.

The Commission Chair thanked Mr Hill for his presentation.

Points of discussion

· Foot traffic and eftpos counts were available as part of the parking trial in the CBD. These figures would be included in the parking trial report being presented to Council in about a month.

· Early engagement with the Mainstreets needed to happen before the proposed review.

· A common reporting format and better reporting of outcomes needed to be included as part of the review.

Resolution CO8/21/4

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the Council receives the Mainstreet Report: July to December 2020.

Carried

Staff Action

Staff to follow up on:

· The cleaning of lamp posts and the pavement scrubbing in Greerton Village.

· Bus stops signage for Mount Mainstreet.

11.2 Direction on the Hearings Panel for Plan Changes 26, 27 and 30

Staff Janine Speedy, Team Leader: City Planning

Key points

· A brief overview of the report was provided.

· Three options for the hearings panel were provided. The staff recommendation was for Option One.

In response to questions

· Plan Change 26 had been significantly driven by the 2020 changes to the National Policy Statement-Urban Development (NPS-UD).

· Direction for Plan Change 27 had been set by the Regional Policy Statement 2015, and was also a result of the significant flooding events in Tauranga in 2005 and 2010.

· It was requested that further consideration be given to some kind of community perspective on the panel.

· Time line and legislative provisions around the process e.g. could parts of the plan changes be withdrawn, approximate timings for hearings, and when decisions would be made for release would be provided to Commissioners.

· Commissioners would like to see the long list as well as the short list of the preferred candidates for the hearings panel, along with the list of each candidate’s skills.

Resolution CO8/21/5

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

That the Council:

(a) Receives the Direction on the Hearings Panel for Plan Changes 26, 27 and 30 report.

(b) Requests staff prepare a recommendation of three to five independent hearings commissioners (including chair), selected from the Ministry for the Environment Certificated Commissioner list, for appointment to the hearings panel on the following plan changes:

(i) Plan Change 26 – Housing Choice

(ii) Plan Change 27 – Flooding from Intense Rainfall

(iii) Plan Change 30 – Earthworks

(c) Notes in accordance with section 80 of the Local Government Act 2002, that the decision to appointment commissioners directly from the Ministry for the Environment list of approved commissioners is inconsistent with Council’s Independent Hearings Commissioners Policy, as set out in paragraphs 26-28.

(d) Notes that a report is required to Council with recommendations on delegations to the Plan Change 26, 27 and 30 Independent Hearings Commissioners hearings panel.

Carried

Staff Action

A time line and the legislative provisions around the Plan Change process e.g. could parts of the plan changes be withdrawn, approximate timings for hearings, and when decisions would be made for release, to be provided to Commissioners.

11.3 Submission on the discussion document Supporting Sustainable Freedom Camping in Aotearoa New Zealand - Proposed Changes to support effective management of freedom camping in New Zealand

Staff Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Regulatory & Compliance

Ariell King, Team Leader: Policy

Stuart Goodman, Team Leader: Regulation Monitoring

In response to questions

· Questions 3.1 and 3.2 had been marked neutral as TCC’s freedom camping bylaw already restricted freedom campers to self-contained vehicles. However, it was important that this be supported by law so it was suggested that the question be amended to strongly support mandatory self-contained vehicles.

· Generally, TCC did not use the freedom camping bylaw act to manage homelessness. A community approach to homelessness activity was preferred.

Resolution CO8/21/6

Moved: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Council:

(a) Receives the Submission on the discussion document Supporting Sustainable Freedom Camping in Aotearoa New Zealand - Proposed Changes to support effective management of freedom camping in New Zealand report.

(b) Approves the submission to the discussion document “Supporting Sustainable Freedom Camping in Aotearoa New Zealand – Proposed changes to support effective management of freedom camping in New Zealand” in attachment A with the following amendment:

· Amend section 3.1 from Neutral to Strongly Agree.

Carried

12 Discussion of Late Items

Nil

13 Public excluded session

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Resolution CO8/21/7

Moved: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

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

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

General subject of each matter to be considered	Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter	Ground(s) under section 48 for the passing of this resolution
13.1 - Public excluded minutes of the Council meeting held on 27 April 2021	s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons s7(2)(g) - the withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege s7(2)(h) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities s7(2)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations) s7(2)(j) - the withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage	s48(1)(a) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
13.2 - Appointments to Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee	s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons	s48(1)(a) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7
13.3 - Board appointments to a council-controlled organisation: Bay Venues Limited	s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons s7(2)(c)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information, or information from the same source, and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied	s48(1)(a) - the public conduct of the relevant part of the proceedings of the meeting would be likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for withholding would exist under section 6 or section 7

Carried

At 12.07pm, the meeting resumed in the open session.

14 Closing Karakia

Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston closed the meeting with a Karakia.

The meeting closed at 12.08pm.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed as a true and correct record at the Ordinary Council meeting held on 31 May 2021.

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

CHAIRPERSON

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

11 Business

11.1 Executive Report

File Number: A12530421

Author: Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Regulatory & Compliance

Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy & Growth

Susan Jamieson, General Manager: People & Engagement

Paul Davidson, General Manager: Corporate Services

Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Gareth Wallis, General Manager: Community Services

Authoriser: Marty Grenfell, Chief Executive

Purpose of the Report

1. To provide updates on key projects and activities.

Recommendations

That the Council receives the Executive Report.

Strategy and Growth

Tauriko for Tomorrow

2. Council and Waka Kotahi NZ Transport Agency (NZTA) have progressively met and engaged with directly-affected landowners and engaged with the wider community through open days on the Tauriko for Tomorrow project.

3. The project and engagement has included the following.

· Engagement with landowners on the Tauriko West Rezoning and Structure Planning project, including presenting the vision, rezoning, timing of and structure planning for Tauriko West.

· Engagement with directly-affected landowners on the Enabling Works Project. This has included:

- Discussion on SH29 speed review;

- Safety improvements;

- Changes to intersections at the south (Redwood Lane) and the north (Cambridge Rd and new access into Tauriko West, along with road widening).

· Engagement with directly-affected landowners on the wider long-term State Highway project (presentation to the shortlisted three options which are being progressed through the Detailed Business Case).

4. The engagement described above has included a number of one-on-one meetings (approximately 80 held), presentations to hapū and Te Rangapu Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana Partnership and a week of engagement sessions (from Wednesday, 12 May to Sunday, 16 May) at Tauranga Crossing.

Western Bay of Plenty Transport System Plan (TSP) – Executive Summary

5. The Transport System Plan’s Executive Summary has been designed as a public document to communicate the Transport Plan and the agreed transport priorities. The TSP Executive Summary has now been updated to include the agreed prioritised/ranked project list and maps which show packages of activities in a geographic area (e.g. Hewletts Road sub-area package), or with a common goal (e.g. public transport and mode shift package). The TSP Executive summary is now available on the TCC website: https://www.tauranga.govt.nz/Portals/0/data/future/growth/files/transport-system-plan-executive-summary.pdf

6. The programme of activities and project timings shown on the maps reflects the findings of the Transport System Operating Framework (TSOF), as at October 2020. Further analysis, including project dependencies and interdependencies, timing and costing, will continue to be undertaken by the project partners as plans are scoped and developed and decisions are made as part of long-term plans, the Regional Land Transport Plan (RLTP) or National Land Transport Programme.

7. This means that some project timing and phasing of activities could change, or activities may be grouped together. Changes are reflected in the project partners’ draft plans, or the Waka Kotahi Investment Proposal.

8. The Executive Summary will be updated following decisions on LTPs, the RLTP and NLTP to reflect the programme of activities confirmed through those processes, along with other project developments since October 2020.

Papamoa East Interchange

9. The working draft of the LTP presented to the Council in December 2020 included only design costs for the Papamoa East Interchange (PEI). While the investment was required to support city growth, it was not recommended for inclusion due to the Council’s overall fiscal position. The Elected Members resolved that the Executive report back with an updated draft LTP that “Recognises that to address the transportation, housing and community infrastructure needs of the city, a ‘Scenario C Plus’ which includes expenditure to prepare Te Tumu for housing and the Papamoa East Interchange (PEI) infrastructure by 2026 is to be the baseline for the development of the Draft LTP.” While that resolution was passed there was no decision on how that additional expenditure would be financed or how the impact on the balance sheet position would be managed. Those issues were to be addressed when the revised draft was presented in early 2021 at the next stage of LTP development.

10. Following the appointment of the Commissioners, the draft LTP including the PEI (and related projects) was approved for consultation, with an investment of $113.7 million and construction completed by the end of the 2025/26 financial year. The inclusion of the project significantly impacted Council’s debt-to-revenue ratio and to address that, the following decisions were made:

· Rate funding of debt retirement ($0.6 billion over the ten years to address the overall fiscal position); and

· Explore options to avoid this additional rating burden in future years.

11. Given the extreme housing supply shortage in Tauranga, work has been undertaken to assess the opportunity to fast-track the PEI project completion, to accelerate the development of approximately 750 homes. That work will be reported to Council as part of the LTP deliberations process.

12. Staff are currently actively working on the following workstreams:

· Project planning to bring forward the construction of the PEI by a further 2 years, with revised completion timing of mid-2024.

· Progressing design and enabling works planning, with a view to tendering works, this calendar year and construction physically commencing in January 2022

· Reviewing the LTP budgets, with a view to including recommendations within the Deliberations Report to bring forward investment

· Engagement with Waka Kotahi on exploring tolling of the PEI as an alternative funding source

· Evaluating opportunities to utilise the Infrastructure and Financing legislative pathway to finance and fund investment in the PEI

· Progressing work and engaging with central Government on a revised Housing Infrastructure Fund arrangement that supports the earlier delivery of PEI, which is not dependent on the commencement of the Te Tumu growth area

· Working with Kaituna 14 Maori Land Trust to explore and progress options which enable an infrastructure corridor through the land block.

Infrastructure Group

Te Maunga Wastewater Plant Upgrade Programme

13. The Te Maunga wastewater treatment plant is being upgraded to cope with demand in Tauranga. All new growth areas in Tauranga will have wastewater flows directed to the Te Maunga plant. The plant capacity is being increased to cope with the higher hydraulic loads and increase in organic loads. All flow will be tertiary treated through UV disinfection and wetlands prior to discharge into the Pacific Ocean.

14. The Landward Outfall pipeline contract (value $16m) has been awarded to HEB and site trials are nearing completion. Production work commenced mid-May on the section of pipe between the outfall pump station and SH2.

15. Negotiations commenced with the preferred tenderer for the Bioreactor 2 Ground Improvements contract earlier this month and the tender award is imminent.

16. Tenders have closed for the Bioreactor 2 Above Ground Works and the tender evaluation team is currently working through the three tenders received.

17. Geotechnical and groundwater investigations have been completed for Clarifier 3 and work has commenced on a Design Basis Report for the clarifier.

18. Pond 1 desludging has been delayed to remove a fibrolite diversion wall that contains asbestos. The team is working with asbestos specialists and Beca to develop a methodology for sludge removal.

19. The consultation document for the LTP includes upgrade investment of around $151m over the next ten years.

Kerbside Collection Update

20. The roll-out of the bins is going well and we are slightly ahead of schedule. All bins are expected to be delivered by the end of May, with distributions to Multi-Unit Dwellings and any mop-up of bins to follow.

21. We have exceeded our garden waste opt-in target of 10,000 pickups each month. Residents can continue to sign up to the scheme, but we cannot guarantee they will receive their bin in time for the 1 July service start-up.

22. The build of the 33 kerbside trucks is on track. However, in the case of the food waste trucks, we will use unbranded trucks for the first few weeks until the TCC-branded trucks are ready.

A picture containing text, outdoor, road, sky

Description automatically generated

A picture containing text, sky, outdoor, green

Description automatically generated

23. Envirowaste has signed agreements with 32 of the 47 staff required, with a number of agreements waiting to be signed. This process is ahead of schedule.

Maleme Street Transfer Station

24. Since 2018, we have had an abatement notice on the site from Regional Council. They wanted it closed later that year, or early in 2019, they agreed to delay the closure, based on the premise that the proposed kerbside collection (which had been approved in the 2018-2028 LTP) would reduce volumes enough to meet our consent requirements. Through further investigation and mitigation attempts, it became clear that a reduction in volumes from kerbside alone would not be enough to enable the transfer station to remain open. We negotiated the closure of transfer station on 1 July, when the service started.

25. During the RFP process for the management of our waste facilities, we asked all submitters to provide options for how they would manage the abatement issue if they were the successful tenderer. None of the submitters believed that a construction solution was viable - some tendered on the basis of operating Te Maunga alone and others, such as EnviroWaste, tendered on closing Maleme Street completely, or to the public.

26. The tender from EnviroWaste proposed closing Maleme Street to the public from 1 June 2021, to enable them to use the site to store and service their kerbside collection trucks, process food waste and divert all commercial traffic there, reducing the load on Te Maunga. We negotiated the 1 July closure to ensure our community had kerbside collections in place before the change took effect.

27. Following completion of the tender process, we felt that closure of Maleme Street on the day kerbside collections started was too soon and worked with EnviroWaste to delay this until 2 August. To achieve that, EnviroWaste had to find land to temporarily store their trucks and temporarily alter the way the operations would work, resulting in significant cost. We were also able to convince the Regional Council to push the closure out by a month.

28. EnviroWaste has indicated that it could only keep the transfer station open to the public if we could secure and pay for land for a truck depot, land and consent to process food waste and futher assurances the abatement notice would not be enforced. They have significant concerns about the further strain this would put on their operating efficiency. To date, we have not been able to find alternative land to store the vehicles, process food waste or a solution that prevents contaminants entering the stream.

29. We will continue to work on the possibility of a date shift, but at this stage, it appears unlikely that can be achieved.

Waiāri Water Supply Scheme Update

30. The Waiāri Water Supply Scheme will increase water supply capacity and provide for growth in the western Bay of Plenty. A quarter of the total water take for this scheme is earmarked for the Te Puke area, with the remaining 75% contributing to the Tauranga water supply, including growth areas of Papamoa.

31. All eight Construction and Supporting Technical Contracts have been awarded and are progressing well. These contracts are all interrelated and, when complete, will form the Waiāri Water Supply Scheme.

32. The three Trunk Main contracts are well advanced:

· The section from the Eastern Reservoir (Welcome Bay Road) to the intersection of Te Puke Highway with Poplar Lane was completed last December.

· The Poplar Lane Reservoir to the Te Puke Highway end of No. 1 Road section pipework is 90% complete, pipework installation has been completed and work is now underway to install valves, fittings and fibre communications.

· The last section of trenchless pipework has been completed on No.1 Road. As with the above section, work will recommence on installing valves, fittings and fibre communications in June, to avoid disruption during the kiwifruit season.

33. The intake structure remains on the critical path, with work now progressing well with the structure following the challenges in completing the foundation works. The construction is on schedule for completion by 6 May 2022.

34. Good progress is being made on the Water Treatment Plant (WTP), Membrane and Automation Contracts. Particular focus is being given to sourcing water for trunk main flushing and to support initial WTP testing prior to commissioning with water from the Intake.

35. The risk adjusted programme has been updated following programme integration and risk workshops. This has confirmed the scheme will be online by 14 October 2022 and remains on budget at $185,830,128.00.

36. The community engagement team liaises regularly with key stakeholders and local landowners. Open days, planting and iwi involvement opportunities are being programmed for planting season at the Intake and Water Treatment Plant sites.

37. The Waiāri water supply scheme project has been deemed as an essential service, meaning work can continue during any future COVID lockdowns. The two current streams that supply water to the city are experiencing historic low flows, resulting in water restrictions being in place to manage demand. This is the longest-ever period of water restrictions for Tauranga City. The restrictions will not be lifted until the base flow of the two streams increases.

A picture containing tree, outdoor, traveling, surrounded

Description automatically generated

Totara Street

38. Waka Kotahi has formally advised Council that due to funding constraints, the implementation phase for Totara Street Safety Improvements will not be prioritised for their funding contribution in the current National Long-Term Plan (NLTP).

39. The next opportunity for funding allocation is the 2021-24 NLTP development process.

40. The timeline for the adoption and approval of the 2021-24 NLTP by the Board is late-August 2021, with the adoption and publishing of the document in Late-August/early-September.

41. In the interim, staff will be seeking sign-off of the detailed design and safety audit from Waka Kotahi, should the project be approved in the 2021-24 NLTP.

42. The tender for the physical works closed on Monday, 11 May 2020 and the tender evaluation team is currently evaluating the tender.

43. Tenderers were made aware that the commencement of the physical works was subject to Waka Kotahi funding approval.

44. Staff are currently reviewing options to keep vulnerable users of Totara Street safe and will prepare an options paper to be considered by Commissioners, following the formal adoption of Waka Kotahi’s NLTP.

Travel Safe Team Update

45. Our Travel Safe Team has been working closely with local community groups and schools to lift awareness of Road Safety and Active Travel.

46. We recently ran a Secondary Schools Road Safety workshop with our Travel Safe/SADD students from Tauranga and Western Bay of Plenty Secondary Schools. One of the activities included designing a road, which the students really enjoyed.

47. Otumoetai Intermediate hosted an Innovating Streets session where students were able to experience first-hand what goes into the safety improvement design process. Working with our roading engineer, students studied engineering plans and maps of Sherwood Street and the Little John Drive intersection; they were shown the issues to be considered in developing safety improvement options, such as the locations of water and sewerage pipes, internet cables and fibre and stormwater systems. They also learned about potential hazards for drivers and pedestrians, vehicle speeds, stopping distances and lines of sight.

48. Travel Safe also ran a workshop with primary school teachers, where the General Manager: Infrastructure spoke about transport issues within the city.

49. This week, we have held two Primary School Travel Smart Student workshops. These events had a combined total of over 110 primary-aged students. Each school shared something they are working on to improve Road Safety or encourage Active Travel within their school community.

50. In addition to working closely with schools, Travel Safe also offers young driver courses and education programmes for adults. Two training days were offered for Young Drivers during the April school holidays, where 54 participants took part, with very positive feedback. A new workplace programme designed to boost understanding about active and sustainable travel and build on-road biking confidence was recently trialled with a selection of council staff. The plan is to offer this programme to other departments within council, as well as offer it to external workplaces that are looking to encourage mode shift and increase active travel.

51. The Travel Safe team has six skilled and passionate staff and is funded through 51% Waka Kotahi contribution and 49% local share, to which Western Bay of Plenty District Council contributes.

Capital Programme Assurance Division (CPAD) Update

52. A review of Council’s project delivery model (initiated last year) reflected the increasing importance of our capital expenditure programme. Our long-term planning anticipates that capex will continue to grow significantly over the next decade.

53. One of the key recommendations and outcomes from the project delivery review was the creation of an enterprise programme management office. This will provide an expert advisory function including:

(a) Managing Council’s overall programme of works (rather than individual projects) to achieve scheduling efficiency;

(b) Monitoring requirements, timeframes and budgets of future capital projects, to ensure that delivery resources are adequately planned and available;

(d) Monitoring project progress and performance;

(e) Developing common methodology, reporting and governance structures for project delivery, to improve overall programme delivery;

(f) Managing the introduction of new project management methodology, to ensure that changes to processes are well-embedded in the organisation; and

(g) Acting as a project management knowledge expert advisor.

54. The CPAD division was established late last year, with the appointment of a manager in April this year. Following meetings with staff and key stakeholders, a delivery model is being established, and a roadmap put in place for the next 6-12 months.

55. One of the first projects CPAD has been advising on is the Civic Centre Rebuild programme. Another key area of focus for CPAD is a Strategic Procurement review, the results of which will inform our approach to procurement and supplier engagement for delivery on the long-term plan. Our procurement plan and approach will be tailored to give certainty and early visibility of our pipeline of work to suppliers, as well as assisting with supplier relationship management and engagement.

People and Engagement

Democracy Services

56. The first of a series of governance training sessions for tangata whenua representatives on Council’s standing committees was held on 13 May 2021. This is an important provision in building the capacity and capability of Tangata Whenua representatives to contribute to Council decision-making. The four-hour session covered Local Government 101, Decision-making under the Local Government Act 2002, Standing Orders and meeting processes. It was an interactive training session, with both staff and representatives sharing their knowledge and experience.

Human Resources

57. Bargaining for a new Collective Employment Agreement (CEA) has continued with the Public Service Association (PSA) during the period. This CEA is one of two that the Council has in place with the PSA and covers 15% of our employees.

58. Council reviews the remuneration of all employees on 1 July every year. During the COVID-19 lockdown in 2020, Council implemented a ‘salary freeze’ and salaries were not increased on 1 July 2020. Preparation for this year’s proposed remuneration review commences in May, by obtaining independent data that verifies the market movement of remuneration in our region and industry since 2019.

Customer Services

59. Customer Services has set up a joint stakeholder working group with the DHB on the vaccination centres that have been, or are intended to be established around the city. Recent discussions have focused on the best ways to manage (and mitigate where possible) the impacts of high vehicle and people movements associated with the vaccination centres.

Health & Safety

60. Results from the Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) Health, Safety and Wellbeing survey have been made available to share business-wide. These included measurement of our learnings from COVID-19, psychological wellbeing and our health and safety culture. Team leaders are being encouraged to discuss outcomes at a team level - thinking about what improvement actions they may take.

61. The Commissioners visited the Waiari ‘balance of plant’ and ‘intake’ site and took the opportunity to inquire about the management of health, safety and wellbeing of our contractors. A number of recent health and safety events have presented an opportunity to review the standards and expectations agreed between council and contractors, to ensure we are meeting legal obligations to Consult, Cooperate and Coordinate work.

62. Ensuring the safety of the community and visitors enjoying our parks and reserves is critical, as is respecting the cultural significance of the areas concerned. Collaboration between the Health & Safety and Spaces & Places teams has established a methodology to prioritise track maintenance at Mauao that will ensure upgrades are targeted to areas presenting the greatest risk to those enjoying the area. This will provide a valuable methodology for managing risk across all council parks and reserves.

63. Our Sustainability & Waste team has been collaborating with the Service Centre & Contact Centre teams to ensure the success of the kerbside collection and transfer station upgrade projects. Given the ambitious Long Term Plan for our city, priority has been given to proactively building resilience, both in self-management and in work design; normalising conversations as a team around wellbeing; and ensuring our people have up-to-date knowledge and practiced skills in managing psychological health and safety.

Communications and Engagement

64. The volume and tone of media coverage has remained fairly consistent since the last Executive Report. Topics that have previously had negative reporting, or had the potential to be more critical, were positive, such as kerbside (halving domestic waste volumes through council’s new kerbside service roll-out) and also the wastewater spill in Matapihi (with criticism offset by council’s response and messaging).

65. Positive reporting also focused on Tauranga's attractions and events (such as the Jazz Festival, art awards and 150^th anniversary of Tauranga libraries). The Commissioners’ decision to uphold the introduction of a Maori ward was also largely positive. Transport and roading themes were generally mixed, with continuing recognition of the need to improve traffic flows, but disagreements about whether council could be trusted to do it. Similarly, some coverage about public nuisance caused by homeless people re-emerged, after a period in which it has not been a significant theme.

Te Pou Takawaenga

66. Te Rangapu Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana has been actively reviewing progress of the Three Waters Reform and has identified key areas of interest:

1. Relationships with iwi and hapu must be considered in the development of regions;

2. Kaitiakitanga relationships to relevant taonga (bodies of water and waterways) must be maintained;

3. There is an opportunity to afford more consideration for infrastructure to and on Maori land in the reforms;

4. There is an opportunity to promote more natural environmental alignment (e.g. utilising wetlands for their natural properties, rather than engineering against them).

Regulatory and Compliance

Environmental Regulation

67. Council received $165,000 from MBIE’s Responsible Camping funding for the period ended 30 April 2021. The fund was set up to support councils manage the impact freedom campers have on community infrastructure and the environment. This season’s funding comprised of:

(a) Ambassadors and enforcement, which included additional education patrols;

(b) Education and information, which included communication campaigns;

(d) New CCTV cameras and increased servicing of our facilities and sites.

The projects have been successful, with spending targets met and positive impacts achieved for residents and visitors. Staff are currently preparing the final report to MBIE.

Animal Services

68. Analysis of dog attacks on people has shown that reported attacks continue to decline, with the projection for the current year being the lowest since records have been kept (2007). During this same period, dog numbers have grown from 7880 to 14631.

Environmental Health and Licensing

69. The processing of Liquor Licensing applications has slowed significantly, this is a result of the COVID-19 Pandemic Order, which provides a longer lead-time for our supporting agencies to respond to applications. The current order expires on 21 June 2021, but it does provide a grace period of 30 days to allow supporting agencies to catch-up on applications. If the order is not extended, we should be back to working within timeframes from the beginning of August 2021.

70. Noise complaints have reduced over recent months, possibly as a result of the change in season.

Emergency Management

71. At the April Local Welfare Committee meeting, members workshopped key elements of welfare delivery by way of reviewing and developing a Tauranga City emergency welfare plan. The plan’s aim is to recognise the importance of community response through strengthened community partnerships.

72. A public education campaign commenced in April, with digital billboard messages displayed at two key locations across the city, and on the back of a public transport bus. The campaign highlights the importance of being prepared in an emergency, and where to find your single source of truth during an emergency event.

73. We have also had emergency management preparedness meetings with the following organisations:

(a) Early Childhood Education centres;

(b) Ministry of Education Regional Advisors, to plan upcoming facilitated emergency planning workshops for coastal schools;

74. We are pleased to advise that we have received $165,000 from the National Emergency Management Authority Resilience Fund towards the following projects:

(a) Kia Takatu: development of an engagement framework at iwi, hapū, and marae level, to gain insights into what additional pathways are needed to further enhance marae readiness and preparedness;

(b) Delivery of the Good and Ready Programme programme to the Gate Pa and Greerton communities, to ensure residents are prepared for emergencies. The funds received will assist Red Cross to deliver the programme;

(c) Digital Education Collateral – development of a suite of modern and interactive digital and print ‘readiness’ products to support community resilience education programmes. This will focus on relevant and directly-relatable impacts/consequences, rather than hazards themselves (e.g. no power, no water, no transport, no shelter etc.).

Building Services

75. The number of building consent applications (312) received in March was the highest monthly total since mid-2007. Volumes in April (275 applications received) were also up compared with previous years and above the average of 247 per month since 2019.

76. Our new application checking process, which sees incomplete applications rejected at the outset, has been embedded and the number of applications now being rejected has decreased significantly. Further, feedback from applicants has been overwhelmingly positive, even when their application has been rejected, as the explanation from our support team facilitates resolving the issues concerned.

77. Inspection wait-times increased over the short weeks around Easter, but have eased back in early-May, to a pont where most standard inspections can be booked between three days and a week ahead, and final insp[ections less than 20 days.

78. The pilot programme of remote inspections using the Zyte tool is proving successful, with nearly 40 inspections per month completed remotely in March and April. We are currently auditing the results of these and we are likely to offer this service to other building firms. At present, we have capacity for remote inspections on Tuesday and Thursday every week, effectively meaning a one-day turnaround for these inspection types.

79. We have five Building Control Officers (BCOs) attending the Auckland Council BCO Training School. This is a six-week intensive course that will get new BCOs trained and ready to undertake inspections and process building consents much more quickly than was previously possible. While we still have a significant number of BCO vacancies, this new approach will help us fill the resource gap quicker than attempting to undertake the training in-house.

80. We are currently reviewing our Quality Manual and undertaking system and technical audits as we lead into our next accreditation audit later this year. There is a significant amount of work underway, making sure we are well-placed to maintain our accreditation.

Environmental Planning

81. After a busy end to the last calendar year, resource consent applications received in January dropped slightly but have increased through to the end of April. This dip over January is relatively consistent with previous years.

82. There are still a number of vacancies within the team. The continued lack of senior staff within the team and Development Engineers has resulted in the level of service being negatively-affected. Different approaches to recruitment are underway.

83. We recently reported on the Timaru Oil Services Limited Resource Consent. By way of update, the Environment Court scheduled mediation process commenced on 19 May 2021. Council will participate in these proceedings as the respondent, along with the Bay of Plenty Regional Council. Mr Joel Ngatuere (representing Whareroa Marae) and Te Runanga o Ngai Te Rangi Iwi Trust have also joined proceedings as interested parties.

Community Services

Arts and Culture

84. The draft of an external review of Creative Bay of Plenty has been presented to the organisation’s board for formal feedback. The review was timed to align with the conclusion of the three year “Toi Moana” arts and culture strategy, and the completion of Creative Bay of Plenty’s current three-year funding contract with Council. Once feedback is received, this will be considered prior to any recommendations being developed and discussed.

85. Staff from the Heritage Collection have been engaging with the Taonga Tauranga Trust, a collective of organisations and interested parties in the local heritage sector, as they work to develop a heritage strategy for the western Bay of Plenty. Council recently funded Taonga Tauranga Trust to develop a heritage intent and the trust is now seeking matching funding from Western Bay of Plenty District Council and Bay of Plenty Regional Council. Taonga Tauranga recently convened a meeting of the ‘heritage partners’ to present a scope and development plan for the work, which has been given the name “Orokohanga Poutama”.

86. Orokohanga Poutama proposes a strategy as an essential tool for the heritage community and tangata whenua to work together to confirm, identify, advance and connect the role of heritage for Western Bay of Plenty and Tauranga, through determining heritage values, priorities, guiding principles and a plan that will drive sustainable, stand-alone heritage outcomes for the sector. In developing the heritage intent, Taonga Tauranga has noted that Tauranga and the Western Bay is one of the few regions in New Zealand that does not have a connected or working heritage plan or strategy. Taonga Tauranga has stated that their aim is to respond to proven demand from tangata whenua, educators, heritage researchers, tourists and the local community for heritage experiences and resources that connect to the social and cultural significance of the area.

87. Council’s partnership funding agreement with The Elms has supported remedial works, including the completion of a new iron roof on the house, earthquake strengthening of chimneys and some work on the house foundations. The lack of international visitors has provided The Elms with some quieter periods in which to undertake the work. Planning is continuing towards the future projects for #7 & #11 Mission Street, with works undertaken to remove asbestos from both properties and lodge resource consent applications for demolition, so that archaeologists can begin their exploration of the site. The Elms Trust’s vision for #11 is a visitor centre and education space alongside a planned new carpark. Council staff are working with The Elms to explore how the new education projects could be piloted, whilst The Elms works towards a fundraising campaign for the future project.

Community Partnerships

88. CCO appointments – the appointment process has commenced for a new Bay Venues Limited chair and three directors, with successful candidates to be appointed effective 1 July 2021. The Tauranga Art Gallery Trust new trustee shareholder induction was held on 18 May. And Tourism Bay of Plenty has commenced the appointment process for a new Chief Executive, with Oscar Nathan stepping down from his trustee role to cover the acting CE role in the interim.

89. The Kāinga Tupu team has completed case study research featuring 18 stories of homelessness in Tauranga, in an effort to capture the complexity of this issue, and the systemic social barriers that exist. Invitations will come out for the public launch of this information on 24 June 2021.

90. BayTrust, TECT, Acorn Foundation, BOPDHB, Kāinga Ora, MSD and MHUD have all indicated a desire to contribute to a partnership approach to fund the Kāinga Tupu work programme for the next financial year. The sector and the Kāinga Tupu Taskforce have requested that the coordination function remain within the TCC Community Partnerships team.

91. A part-time, fixed-term coordinator for the Welcoming Communities portfolio of work commenced on 19 April 2021, as a result of a successful funding application to TECT for this role.

92. BOP Regional Council is continuing to provide security coverage at the Willow Street, Farm Street and Greerton bus interchanges, due to concerns about antisocial behaviour, and safety concerns of many bus drivers. Data collated indicates a decrease in incidents and the drivers report an improved perception of safety. Police continue to report a significant reduction in calls for service to the areas. The security coverage has been altered to align with data showing the more at-risk times and a regular, city-focused safety meeting of all stakeholders has been established to ensure enhanced stakeholder communication.

93. A cross-council team led by the Inclusive Cities Advisor has been formed to review how our strategies, design guides and bylaws work together to support disabled people to access mobility car parking spaces.

94. Blind Square navigational technology has been installed at the Historic Village and a trial will go live in June to support blind and visually-impaired people get around the Village independently, through use of an app. To help support the new Village strategy, the app will also be used to provide information on some of the historic buildings at the Village.

95. The beach access matting has been lifted for a condition assessment. Some matting will be put down over the winter period and an enhanced offering will be in place for next summer, including in a new location in Papamoa.

96. A variety of workshops and meetings are being held with community organisations to increase awareness and knowledge of the match fund medium grants round, the proposed new Community Grant Fund and the draft Community Funding Policy in the Long-term Plan 2021-31.

Libraries

97. Local media coverage highlighted the 150-year history of Tauranga Library. To mark the 150-year milestone, a Seeds of our Library exhibition is being hosted at Willow Street until 8 June 2021. Library minute books from 1871 to 1897 and a catalogue of library archives in digital form are available for public viewing on Pae Korokī – Tauranga Archives Online. Minister Jan Tinetti spoke to a reunion of past and present library staff as part of the celebrations.

98. Events and programmes for the past eight weeks have included Libraries’ popular school holiday programmes and NZ Music Month activities. Several new programmes with a digital focus have also been launched. These include “Better Digital Futures”, for seniors to learn about internet shopping, banking and solving problems online. In “Tech Hour”, children are discovering the fundamentals of programming and design and teens are learning to programme robots.

99. A longstanding project to catalogue all previously uncatalogued items on the shelves in Ngā Wahi Rangihau Research Collections has been completed. This was helped by funding from the National Library of New Zealand and further work will continue next year on uncatalogued material in the Sladden Rare books collection. Completing this stocktake means valuable items are discoverable online, and space is not being taken up on the shelves by unwanted material, making the move to a temporary Library space easier to organise and manage.

Spaces & Places

100. Services renewals for the Elizabeth Street Upgrade project have now been completed on First Avenue and will begin on Elizabeth Street itself in June. Streetscape works have commenced on First Avenue, with a focus on the construction of pedestrian crossings, landscaped kerb buildouts and stormwater treatments. Daytime road closures are anticipated on Devonport Road to enable the completion of the raised crossings. Completion of the overall project is tied to completion of the Farmers development, now called the 38 Elizabeth development. The Farmers retail store is planned to open for Christmas shopping, whilst construction of the towers and fit out of the apartments will be ongoing into next year. Hawkins, Farmers and TCC continue to work closely together to coordinate work programmes.

101. As previously reported, parts of Elizabeth Street Carpark building do not meet the minimum 34% ‘new building standard’ (NBS) rating, which technically means the building could be classified as earthquake-prone. Strengthening schemes for the building to achieve at least 55-60% NBS are being developed and will focus on ramp transitions in the first four levels of the building, and connections between the eastern stair tower and the building. The building is co-owned and the Body Corporate has met to discuss engineering findings, plans, and the estimated costs and apportionment for the remedial strengthening works. These meetings are ongoing, including conversations to minimise any effects of the work programme on the co-owners of the commercial spaces. Full car park closure will not be required when works are undertaken.

102. Naylor Love has been awarded the contract to carry out interim strengthening works on the Spring Street Carpark building. This work involves installation of steel posts for added resilience to a large area of blockwork on the North Eastern corner. Work began on Monday 17May and will be completed in five weeks. Approximately 12-14 carparks will be affected per day during the works and this is being managed through Carepark (TCC Carpark operators).

103. Phase two of the Spring Street Carpark project is the full seismic strengthening to at least 55% NBS. This work is in the design stage, which will take around four months to complete. Work to be undertaken includes the installation of additional steel bracing components and the provision of independent support for the bridge linking to the roof of the adjacent building at 29 Grey Street. While the initial work will be scheduled to minimise inconvenience for regular users, it is likely that the building will need to be closed to the public for a period of time during the full strengthening works.

104. A project team has recently been set up with the objective of looking at the area around Dive Crescent, on both sides of the road, to see what short term improvements are possible. Members of this project team attended the most recent Dive Crescent Governance Group meeting to provide an update to representatives from the Otamataha Trust and Commission and discuss a partnership structure for working on this project together.

105. In December 2020, a building consent was lodged for seismic strengthening of the Cargo Shed building to a targeted 67% NBS for the superstructure. However, the overall building seismic rating will sit at 40% NBS, limited by the slope stability as a result of the land composition and its location. The Building Control Authority has requested further information on geotechnical and engineering matters, and these are currently being addressed. A plan will be developed for the redevelopment of the Cargo Shed over the coming months, to meet NBS requirements and open it up for ongoing community use.

106. The Omanawa Falls partnership continues to work closely together on the three dedicated streams of work: Safe Access, Ownership and Experience. Lodgement of consent is still to occur, while engagement with neighbours and other stakeholders continues. The programme is dependent on the consenting process, which is likely to be publicly notified. The successful kaitiaki programme finished in April and will be rolled out again this coming summer to manage visitors while construction is completed in stages.

107. It is currently expected that construction of the Kulim Park upgrade will commence around the end of August, with the bulk of works (including alterations to the existing road, carparking and new pathway) completed in December. Play equipment, playground surfacing (wet pour) and the boardwalk decking timber are about to be ordered, although delivery times for these items are to be confirmed. Veros has been appointed to undertake the Project Management and Higgins has been awarded the construction contract.

Venues and Events

108. Staff are continuing to gather community insights to support the development of the City Events Strategic Plan. Three stakeholder workshops were held on 13 May 2021 and some great feedback was received that will help shape the strategy development and direction. Staff will hold a more in-depth workshop in June to drill down into how Council can respond to the issues raised, and wider community engagement will be undertaken in July after the LTP consultation period closes. The strategy itself is aimed to be completed by year-end.

109. Anzac Day Commemorations across the city went very well, with great feedback received. Staff are working through a debrief process with the various RSAs, New Zealand Defence Force and other key stakeholders, with a view to making improvements for 2022 services.

110. The 58^th National Jazz Festival returned to Tauranga over Easter Weekend, following its cancellation in 2020 due to COVID-19. The 2021 Festival, which receives TCC Legacy Event Funding, comprised of a number of public events including the return of the TECT Jazz Village at The Historic Village, the Downtown Carnival in Tauranga CBD, and the 43^rd National Youth Jazz Competition and seven ticketed concerts at Baycourt Community and Arts Centre. A new Downtown Carnival stage in Wharf Street showcased the recent redevelopment and the Festival saw over 27,000 attendees across its various events. Staff are undertaking a comprehensive event economics review of the Festival and will report on the outcome, when available.

111. Event bookings for Tauranga’s public open spaces appear to be on par with pre-COVID numbers, with filming activities still increasing.

112. The Event Facilitation team has been working with event organisers wanting to utilise Tauranga’s public open spaces for events during the year ahead and already has over 350 bookings in place. This is on-par with pre-COVID bookings at this time of year.

113. Baycourt venue utilisation for 2021 is tracking approximately 35% ahead of the same period in 2019 (mid-March to mid-May). NB: 2020 is not considered a suitable comparison due to the COVID-19 nationwide lockdown. Baycourt has hosted a diverse range of events over this period including several sold-out and near-to-capacity shows. Of particular note were the three sold-out shows for The Wiggles, Marlon Williams, RNZB’s Tutus on Tour, the NZSO, the 58^th National Jazz Festival, the inaugural TECT Community Awards Ceremony and Meremere – a powerful autobiographical performance by critically-acclaimed and internationally-renowned dancer Rodney Bell (presented in partnership with Baycourt and Tour-Makers).

Corporate Services

Airport

114. 103,151 passengers passed through the terminal in Q1 2021, compared to 103580 in Q1 2020, the opening of the trans-Tasman bubble has seen an increase in International check ins but not as many as first anticipated as Air NZ has had to scale back planned trans-Tasman services.

115. Air NZ operated 2,322 services at a load factor of 77% in Q1. These loadings are on par with Q1 2020 although it was 300 less flights due to aircraft up sizing.

116. There have been two full scale emergencies and one local stand by over the past month.

One full emergency involved an Air NZ aircraft having to evacuate on the end of the runway due to a cargo hold fire warning, our Rescue Fire team assisted with the evacuation and made bus transport available back to the Terminal where passengers were briefed, it turned out to be a false alarm.

The second involved a tragic fatal parachutist landing where our Rescue Fire team carried out CPR for 15 -20 minutes until paramedics arrived who took over but to no avail.

The local standby was due to a hydraulics warning light on an inbound Air NZ aircraft, the aircraft landed safely and was attended to by engineers. In all three incidents our emergency plan was fully functional and effective.

Marine Precinct – Vessel Works

117. Despite a slow start to the year, the travel lift and hardstand have been busier than ever over the last month. The lifting team have been stretched but have been using the increased number of lifts as an opportunity to train additional travel-lift operators skilled in lifting both work and pleasure vessels. This brings the number of trained operators to four.

118. Brett Kane has been engaged to chair the Marine Precinct Advisory Group (MPAG) and focus it on strategic initiatives, additionally he will be joining the dots between the strategic projects underway in the Marine Precinct. The initiatives he is overseeing are: MPAG Chair, Marine Facilities Management Plan (Strategic review), Future Operating Model for the Tauranga Marine Precinct and the Wharf Extension Project.

119. The second vessel (Miss Silver) for Super Yacht Coatings shed was delivered for a six-month refit without a hitch (picture below). Although Vessel Works won’t see any revenue from hardstand rates, it’s a major milestone for the precinct as a whole.

Procurement

120. The changes brought about through the new Procurement Policy took effect on 3 May 2021. Work continues on the new online Procurement Manual, including developing the Broader Outcomes guidance. Any changes to existing processes will incorporate feedback from the Capital Programme Assurance Division (CPAD) and other stakeholders, including peer reviews of the manual by MBIE and the McHale Group.

121. The Procurement team has also been working with CPAD on the strategic procurement work mentioned above, and is also currently recruiting for a senior procurement advisor to help support the new division.

122. Fleet is working to retire two ailing vehicle management tools – the Resource Manager system and KeyWatcher system. The replacement is an integrated key cabinet system. The new system will allow closer monitoring of pool car usage and is expected to lead to a reduction in the cars required and deliver improvements for users.

Legal and Risk Services

123. Legal, Risk, and Internal Audit matters will be reported separately to the Commission, however the teams continue to provide support into the business and provide advice and input into a range of projects and operational initiatives. Subject to the LTP decisions, these teams expect to boost capacity to further assist with the growing capital programme.

Beachside Holiday Park

124. Beachside Holiday Park occupancy is continuing to increase, currently up 25% YTD.

For the 1 July 2020 – 30 April 2021 period, the park had 76,075 customers, compared to 60,542 customers in the 1 July 2019 – 30 April 2020 period.

Finance

125. Preliminary work for the June 2021 Annual report has commenced, along with the interim audit by Audit New Zealand, which covers internal controls, system reviews, data and processes. The new SAP finance system will be used to produce the annual report this year. As a result, there will be additional challenges adjusting to new year end process and reporting requirements as well as reconciling the rates and revenue transactions which are still undertaken in the old Ozone system.

126. The first draft budgets for the Long-term Plan were finalised for consultation, with review now being undertaken of the proposed capital programme. The large under-delivery of capital in the current year means that there is a flow on effect to next year’s programme and the timing of project delivery. There is also some updated information on costs and timing of projects.

127. Housing Infrastructure Fund (HIF) loans which are at 0% for approved projects, have been almost fully drawn down for Waiari water supply, with $105m of the approved $106m now drawn down. Some timing renegotiation is required with the Department of Internal Affairs for Te Maunga HIF agreement based on the timing of project delivery. To date we have drawn down $19.4m of an agreed $51.8m.

128. Modelling of potential Development Contribution (DC) funding for future community infrastructure has commenced. This involves looking at the key infrastructure likely to be required in the new growth areas of Te Tumu and Tauriko West and estimates of their cost and timing along estimates of the number of houses. This modelling is then included in viability assessment of that proposed development to confirm that there would be demand for sections at the prices proposed including development contribution charges.

Digital Services Update:

129. Digitals focus on Cyber Security and better training/education for our people, took another positive step this month. Seeing Digital combine our Cybersecurity, training and change support into a single new function. This change will help us to maximise synergies in the way that we engage with our people and contractors to ensure our people are aware of the important part they play in keeping the council and community safe from the continued growth of cybercrime and ensure that the investments we make in platforms are maximised.

130. Meeting our regulatory obligations under the Public Records Act is a key foundation of any council. A very important part of the Act is not only the way we store and access records but also the time that we retain and dispose of these records. Until 2021 TCC did not have a Retention & Disposal Schedule, meaning all council records (required under the Act) were being retained forever. In January this year, the Chief Archivist Approved our Retention & Disposal Schedule and we are now starting the process to implement this schedule. Start with Human Resources related records. IN addition, we have been approached by several councils that wish to copy our schedule.

131. Maximising the productivity of our people has become more important than ever in the post COVID environment. Like many organisations globally TCC is consolidating our telephony, meeting and collaboration solutions into the Microsoft Teams environment. Phase 1 of this project involves replacing our end of life telephony platforms, reducing organsiational risk and improving the way that our teams can communicate. Phase three will involve rolling out the collaboration tools, and phase three will see us transition our records management into Teams as well. This final step will significantly increase productivity and also reduce operating costs.

132. LTP Submission Management – As part of the LTP consultation process, we are leveraging a new capability in the SAP Qualtrics solution to collect and respond to community feedback, as well as support a more automated process. This will enable the community to book a time to provide in-person feedback. The solution has provided staff with real-time monitoring of submissions and activity manager feedback and has automated the previously labour-intensive process of consolidating consultation documentation (including General Manager reports, deliberation reports and committee meeting attachment documents). Qualtrics is part of our SAP Eco-system and is the leading engagement tool globally, providing the capability for in-depth research and analytics on community, customer, staff, brand, product and suppliers.

Attachments

Nil

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

11.2 Revocation of Independent Hearings Commissioners Policy

File Number: A12521960

Author: Daniel Smith, Manager: Environmental Planning

Cindy Gillman-Bate, Corporate Solicitor

Ariell King, Team Leader: Policy

Janine Speedy, Team Leader: City Planning

Authoriser: Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Regulatory & Compliance

Purpose of the Report

1. To revoke the Independent Hearings Commissioners Policy and adopt an alternate approach enabling the use and selection of RMA accredited Independent Hearings Commissions (IHCs) as named on the Ministry for the Environment’s list of ‘Making Good Decisions’ Certificate holders - non-local body elected members or any equivalent list, as amended from time to time.

Recommendations

That:

(a) The Council revokes the current Independent Hearings Commissioners Policy effective from 31 May 2021, with the exception of clause 5.6 (Costs Associated with Independent Hearings Commissioners) which will continue until the date the Council adopts the Schedule of User Fees and Charges for 2021/22;

(b) The Council revokes the current Delegations to Independent Hearings Commissioners;

(c) The Council makes the delegations specified in Attachment 1 (titled Delegations to Independent Hearings Commissioners) to all persons who are accredited to conduct hearings in terms of sections 39A and 39B of the Resource Management Act 1991 (other than local body elected members), as named on the Ministry for the Environment’s list of ‘Making Good Decisions’ Certificate holders - non-local body elected members or any equivalent list, as amended from time to time (“Independent Hearings Commissioner”);

(d) The Council delegates to the Chief Executive, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance and Manager: Environmental Planning (“Delegate/s”)^*:

(i) the authority to select and appoint one or more Independent Hearings Commissioner(s) to act in respect of any particular matter; and

(ii) where there is more than one Independent Hearings Commissioner selected and appointed for the particular matter, the authority to appoint the chair and any deputy chair.

^* For the purposes of this delegation, the Delegate includes any staff member who performs or exercises the same or substantially similar role or function to the Delegate’s position named above, whatever the actual name of their position.

(e) The Council continue to determine on a case-by-case basis the selection and appointment of persons for hearings on City Plan changes and variations under Schedule 1 of the Resource Management Act 1991;

(f) An administrative procedure to guide the selection and appointment of Independent Hearings Commissioners be developed and adopted by the Executive Leadership Team; and

(g) Resolutions (b) to (e) are effective as of 1 June 2021.

Executive Summary

2. The current IHCs Policy provides for the recruitment, appointment and authorisation to Council’s IHC List.

3. The CE, GMs and Managers of relevant teams have delegated authority under the IHCs Policy to select one or more IHCs from Council’s List to undertake decision-making functions on behalf of council under the RMA, LGA and other relevant pieces of legislation.

4. The appointment of the current IHCs expires on 30 June 2021. The IHCs Policy was last reviewed and amended in 2015. This provides an opportunity to review the policy, which is overdue, and consider an alternative approach.

5. Restricting IHCs to those on Council’s IHCs List limits Council to the expertise and availability of those on the list when undertaking hearings and decision-making functions under the RMA.

6. This report recommends the policy be revoked and a new approach adopted to enable the use of any RMA accredited IHC as named on the Ministry for the Environment’s list of ‘Making Good Decisions’ Certificate holders - non-local body elected members or any equivalent list, as amended from time to time.

7. Plan changes or variations under Schedule 1 of the RMA, require a resolution from Council to progress to a hearing. This resolution is to determine the hearings approach. Council will determine by resolution whether the plan change or variation will be heard by Council, a Council committee, accredited IHCs, or a combination of councillors and accredited IHC(s). This will remain the case regardless of whether the recommendations in this report are adopted.

Background

8. Council relies on the use of and delegates the necessary powers to a list of 12 IHCs for:

a) Making decisions on applications when a resource consent hearing is required under the RMA and Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 (HASHAA);

b) Notification and substantive decision-making in circumstances where a hearing is not required, e.g. potential for perception of conflict or significant public interest;

c) Conducting hearings for plan changes, or plan variations, and making recommendations to Council on decisions relating to submissions. These hearings may be heard by Council or a committee of Council, accredited IHCs, or a combination of elected members and accredited IHCs; and

d) Additional purposes as prescribed under other pieces of legislation other than the RMA and HASHAA.

Statutory Context

9. Under section 34A(1) of the RMA, the Council may delegate to an employee, or accredited IHC appointed by it, any of its functions, powers or duties under the Act, with 2 exceptions:

1) the power to approve a proposed policy statement or plan under clause 17 of Schedule 1; and

2) the section 34A(1) power to delegate. In other words, any delegation must be direct from the Council, and there may not be sub-delegation.

10. There are two elements to conferring an RMA accredited IHC the power to conduct an RMA hearing, namely that they have been:

a) delegated the necessary powers to carry out such a task; and

b) appointed to exercise those powers in a particular case.

11. If the recommendations of this paper are adopted, these two elements can be met respectively by the recommended delegations to the accredited IHCs on the MfE List and to staff to appoint accredited IHCs from that List for particular matters, included as Attachment 1.

12. If the position title of a delegate changes or their position is disestablished, a staff member who performs or exercises the same or substantially similar role or function to the delegate’s position will be deemed to hold the delegation, whatever the name of their position.

Reasons for the change

13. The IHCs Policy has caused the following issues:

a) Staff time and resourcing required to run the three-yearly recruitment process and report proposed appointments to Council;

b) The IHCs not having the expertise and skills necessary for the particular plan change or resource consent hearing (e.g. cultural expertise);

c) IHCs on the list not holding the relevant accreditation (s39B of the RMA) or delegation as a result of certification, and/or appointment to the list, expiring while on the list or during the hearing period;

d) Hearings, whether plan changes or for resource consents, require the principles of natural justice to be upheld. Having a list of 12 IHCs is often limiting to be able meet this requirement over an extended period; and

e) A limited pool of IHCs has resulted in RMA timeframes not being met for a number of reasons, including lack of availability, accreditation and/or expertise.

14. The use of the accredited IHCs List ensures:

a) Access to a wider range of skills and expertise;

b) With MfE’s list is kept up to date, Council’s powers can only be delegated to accredited IHCs;

c) No cost to Council to run a recruitment process, select commissioners or maintain a list of IHCs;

d) The ability to appoint an IHC with the relevant chair certification (additional certification provided by MfE) when an IHC is acting alone or chairing a panel of IHCs;

e) Council is not limited to the availability of 12 IHCs thus avoiding those issues above under paragraph 13.

15. It is recommended that the resolutions take effect on 1 June 2021 to enable immediate use of the Certificate holders from the MfE List.

16. If Council’s decision is to establish a hearings panel of IHCs for future plan changes/variations, Council can at that stage either appoint the IHCs, or delegate to the Chief Executive to appoint them from the MfE List with a particular skill set.

OTHER PURPOSES

17. In addition to RMA and HASHAA decisions, Council will establish committees, subcommittees, or hearings panels to hear non-RMA non-HASHAA quasi-judicial regulatory matters. Council resolves the appointments to these committees and may comprise IHC(s), councillors, or a combination of both. The Commission recently established a Regulatory Hearings Panel for this purpose and appointed the panel members who include external persons not on Council’s IHC List.

18. The IHCs appointed to a non-RMA non-HASHAA regulatory hearings committee, subcommittee or panel need not be RMA accredited and could be any external person with the required knowledge, skills and hearings experience. Rescinding the policy will enable Council to appoint any external persons with relevant knowledge, skills and expertise to such a committee, subcommittee, or hearings panel.

Legal Implications / Risks

19. If the recommendations of this report are adopted, there is no need for Council to adopt a replacement policy relating to IHCs as there is no mandatory legal requirement for such a policy.

20. Council does not need a stand-alone policy on recovery of costs associated with IHCs as these are included in the administrative charges fixed under section 36 of the RMA. These are fixed annually through Council’s Schedule of User Fees and Charges.

21. Council’s position on when accredited IHCs will be used, will be recorded in an administrative procedure and adopted by the Executive Leadership Team to ensure transparency and consistency.

22. The risks of retaining the status quo include:

a) Those issues detailed in 13 above will continue; and

b) The three-year appointment terms of IHCs on the current List has already been extended, which was inconsistent with the policy. An additional extension will be required to provide enough time to run a recruitment process and recruit a new List.

23. Legal advice was obtained in relation to the matters detailed in this report.

Options Analysis

Option		Advantages	Disadvantages
1	Retain the status quo	· Set hourly rates for the full three-year term of appointment.	· As listed under point 13 above
2	Adopt recommendations	· As listed under point 14 above	· Hourly rates of IHCs on MfE’s List will vary and may increase over time.

Financial Considerations

24. Option 2 has a potential cost-saving in that Council does not have to fund any advertising or recruitment for IHCs.

25. When accredited IHCs are used for resource consents, actual costs are passed on to the applicant and not borne by Council.

26. Any remuneration for IHCs is included in the overall budget for plan changes.

Significance

27. In accordance with the consideration of the Local Government Act 2002 criteria and thresholds in the IHCs Policy, it is considered that the decision is of low significance. It is acknowledged that plan changes/variations heard by IHCs may be of high significance.

Consultation / Engagement

28. IHCs on Council’s List will be informed of the changes given they will take effect on 1 June a month before their appointment terms are due to expire (on 30 June). Those who are RMA accredited will be on the MfE List and will thus still be able to be selected and appointed for particular matters under the new recommended delegations.

29. Considering the decision is of low significance, officers are of the opinion that no further engagement or consultation is required prior to Council making a decision.

Next Steps

30. The Delegations Manual will be updated to reflect the decisions at this meeting. The policy will be removed from the website and current IHCs on the panel advised of the decision.

31. The administrative procedure (and accompanying templates) will be developed and adopted by the Executive.

Attachments

1. Draft Delegations to Independent Hearings Commissioners - May 2021 - A12551527 ⇩

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

DELEGATIONS TO INDEPENDENT HEARINGS COMMISSIONERS

Pursuant to sections 34A and 39B of the Resource Management Act 1991 (“RMA”), and section 76 of the Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Act 2013 (“HASHAA”), and subject to the Conditions specified below, Council makes the delegations specified in the Delegations section below to all persons who are accredited to conduct hearings in terms of sections 39A and 39B of the Resource Management Act 1991 (other than local body elected members), as named on the Ministry for the Environment’s list of ‘Making Good Decisions’ Certificate holders - non-local body elected members or any equivalent list, as amended from time to time (“Independent Hearings Commissioner/s”).

Conditions

1. The following are excluded from these delegations and these delegations should be interpreted accordingly:

· Council’s power to approve a proposed policy statement or plan under clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the RMA;

· Council’s power to delegate its functions, powers and duties under the RMA and HASHAA;

· any of Council’s functions and powers under subpart 3 of Part 2 (except as provided in section 90(3)) of HASHAA;

· any of Council’s functions, powers and duties that Council is prohibited by a rule of law (for example: a statutory provision, regulation or court ruling) from delegating to the Independent Hearings Commissioners.

2. An Independent Hearings Commissioner is not permitted to sub-delegate any of his/her delegated authority.

3. An Independent Hearings Commissioner must exercise and perform these delegations in accordance with the applicable legislation, Council’s corporate strategies, policies, plans and the principles of administrative law and natural justice.

4. Each of the delegations specified includes all ancillary functions, powers and duties that are necessary for the Independent Hearings Commissioner to exercise or perform or give effect to the delegation.

5. Exercise or performance of these delegations by an Independent Hearings Commissioner is limited to matters in relation to which they have been selected and appointed to act. An Independent Hearings Commissioner may only exercise or perform these delegations to the extent and within the scope specified in their letter of appointment to act in relation to a particular matter.

6. An Independent Hearings Commissioner is deemed to have these delegations on the later of 1 June 2021 or the date of their inclusion on the Ministry for the Environment maintained list/register of Making Good Decisions certificate holders (i.e. RMA accredited persons) who are non-local body elected members (or equivalent list), and to hold the delegated authority for so long as they maintain that accreditation.

7. Each of the delegations must be read and interpreted in conjunction with the legislative provision to which it relates.

DELEGATIONS

1. Council delegates those of its functions, powers and duties under the RMA and HASHAA as specified in the table below to each of the Independent Hearings Commissioners.

When a section of HASHAA refers to an equivalent section under the RMA as applying for the purposes of HASHAA (with any modifications specified in HASHAA), and the Independent Hearings Commissioner is delegated authority from Council under that equivalent RMA section, then the Independent Hearings Commissioner is delegated the same authority (with any necessary modifications) in respect of that HASHAA section as they hold under the equivalent RMA section, whether or not an equivalent HASHAA section is specified in the table below.

RMA SECTION	HASHAA SECTION	BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DELEGATION
37 and 37A	76(2)(f)	Power to extend a statutory time limit and power to waive compliance with a time limit, a method of service or the service of a document. Includes the power to determine which persons are directly affected by the extension or waiver and to authorise that they be notified.
39, 39AA, 40, 41, 41A, 41B, 41C, 41D, 42	76(2)(g)	All of the functions, powers and duties of Council in relation to hearings specified in these sections. Includes (without limitation) the powers under the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1908 specified in section 41 RMA and the powers to make sensitive information orders specified in section 42 RMA.
42A	76(2)(g)	Power to require an officer of a local authority or to commission a consultant or any other person employed for the purpose to prepare a report in accordance with section 42A RMA.
95, 95A, 95B, 95C, 95D, 95E, 95F	29	Power to determine notification requirements including whether an application is public or limited notified. Power to make notifications in accordance with these sections.
104	34(1) and (2)	Power to hear and determine: · resource consent applications · applications for a change or cancellation to consent conditions and conditions specified in consent notices; and · reviews of consent conditions. Includes (without limitation): · the power to decline an application on the grounds that there is inadequate information to determine the application; · the power to impose conditions on consent.
104A, 104B, 104C, 104D	36(1)
106	35 and 55(c)(i)
108, 108A, 220	36(2), 37 and 38
127 and 221	52
132	55
125	51	Power to extend the period after which a resource consent lapses.
139	58	Power to determine a request for a certificate of compliance.
139A		Power to determine a request for an existing use certificate.
168A, 171, 189A and 191		Power to consider a requirement under Part 8 of the RMA, hear submissions received, and recommend to the requiring authority that it: · confirm the requirement; · modify the requirement; · impose conditions; or · withdraw the requirement.
176A		Power to exercise discretions relating to outline plans.
357AB, 357C, 357CA and 357D	82 and 83	Power to hear and determine objections made to Council under sections 357, 357A and 357B RMA and sections 82 and 83 of HASHAA.
Schedule 1		All of the functions, powers and duties of Council in relation to hearings and decisions specified in Schedule 1. Includes (without limitation): · the power to hold a hearing under clause 8B; · the power to make decisions under clause 10; and · the power to make decisions under clause 29(4). This delegation excludes the power to make the final approval or adoption of the proposed plan, plan change or variation under clause 17 of Schedule 1 of the RMA.

2. Council delegates to each of the Independent Hearings Commissioners all authority necessary to hear, either alone or in conjunction with one or more other hearings commissioners, any quasi-judicial or regulatory matter that the Council is empowered or obligated at law under the RMA and HASHAA to hear and to make a determination (including drafting the substantive decision) where that is permitted by law.

3. Authority to chair or deputy chair a group of Independent Hearings Commissioners who have been selected and appointed to hear a particular matter is conditional on being appointed to act as the chairperson or deputy chairperson of that group, and having the chairing endorsement^{^[1]}.

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

11.3 Bay Venues Limited Board Remuneration Review 2021

File Number: A12464498

Author: Anne Blakeway, Manager: Community Partnerships

Josephine Meuli, CCO Specialist

Authoriser: Gareth Wallis, General Manager: Community Services

Purpose of the Report

1. To make decisions regarding the remuneration for the Board of Bay Venues Limited, a Tauranga City Council, council-controlled organisation.

Recommendations

That the Council:

(a) Receives the Bay Venues Limited Board Remuneration Review 2021 report.

(b) Agrees that the remuneration for the directors of Bay Venues Limited Board should remain the same, being:

(i) Base director fee set at $33,000 per annum; and

(ii) Chair fee at $66,000 per annum.

(c) Agrees a remuneration review for the Bay Venues Limited Board be included in the remuneration review for all council-controlled organisations, next scheduled for 2023.

Executive Summary

2. On 27 April 2021, Council approved the Strategic Review of Bay Venues Limited (BVL), which confirmed “changes to the current Bay Venues Limited Board structure and direct[ed] staff to develop a process to appoint a new, leaner Board, including a senior staff member from Tauranga City Council, with a stronger community focus and reviewed director remuneration, to be in place from 1 July 2021.”

3. This report presents the findings of a subsequent review of the BVL Board’s remuneration, taking into account modified strategic priorities, including delivery of a stronger community focus while maintaining the delivery of commercial outcomes.

4. In the meantime, staff have commenced an appointment process to appoint a new Board (of up to five directors), with recommendations for appointment planned to come to Council on 21 June 2021.

Background

5. Tauranga City Council (TCC) is a 100% shareholder of Bay Venues Limited (BVL), a council-controlled organisation.

6. Section 4.10 of TCC’s Appointment of Directors to Council Organisations’ Policy states that council-controlled organisation director remuneration “will be reviewed at least once per triennium, or wherever the performance of the council-controlled organisation or the role of the council-controlled organisation and its board changes significantly.”

7. Section 4.10.2 states that where council-controlled organisation directors are remunerated, the level of remuneration will be set taking into account the following factors:

· the need to attract and retain appropriately qualified directors;

· the levels of remuneration paid by comparable organisations in New Zealand;

· any changes in the nature of the council-controlled organisation’s business; and

· any other relevant factors.

8. On 19 December 2017, a remuneration review for BVL directors (DC305), approved an increase to the base fee for its directors to $33,000, the Deputy Chair fee at $41,250 per annum, and the Chair to $66,000 per annum.

9. On 10 December 2020, staff undertook a remuneration review for TCC’s three council-controlled organisations, including BVL. Council agreed to maintain BVL’s base director remuneration at $33,000, pending the outcomes of the Strategic Review of BVL.

Council-controlled organisation Board remuneration review

10. In past remuneration reviews (2017 and 2020), the same methodology has been utilised, taking into account relevant benchmarking information and any recent board performance reviews – see Attachment 1 for methodology.

11. During the 2020 review, staff used the Institute of Directors: Directors’ Fees Report 2020/21 to support its findings. The information is recent and is appropriate for this review of the BVL director’s remuneration.

12. The below table shows the current remuneration, including the updated remuneration in December 2020 for TAGT and TBOP directors:

CCO	Band	Base fee – director/trustee	Fee – chair	No. of board members	Last reviewed
BVL	3 Commercial and non-commercial	$33,000	$66,000	3/4 + 1*	December 2017
TAGT	5 Non-commercial	$5,000	$10,000	6	December 2020
TBOP	4 Non-commercial	$12,000	$24,000	6	December 2020

*One director may be a Council staff member but in line with Council’s policy, will not receive remuneration for these additional duties.

13. The scores in the evaluation results in the Assessment of Remuneration for BVL directors (Attachment 1, section 4.1) shows no significant changes to the role (as assessed by the previous reviews). This is reasonable, as BVL has not undergone a significant overall change in the scale and nature of operations since the previous remuneration review, which would be reflected in a change of band.

14. It is therefore recommended that the BVL base director remuneration is maintained at current levels until the next remuneration review in 2023. If this situation changes following, for example, the upcoming review of the feasibility of bringing community halls and community centres back in-house, then board remuneration can be reviewed accordingly.

Strategic / Statutory Context

15. Tauranga’s council-controlled organisations help the council to achieve its strategic community outcomes for the city.

16. Regular reviews of council-controlled organisation directors’ remuneration are required by the Local Government Authority. Council’s Appointment of Directors to Council Organisations Policy includes consideration of director/trustee remuneration, including the expectation that council-controlled organisation director remuneration will be reviewed at least once per triennium.

17. Tauranga City Council’s Appointment of Directors to Council Organisations’ Policy includes appointment of directors, skills and expertise requirements and director remuneration.

18. In meeting the commercial expertise requirements directors will also be able to demonstrate a public-service ethos, in particular:

(a) an understanding of the wider interests of the publicly accountable shareholder; and

(b) the ability to build and maintain relationships within the Tauranga community.

19. In maintaining the base fee remuneration at $33,000, consideration has been given to the renewed strategic priorities for BVL balanced against the benchmarks and methodology used in December 2020.

20. Staff consider there is no significant change required by the BVL directors, rather an increased focus on its services to the community and increased positive impact in these areas.

21. It is considered more appropriate to retain the remuneration at current levels for the next three years, pending the delivery of the revised strategic direction set by council.

Options Analysis

Option 1: Approve that the Board remuneration be maintained at $33,000 base director fee, and Chair fee at $66,000 per annum – RECOMMENDED.

22. Council approves to maintain BVL director fees at the current level.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Retaining BVL’s director remuneration at current levels is appropriate, meeting the criteria set out in council’s methodology.

· This level of remuneration is considered prudent and appropriate for the level of expertise required from the new directors.

· The level of remuneration takes into account that candidates need to exhibit the necessary requisites of governance (professional skills and expertise) as well as demonstrating an understanding of having a “public-service ethos”.

· The remuneration meets with the benchmarks used in the December remuneration review and is still relevant for this application (Institute of Directors: Directors’ Fees Report 2020/21).

· The reduction in directors (from seven to four or five, with one unpaid) means total remuneration will be less than in previous years.

· Potential reduction in attracting high-calibre candidates due to fees remaining at the current level – particularly in light of the recent strategic review, and the onus on board members for health, safety and wellness in a high-risk organisation.

23. Staff have not provided a second option at this time (increase or decrease in BVL director fees), noting the approvals within the strategic review has not made significant change to the nature of BVL’s business or any other relevant factors.

24. Further, to decrease the remuneration at this stage, following the outcomes of the recent strategic review, may lead to a reduction in potential high-calibre candidates applying for the roles.

25. The review notes the current levels of remuneration for BVL directors are comparable with other similar organisations across New Zealand, as detailed in Appendix 2 of Attachment 1.

26. Council may consider that an increase in fees for BVL directors is appropriate given the reduced number of directors on this board and increased responsibility. However, staff do not recommend an increase in remuneration as the methodology outlined in Attachment 1 notes no significant change or impact to the requirements of the board, but rather highlights the board’s need to focus on driving community outcomes. Following the financial impact of COVID-19 on the wider community, an increase in director remuneration may also be viewed as insensitive at this time.

Financial Considerations

27. With the recommended option being to maintain the current fee structure for BVL directors, there are no additional financial requirements for BVL.

28. BVL’s board will be reduced from seven to four or five directors, with one (unpaid) Council-appointed staff member. This means the total remuneration fees for the board will decrease by between $99,000 and $132,000 (see Attachment 1, Section 6 for further details).

Legal Implications / Risks

29. There are no legal implications of this decision.

30. There are potential reputational risks relating to this decision. Ensuring that council-controlled organisation director remuneration is appropriate enables TCC to attract and retain suitably qualified directors for its council-controlled organisations.

Significance

31. The Local Government Act 2002 requires an assessment of the significance of matters, issues, proposals and decisions in this report against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Council acknowledges that in some instances a matter, issue, proposal or decision may have a high degree of importance to individuals, groups, or agencies affected by the report.

32. In making this assessment, consideration has been given to the likely impact, and likely consequences for:

(a) the current and future social, economic, environmental, or cultural well-being of the district or region;

(b) any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by, or interested in, the issue, proposal, decision, or matter; and

33. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

34. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the matter is of low significance, officers are of the opinion that no further engagement is required prior to Council making a decision.

Next Steps

35. If approved by Council, the director fees would remain the same for the new board members to be appointed on 1 July 2021. The next full review of council-controlled organisation remuneration will be in 2023, following the local body elections in 2022.

Attachments

1. Assessment of Remuneration for BVL directors, May 2021 - A12549308 ⇩

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

Attachment 1

Assessment of remuneration for the Board of Bay Venues Limited

1. Executive Summary

This assessment of council-controlled organisation director remuneration utilises the same methodology used in previous reviews (2020 and 2017). The methodology is provided for clarity as Appendix 1 of this review. Before starting this assessment, we considered the approach and methodology used in the previous reviews and concluded that it was still appropriate.

The information also compares other council-controlled organisations and Crown entities with similar operations. The Institute of Directors (IOD) Directors’ Fees Report 2020/21 is also a valuable resource.

Part of the process involved researching fees for other benchmark organisations – other CCOs and crown entities with similar operations. The Institute of Directors (IoD) Directors Fees Report 2020/21 was also a valuable resource. See Appendix 2 for benchmarking data.

Data for the financial aspects of the size and scale dimensions was obtained from the council-controlled organisations’ annual reports for the year ended 30 June 2020. The remaining areas were determined by officer review.

Bay Venues Limited board remuneration was last assessed in Council’s remuneration review in December 2020. However, Council agreed to maintain the remuneration for BVL board at the base director fee of $33,000, pending the outcome of the McGredy Winder Strategic Review.

Given the results of this assessment, the recommendation is to retain the base director fee at $33,000 per annum for BVL directors.

A more detailed discussion, including alternative options and the full cost of each option, is provided in the Recommendations section of this assessment.

2. Current council-controlled organisation (CCO) director fees – December 2020

Following the board remuneration review in December 2020, current remuneration for all three council-controlled organisations is as follows:

CCO	Base fee	Chair fee	Deputy chair fee	Total change in board remuneration 2020
BVL	$33,000	$66,000	$41,250	No change
TAGT	$5,000	$10,000	$6,250	+ $15,625
TBOP	$12,000	$24,000	$15,000	+ $17,625

3. Benchmarking and market movement

Previous reviews have appended a table showing the fees for a number of different comparable organisations. The information provided in December 2020 is provided as Appendix 2.

The Institute of Directors' (IOD) Directors Fees Report 2020/21 provides valuable information on directors’ fees for many different types of organisation, broken down into a range of different metrics, including industry, organisation type (e.g. private, SOE, council-controlled organisations, not-for-profit), size etc. This information has been incorporated into the benchmarking table.

The IOD report shows that the general market movement for directors' fees over the previous year was 0.8%. Council-controlled organisations saw a 0.6% decrease (however this follows a 14.1% increase the previous year) and the not-for-profit sector had a minor increase of 1.2%.

4. Application of methodology to Bay Venues Limited (BVL)

The full methodology is provided as Appendix 1 of this assessment.

The size and scale evaluation was based on the following information. The financial aspects were obtained from BVL’s financial accounts as at 30 June 2020.

Size and Scale Data	Bay Venues Limited
Total Revenue	$22.9 million
Total Assets	$118.2 million
Full time employee equivalents (FTEs)	100<299

4.1 Evaluation of results (includes TAGT and TBOP)

The size and scale areas were evaluated using the above data. The remaining areas were determined by officer review. Results from the previous review were used as a starting point (where the assessment differs from the previous review, that number is shown in brackets).

Evaluation areas	BVL	TAGT	TBOP
Budget/ turnover	2	1	1
Assets Owned	2	1	1
FTEs	3	1	1
Complexity	3 (2)	2 (1)	2
Function	2	1	2
Impact of decisions	2	2	2
Public profile	3	2	3
Reputational Risk	3	2	3 (2)
Skills	8	4	6
Total	28	16	21
Band	3 Mixed (Commercial and non-commercial)	5 Non-commercial	4 Non-commercial

The scores in the table above show no change to BVL (as assessed by the previous reviews). This is reasonable, as BVL has not undergone a significant overall change in the scale or nature of operations since the previous review, which would be reflected in a change of band.

5. Recent events

Since March 2020, the Covid-19 global pandemic has impacted on all council-controlled organisations to varying extents (as it has on New Zealand society in general). This has created new challenges for the council-controlled organisations, their management and boards in a number of areas.

The Institute of Directors, Directors’ Fees Report 2020/21 provides the results of their annual survey, undertaken in May 2020 during the Covid-19 lockdown. It notes that “while Covid-19 has added to the complexity of governance, it has also presented an opportunity”^{^[2]}. It also states “for Directors, the challenge in both the near term and the future will be to set a path in uncertain times and boost the confidence of employees and shareholders, to secure the post-Covid future of the organisations they govern”¹.

The McGready Winder Strategic review of Bay Venues Limited was completed and presented to Council on 27 April 2021, following which Council agreed to:

(i) implement option 1, an enhanced status quo – continuing with current operational arrangements, strengthened by clearer Key Performance Indicators; and

(ii) develop a process to appoint a new, leaner Board, including a member of the Executive from Tauranga City Council, with a stronger community focus and reviewed director remuneration, to be in place from 1 July 2021.

Applying the remuneration evaluation methodology to BVL’s enhanced status quo option shows no significant change to the data. That is, the data remains the same for BVL’s size and scale of total revenue, total assets and total FTEs.

This may change if the number of assets reduces following the invetsigation into the option of moving community halls and community centres back under the direct control of Council. While there has been approved changes, this does not affect the operational outcomes for BVL being to continue to deliver a commercial focus across the (current) group of assets.

6. Recommendations

Bay Venues Limited

In 2017, the BVL directors’ fees were increased to bring them into the range for their band. Before this, BVL’s director fees had remained the same since their establishment in 2013.

The most recent board performance review was a Council-led review in February 2020. The report noted that the board was in transition under a new Chair, with a different way of operating the board. There were some issues raised, with the key ones relating to the need to improve the working relationship between management and the board, and better board oversight of health and safety incident management.

BVL’s 2019-20 Annual Report noted that all areas of the business have been affected by the Covid-19 pandemic, with significant impacts on the commercial events business through into the next financial year.

Given the need for transformational change at BVL, and a stronger focus on community outcomes and health and safety, it is recommended that the fees for BVL directors remain at their current level:

		Current remuneration		Remuneration per recommendation		Total variance
Chair	$66,000		$66,000		-
Deputy chair	n/a		n/a		-
Other directors	$33,000 (x6 = $198,000)		$33,000 (x3* = $99,000) (x2* = $66,000)		$33,000
Total remuneration	$264,000		$165,000 or $132,000		$99,000 or $132,000

* This figure will change depending on whether two or three directors are appointed in June 2021. Under Council’s Appointments Policy, the Council-appointed member of TCC’s Executive team is ineligible to receive remuneration during their term of appointment, and so this will not affect the total board remuneration.

Other options

Option	Benefits	Disadvantages
A. Increase fees – not recommended	· May attract higher calibre directors. · No direct financial impact on council as director fees are paid by BVL itself.	· Financial impact on BVL, which may flow through to council in funding requests.
B. Decrease fees – not recommended	· Reduced governance costs for BVL.	· Reputational issue with BVL directors and potential future director applicants.

Option

Benefits

Disadvantages

A. Increase fees – not recommended

· May attract higher calibre directors.

· No direct financial impact on council as director fees are paid by BVL itself.

· Financial impact on BVL, which may flow through to council in funding requests.

B. Decrease fees – not recommended

· Reduced governance costs for BVL.

· Reputational issue with BVL directors and potential future director applicants.

Appendix 1:

Methodology for review of Tauranga City Council’s council-controlled organisation director remuneration

Purpose

To ensure that all of Council’s council-controlled organisations operate in a manner that maximises their contribution to ratepayers benefit by attracting appropriately qualified and motivated directors and trustees. Remuneration has a direct impact on ensuring the right pool of applicants, with relevant experience, are attracted to these roles.

The Council is empowered by legislation and policy to appoint directors to council-controlled organisation Boards and set directors’ fees to reflect the size, complexity and operating environment of each entity.

Methodology

This model was developed by Auckland Council. This methodology was principally based on a report prepared by Martin, Jenkins and Associates. This was the same methodology used in 2017 and 2020 for the previous reviews of the council-controlled organisations’ director remuneration.

While Auckland’s council-controlled organisations are much larger in scale than Tauranga’s, the scales have been left the same to ensure that the final scores and relative remuneration are consistent.

This methodology considers the relative scale of each council-controlled organisation through a variety of dimensions in the following key areas:

· Size and scale

· Complexity and scope

· Accountability

· Skills Required

Size and scale

These are quantitative dimensions which demonstrate the relative magnitude of each council-controlled organisation including revenue, opex, capex, asset base, equity, liabilities and employee numbers.

These dimensions are useful for understanding the scale of an organisation but are not sufficient on their own to assess the nature of governance roles and responsibilities.

Budget/turnover	Score
$0-10m	1
$10m-50m	2
$50m-100m	3
$100m-300m	4
$300m-600m	5
$600m-1.2b	6
$1.2b+	7

Assets owned	Score
$0-100m	1
$100m-500m	2
$500m-1b	3
$1b-3b	4
$3b-6b	5
$6b-12b	6
$12b+	7

FTEs	Score
0-50	1
51-99	2
100-299	3
300-499	4
500+	5

Complexity and scope

These dimensions assess the nature of the work performed by each entity. This includes dimensions such as relationship management responsibilities, the complexity of issues considered, whether or not there are past decisions for guidance and ownership versus management responsibilities.

Complexity of issues	Score
Very complex issues with no past decisions for guidance. Each situation significantly to others and solution required is often unique.	5
Some issues will be very complex with few previous decisions for guidance.	4
Complex issues requiring analysis and consideration of potential alternative solutions. While each case will be treated on its merits there will often be previous decisions for guidance.	3
Some issues will be complex requiring analysis and careful judgement but other issues will be straightforward and may be resolved quickly through consistent application of established decisions.	2
Situations require consideration and judgement, but usually under established guidelines.	1

Function, level and scope of authority	Score
Innovative – the development of new concepts is required to find innovative and path-finding solutions. There will be little or no external guidance (New Zealand or internationally) to aid resolution of these issues.	5
Constructive – the development of new approaches or advice is required where the issues are complex, multi-dimensional and involve substantial research, consideration of possible alternatives and their consequences. The body may commission research or utilise the findings to inform their policy development or advice.	4
Evaluative – issues will include circumstances, facts and concepts different to those that have been experienced in the past. Analytical thinking and evaluative judgement will be required to identify realistic alternatives and apply/recommend a solution.	3
Judgement – solutions will be found from application of professional or personal judgement and generally guided by previous decisions. Circumstances may be different from those previously experienced but there will be a sufficient frame of reference to make a considered decision.	2
Operational – issues to be resolved are generally within existing policy and prior decisions. Decisions can generally be made quickly and with reasonable certainty.	1

Accountability

This considers the scale of market risk, exposure and public interest in each entity. This includes the impact of decisions made by each Board, the public profile of the council-controlled organisation’s activities, potential risk to reputation of individual Directors, and key risks faced by the entity.

Impact of decisions	Score
An immediate impact on groups of people or sectors of society.	5
An immediate, critical impact on individual or small number of people.	4
Decisions have an immediate, but not critical effect on a small number of individuals or a single corporate entity.	3
Decisions have a longer-term impact on groups of people or sectors of society.	2
Decisions affect internal policies within an organisation.	1

Public profile	Score
High profile, broad public interest and scrutiny likely. Potential impact on New Zealand’s international population.	5
Moderate profile; strong interest likely from large sectors of the public. Decisions may have a major effect on the Council.	4
Medium profile; public interest likely to be localised to area, sector or discipline.	3
Limited profile – usually non-controversial determinations but of interest to small pressure groups.	2
Low profile – generally non-controversial findings or recommendations.	1

Risk to personal reputation	Score
Widespread public interest in outcomes would be expected. Member/s will attract strong interest from media and/or peers. Potential risk to personal and/or the body’s reputation is high.	5
Strong public, peer and stakeholder interest and importance would be associated with these issues. Media interest would also be expected, but potential risk to personal or the body’s reputation is unlikely.	4
Moderate but widespread public and peer interest is likely. Reputational risk is minimal.	3
Public interest is likely to be limited, but the issues would be of interest to other members of the particular profession or sector.	2
There is likely to be little or no wider public or peer interest in decisions made by the entity.	1

Skills Required

In addition to these dimensions, the skills collectively required within each Board were considered. This includes the type of expertise and specialisation needed.

Expertise required	Score
Outstanding and authoritative knowledge, recognised nationally and internationally for expertise in a particular field.	12
Deep and broad knowledge in a specific area or as a leader. Widely respected as a subject matter expert or authority in their field.	10
Substantial range of knowledge and experience in a field or professional discipline sometimes associated with senior level functional or technical leadership, executive management or governance roles.	8
A number of years’ experience in a technical, professional field or in a leadership role is a prerequisite.	6
No specific experience is required but members would have broad general knowledge and may represent a body of opinion.	4

Consideration of these collective dimensions provided us with a comprehensive understanding of each council-controlled organisation and enabled an assessment of the internal relativities between each of the council-controlled organisations.

Converting the score to a band

Extrapolated based on previous scores and band levels

	Band 1	Band 2	Band 3	Band 4	Band 5
Budget	7	6	5	4	3
Assets	7	6	5	4	3
FTEs	5	4	3	2	2
Complexity	5	4	3	2	1
Scope	5	4	3	2	1
Impact	5	4	3	2	1
Profile	5	4	3	2	1
Reputation risk	5	4	3	2	1
Expertise	12	10	8	6	5
Total (upper limit of band)	56	46	36	24	17

Fees

Recommended fee bands

Band Level	Commercial Basis	Non-Commercial Basis	Score
1	$51,000 to $58,000	$25,500 to $29,000	47-56
2	$38,000 to $45,000	$19,000 to $22,500	37-46
3	$33,000 to $40,000	$16,500 to $20,000	25-36
4	$15,000 to $25,000	$7,500 to $12,500	18-24
5	$5,000 to $15,000	$2,500 to $7,500	12-17

Analysis shows that the directors’ fees for non-profit organisations is about half that for commercial organisations. The typical multiplier for remuneration is the Chairperson earns double that of a board member, with a Deputy Chair being paid about 1.25 times the standard board member.

Appendix 2: Fee benchmarking for TCC council-controlled organisations

Organisation/ comparison group	Type of entity	Director	Deputy Chair	Chair
General (median figures)
State-owned enterprises IOD Directors’ Fees Report 2020/21		$24,200	$45,000	$58,000
Statutory boards IOD Directors’ Fees Report 2020/21		$24,500	$32,000	$51,100
Council-controlled organisations IOD Directors’ Fees Report 2020/21		$36,000	n/a	$61,000
Not-for-profit IOD Directors’ Fees Report 2020/21		$23,500	n/a	$35,500
Trust (not-for-profit) IOD Directors’ Fees Report 2020/21		$11,000 Trustee	n/a	$5,000
Facilities Management
Dunedin Venues Management 2018/19 annual report	Dunedin CCTO	$18,000		$27,000
Regional Facilities Auckland 2017 review	Auckland CCO	$41,100	$51,375	$82,200
Wellington Regional Stadium Trust^{^[3]} 2018/19 annual report	Wellington CCO	$19,000		$38,000
WREDA 2018/19 annual report	Wellington CCO Includes Venues Wellington	$25,000		$50,000
Art Gallery
Te Manawa Museum of Palmerston North^{^[4]} 2018/19 annual report	Palmerston North CCO	$2,533		$5,066
Wellington Museums Trust^{^[5]} 2018/19 annual report	Wellington CCO	$12,011		$24,022
Tourism
Tourism New Zealand^{^[6]} 2018/19 annual report	Crown entity	$22,000		$44,000
ATEED 2017 review	Auckland CCO	$41,100	$51,375	$82,200
WREDA 2018/19 annual report	Wellington CCO	$25,000		$50,000
Hamilton and Waikato Tourism 2016/17 annual report	Hamilton / Waikato CCO	$10,000		$16,000^{^[7]}
Rotorua Economic Development Limited 2018/19annual report	Rotorua CCO	$10,000		$20,000

Central Government – State Services Commission fees framework

https://www.publicservice.govt.nz/assets/Legacy/resources/CO-19-1-Fees-Framework-for-members-appointed-to-bodies-in-which-the-Crown-has-an-interest.pdf

Group 3a bodies: governance boards, including TEIs and DHBs

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

11.5 Amendment to the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2012 to prohibit heavy vehicles in Mt Maunganui

File Number: A12546166

Author: Emma Joyce, Policy Analyst

Clare Cassidy, Team Leader: Transport Safety

Authoriser: Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Purpose of the Report

1. To amend the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2012 (the Bylaw) to prohibit heavy vehicles from the area between Golf and Girven Roads, Mt Maunganui.

Recommendations

That the Council:

(a) Specifies that pursuant to clause 8.2 of the Traffic and Parking Bylaw 2012 heavy motor vehicles are prohibited at all times from the following streets

· Aintree Place

· Ascot Place

· Ascot Road

· Berescourt Place

· Berwick Place

· Carter Street

· Carysfort Street

· Compton Place

· Concord Avenue

· Crane Street

· Epsom Road

· Kinross Place

· Harris Street

· Huia Avenue

· Lachlan Avenue

· Leander Street

· Links Avenue

· Paterson Street

· Pukaki Street

· Salt Avenue

· Solway Place

· Spur Avenue

· Stawell Avenue

· Surf Road

· Part of Farm Street between Farm Street and Concord Ave

· Part of Taupo Avenue between Marlin Street and Paterson Street

· Part of Oceanbeach Road between Golf and Girven Roads

Executive Summary

2. Concerns have been raised about the safety and noise impacts of increased heavy vehicle movements in the mostly residential streets between Golf and Girven Roads, Mt Maunganui. Council can prohibit heavy vehicle movements at specified times under clause 8.2 of the Bylaw.

3. This report recommends a prohibition on heavy vehicles on most streets between Golf and Girven Roads to limit noise and reduce any safety issues arising from heavy vehicles using the area to avoid traffic from construction on State Highway 2 (Bayfair to Baypark).

Background

4. The area between Golf and Girven Roads is mostly residential apart from the Bayfair shopping mall. Residents in the area have raised concerns about increased safety risks and noise generated by increased traffic movements in the area, particularly as the area is used by children travelling to local schools. While Council does not have up to date traffic data from the area, it is likely that the area is being used more frequently by drivers of all vehicles to avoid the Bayfair to Baypark construction works.

5. Being a predominantly residential area, the streets are designed for heavy vehicle access for deliveries, buses and diversion, but are not appropriate as through routes for higher numbers of heavy vehicles.

6. Clause 8.2 of the Bylaw states Council “may specify roads on which heavy motor vehicles are prohibited at specified times”. While heavy motor vehicles are defined as vehicles that have a gross vehicle mass exceeding 3500kg, the Bylaw excludes inter alia passenger service and emergency services vehicles and vehicles undertaking contracted waste management services from any prohibition. Buses may also use adjacent streets as a temporary stop before commencing a run.

7. Exceptions also apply if a street is the only access point for the purpose of picking up or delivering goods to an address in those roads when alternative access is not available for this purpose. Delivery vehicles using Farm Street to access the Bayfair shopping mall are required to exit right on to Farm Street.

8. Council could decide to implement a prohibition between Golf Road and Concord Avenue (option 1.1), between Golf and Girven Roads (option 1.2), or to retain the status quo (option 1.3). A total of 14 streets will be impacted under option 1.1 and an additional 12 under option 1.2.

Option

Streets subject to prohibition

1.1

Golf Road to Concord Avenue

· Aintree Place

· Ascot Place

· Ascot Road

· Berescourt Place

· Berwick Place

· Compton Place

· Concord Avenue

· Epsom Road

· Kinross Place

· Huia Avenue

· Links Avenue

· Solway Place

· Spur Avenue

· Part of Oceanbeach Road between Golf Road and Concord Avenue

1.2

Golf Road to Girven Road

All of the streets listed above plus the following;

· Carysfort Sreet

· Carter Street

· Crane Street

· Lachlan Avenue

· Leander Street

· Paterson Street

· Pukaki Street

· Salt Avenue

· Stawell Avenue

· Part of Farm Street between Farm Street and Concord Ave

· Part of Taupo Avenue between Marlin Street and Paterson Street

· Part of Oceanbeach Road between Golf and Girven Roads

Strategic / Statutory Context

9. The Bylaw is made under section 22AB of the Land Transport Act. In particular, clause (1)( c) of that Act allows bylaws to include provision for “prohibiting or restricting, absolutely or conditionally, any specified class of traffic (whether heavy traffic or not), or any specified motor vehicles or class of motor vehicle that, by reason of its size or nature or the nature of the goods carried, is unsuitable for use on any road or roads”.

Options Analysis

Issue 1 – Area for heavy vehicle prohibition.

	Option	Advantages	Disadvantages
1.1	Golf Road to Concord Avenue (including Concord Avenue and that part of Oceanbeach Road between those streets)	· Recognises that residential streets are unsuitable for heavy through traffic · Addresses safety (particularly pedestrian safety) and noise concerns from increased heavy vehicle movements · Ensures residential streets have appropriate amenity · In line with Bayfair consent condition that delivery vehicles may only exit right on to Farm Street	· Eastbound heavy vehicles may still use Concord and residential streets to the east to bypass works on State Highway.
1.2	Golf Road to Girven Road (including that part of Oceanbeach Road between Golf and Girven Roads and excluding part of Farm Street between 45 and 63 Farm Street and Taupo Avenue between 20 and 22 and 43 Farm Street (recommended)		· Additional signing required over option 1.1
1.3	No new heavy vehicle prohibition in Mt Maunganui	· Nil	· Does not address safety and noise concerns · Does not recognise that residential streets are inappropriate for heavy through traffic

Issue 2 – Time that prohibition would apply

10. Should Council agree to implement a heavy vehicle prohibition, Council also needs to consider whether the prohibition should apply at all times or at specified times. For example, the existing heavy vehicle prohibition on Maunganui Road is only for the hours between 9pm and 6am.

Option		Advantages	Disadvantages
2.1	Heavy vehicle prohibition at all times in perpetuity (recommended)	· Reduces safety risk · Reduces noise from heavy vehicles in a residential area · Recognises that residential streets are unsuitable for through heavy traffic	· Nil
2.2	Prohibition between the hours of 9pm and 6am	· Consistent with existing heavy vehicle prohibition on Maunganui Road	· Does not address safety risk and noise · Does not recognises that heavy vehicles may use this area at all times of the day.
2.3	Heavy vehicle prohibition at specified times; eg during peak hours and school times	· Potential to minimise safety risk for students travelling to school · Reduces noise from heavy vehicles in residential areas at sometimes

Financial Considerations

11. There will be a small cost (estimated less than $5,000) to install signage at entry points to the prohibited area. This cost can be accommodated within existing budgets.

Legal Implications / Risks

12. There is a potential reputational risk as our ability to enforce any heavy vehicle restriction or prohibition is limited.

Consultation / Engagement

13. In order to meet our obligations under section 78 of the Local Government Act to consider the views and preferences of persons likely to be affected by the matter, feedback on the proposed prohibition was sought from the Road Transport Forum (RTF), Waka Kotahi, New Zealand Police, local schools and AMP Capital (owners of the Bayfair shopping mall).

14. Written feedback from RTF is appended at attachment one. Their submission requests better assessment of the problem and for Council to work more closely with Waka Kotahi to address the impacts of road works. On being advised of the recommended option put forward in this report, RTF advised that the general thrust of their submission applied also to the extended area.

15. Staff also plan to meet with local transport operators on 25 May 2021. Any feedback from that meeting will be provided at this meeting.

16. Feedback from Waka Kotahi was supportive of the proposal as it would keep vehicles on the appropriate road classifications and supports safety outcomes. They noted that they were unable to enforce any prohibition.

17. AMP Capital acknowledged the residents’ concerns and noted that the recommended option made sense.

18. All local schools were invited to comment on the proposal. At the time of writing, no schools had objected to the proposal.

19. The Sustainability and Waste Team will advise their contractors that vehicles undertaking contracted waste management services are exempt from the prohibition.

Significance

20. The Local Government Act 2002 requires an assessment of the significance of matters, issues, proposals and decisions in this report against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Council acknowledges that in some instances a matter, issue, proposal or decision may have a high degree of importance to individuals, groups, or agencies affected by the report.

21. In making this assessment, consideration has been given to the likely impact, and likely consequences for:

(a) the current and future social, economic, environmental, or cultural well-being of the district or region

(b) any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by, or interested in, the issue, proposal, decision, or matter

22. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the recommendation is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

23. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the recommendation is of low significance, staff are of the opinion that no further engagement is required prior to Council making a decision.

Next Steps

24. Should Council agree to the recommended option, signage advertising the heavy vehicle ban will be installed at all entry points to the area. The ban will not in be in effect until the signs are installed.

25. Monitoring of traffic will be undertaken to determine if the prohibition is effective and if it should be extended to include additional streets.

Attachments

1. Submission from the Road Transport Forum - A12563417 ⇩

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

PDF Creator

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

11.6 Harington Street Transport Hub - advice from Office of the Auditor-General

File Number: A12546224

Author: Nick Swallow, Manager: Legal & Commercial

Authoriser: Paul Davidson, General Manager: Corporate Services

Purpose of the Report

1. This report:

(a) Provides advice received from the Office of the Auditor-General (OAG) on the Harington Street Transport Hub (HSTH);

(b) Provides two earlier procurement probity audits from the McHale Group commissioned by Council as a result of the failed HSTH project; and

(c) Outlines the steps Council is taking to improve the safeguards and processes around project delivery and procurement.

Recommendations

That the Council receive the Harington Street Transport Hub - advice from Office of the Auditor-General report.

Discussion

2. The HSTH project was a multi-storey end of journey facility located on Harington Street in the CBD. In June 2020 the project was halted following discovery of significant defects in the design of the structure. The site has since been sold, as previously advised.

3. The OAG determined to look into aspects of the project and has provided a letter dated 26 May 2021 with comments and recommendations for the Commissioners (OAG advice). The OAG advice builds on a procurement probity audit of the HSTH that Council itself commissioned, alongside a related second procurement probity audit Council commissioned to look at a wider sample of TCC projects.

4. The broad conclusions from these three assessments are summarised below, while a table with the specific recommendations is included at the end of this report.

5. It is worth noting that neither this report, nor the three assessments attached to it, consider the respective role of the companies that carried out the structural design and related peer review of the HSTH. This aspect is of central importance when looking to understand the cause of the HSTH failure and is before the Courts. The progress of this litigation will be reported separately by Council’s Legal Team.

OAG advice

6. The OAG contacted Council in October last year looking to understand more about the project. As noted in the advice, the OAG did not consider a formal investigation was warranted, but it considered it would be helpful for the Commissioners if it set out its views on the certain aspects of the project.

7. Given the work carried out by the McHale Group (see below), the focus was a high-level look into the early stages of the project such as planning, as well as the way the HSTH project was governed.

8. The OAG advice outlines a number of deficiencies and gaps around these early project stages. These broadly indicate a need to place a much greater focus on project planning, business case development and project governance.

9. Rather than trying to summarise the OAG advice, it is useful to quote two paragraphs from the concluding comments (footnotes omitted):

As we have outlined, there were several aspects of the Project which did not accord with good procurement or governance practice. These included a lack of a business case or overall plan for procurement, using panel members for work for which they were not appointed to the supplier panel, focusing on price to the detriment of whether the provider could deliver the work being contracted for, an unclear purpose for the Project even after it had started, and unclear responsibilities while it was being carried out. This is not what is expected when a local authority, or any public organisation, is spending public money.

We also question whether the negative net present values in the options considered by the Council should have led the Council to consider whether there were unquantified benefits that outweighed the negative net present value. The Council might have required further advice to help it evaluate the issues (which it did later after construction issues arose).

10. The OAG advice letter is attached to this report and is being published on the date the agenda for this report is published (26 May 2021).

McHale Group procurement audits

11. As noted, one reason the OAG looked at more preliminary aspects of the HSTH project was because it did not see a need to duplicate the work of two earlier procurement probity audit reports commissioned by Council from the McHale Group (an independent public sector assurance practice).

12. The first McHale report was completed in May 2020 and was specific to the HSTH. It assessed the procurement probity aspects for that project. While it found no untoward behaviour, it identified a number of sub-standard areas in terms of good procurement practice, particularly around things like completion of conflict of interest declarations and record-keeping practices. It also noted concerns around the use of supplier panels.

13. The second McHale report was completed in September 2020 and sampled a range of TCC projects to understand if the sorts of procurement probity shortcomings seen at the HSTH project were more widespread. Again, no untoward behaviour was identified but there were several substandard areas, particularly around record-keeping. While less problematic than the HSTH, the report identified a number of areas of improvement.

Steps taken by Council and future reporting

14. In response to the McHale audits, but also as a result of earlier well-publicised project delivery failures, Council has initiated a range of measures around improving project delivery and procurement processes.

15. In terms of project delivery, the changes include:

(a) A significant restructure of Council’s project delivery model in late 2020 that saw, among other things, the establishment of director positions for each of the three main asset-owning divisions in Council: Transportation, City Waters and Spaces and Places;

(b) In order to give those three asset-owning divisions greater ownership and accountability for projects, Council also dis-established its Project Management Office and now has project managers directly embedded in each of the three areas;

(c) Council also established a new division, the Capital Programme Assurance Division (CPAD). CPAD is an advisory function that looks after a number of areas, including:

(i) Management of Council’s programme of works (rather than individual projects);

(ii) Monitoring the requirements, timeframes and budgets of future capital projects in order to ensure delivery resources are adequately planned and available;

(iii) Monitoring project progress and performance;

(d) The manager for CPAD started in April and is in the process of establishing a road-map for implementing the various responsibilities assigned to the new division.

16. In terms of procurement, the changes underway or in progress reflect the recommendations of the McHale report and include:

(a) A new Procurement Policy that came into effect on 3 May, as well as the ongoing review and refresh of the Council’s procurement procedures and templates;

(b) A training programme to be designed to embed these new procurement processes with the organisation. Staff are also investigating a new digital platform to make the procurement procedures more accessible and user-friendly for staff; and

(c) Subject to the Long Term Plan process, two additional procurement advisor roles to supplement the existing procurement advisor so as to enable greater support for project delivery teams.

17. Council will also now factor in the OAG recommendations into the wider program of changes.

18. It will also use its Internal Audit function to carry out a “health check” on the progress to implement the various recommendations noted in this report. This results of that audit will be reported back to the Commissioners in September 2021.

Table with recommendations

19. The following table sets out the recommendations from the three assessments attached to this report:

OAG

Letter of advice dated 26 May 2021

In this letter, I have commented on the Council’s procurement in this case and have recommended that, as it reviews its procurement policies and procedures and implements change in response to the reviews, the Council:

· Use robust, evidence-based processes to guide decision-making, especially where there are differences of opinion;

· Include requirements before a project starts to set out accountability and governance measures, identify key stakeholders, establish record-keeping processes; and

· Review its use of supplier panels.

McHale Group

Procurement Probity Review of Procurement Processes for the Harrington Street Transport Hub Project

· We suggest that Council recognise and note that there are ongoing residual probity risks relating to some aspects of the Harrington Street Transport Hub procurement processes completed in 2016/2017.

· Council should update its Procurement Policy and the Standard Procurement Procedures document (including procurement process-related templates). Ensure that the Procurement Policy and Standard Procurement Procedures documents are aligned to other relevant policies and procedures within the Council, for example, the Delegated Financial Authority Policy, etc.

· Council should independently review recent and current procurement processes to verify if the findings from this review are systemic.

McHale Group

Probity Procurement Review of Procurement Processes

· Initiate a review and update of Council procurement policies, procedures, guidelines, tools and templates to ensure consistency and alignment with current good practice in particular, the current Government Procurement Rules (4^th edition) and the recently updated NZTA SM021 Contract Procedures Manual (Parts A and B) and related proforma (template) documents. Ensure the review and update is undertaken by suitably experienced and qualified procurement professional with substantial track record of public sector procurement experience. Additionally, seek independent assurance from a probity audit expert in terms of peer review of the updated products.

· Develop and implement ongoing, meaningful, training and development for relevant TCC staff in relation to the updated suite of Council procurement policies, procedures, guidelines, tools and templates.

· Incorporate the improvement opportunities to procurement and probity risks and issues identified in this report within the work to implement Recommendations 1 and 2 above.

· Consider implementation of a regular (e.g. annual) independent probity auditor review of a sample of Council procurement processes to provide assurance that the Council’s policies and procedures and probity expectations are being complied with and probity-procurement risk exposure is being satisfactorily managed.

Next Steps

20. Council staff will continue to implement the recommendations noted in this report, and an audit around progress will be presented in September 2021.

Attachments

1. Letter from the Office of the Auditor-General - 26 May 2021 - TCC car park building project - A12584198 ⇩

2. Probity Procurement Review - Transport Hub - Final Report -McHale Group - A12559109 ⇩

3. Probity Procurement Review - TCC - Final Report - McHale Group (003) - A12559108 ⇩

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

PDF Creator

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

PDF Creator

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

PDF Creator

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

11.7 Hearing of submissions on the draft Acquisitions and Disposals Policy

File Number: A12519217

Author: Rebecca Gallagher, Policy Analyst

Ariell King, Team Leader: Policy

Brigid McDonald, Manager: Strategic Investment & Commercial Facilitation

Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy & Growth

Purpose of the Report

1. That the Council receives submissions and hears from submitters on the proposed Acquisitions and Disposals Policy.

Recommendations

That the Council:

(a) Receives the Hearing of submissions on the draft Acquisitions and Disposals Policy report.

(b) Receives the verbal and written submissions (Attachment A) to the proposed Acquisitions and Disposals Policy.

Executive Summary

1. Council on 1 December 2020 approved the Acquisitions and Disposals Policy (the draft policy) for public consultation. A copy of the draft policy can be found at Attachment B

2. The draft policy is proposed to incorporate the substance of three existing policies. If the policy is adopted, the following policies will be revoked:

· Council Land: Recognition of Tangata Whenua Interests and Aspirations Policy

· Property Acquisition and Divestment Road Stopping Policy

· Strategic Acquisitions Fund Policy

3. The draft policy provides clear principles regarding the management and purpose of Council’s property acquisitions and disposals.

4. Public submissions were sought from 15 March 2021 to 15 April 2021. Two drop-in sessions were held the first on 7 April 2021 and the second on 15 April 2021.

5. A total of 104 submissions were received. Of the 104 submissions 38 have indicated that they wish to be heard. A copy of the submissions we have received are contained in Attachment A

6. The consultation was advertised widely through council libraries, on the website and through social media. A copy of the comments we received through our social media and news articles on the draft policy can be found in Attachment C. Please note that not all social media posts and news articles are contained in attachment C, only those which generated comments which were relevant to the draft policy were included.

7. Table one below provides a list of submitters speaking to Council. An updated speakers schedule with page references will be provided at the hearing.

Table One

Submission number	Submitter name or organisation
008	Whitiora Mcleod
025	Barrie Singleton
026	Jim Sherlock
027	Ken Evans
029	Don Edser
031	Maureen Anderson
033	Richard Prince
043	Irene Walker
044	Peter Williams
046	Andrew Hollis
053	Peter Gregson
054	Puhirake Ihake – Ngati Tapu Hapu
055	John Robson
056	Ian Stevenson
061	Hayden Henry
064	Matire Duncan – Nga Potiki RMU
065	Matire Duncan – Tahuwhakatiki Marae
066	Hayden Henry – Ohuki/Mataphi Trust
067	Matire Duncan – Papamoa 10B block
068	Matire Duncan – Mangatawa 13B2B Trust
069	Matire Duncan – Kaitemako M2 Trust
072	Nathan James – Ngati Kuku
074	Hayden Henry – Hungahungatoroa 1B2B2 Trust
077	Anaru Timutimu - Ngai Tukairangi Hapu Trust
078	Puhirake Ihaka
080	Buddy Mikaere – Ngai Tamarawaho
082	Gavin Pendegrast
088	Rob Paterson – Citizens Advocacy Tauranga Incorporated
089	Stuart Gooch
090	Paul
091	Jordan Stannard
092	Sarah King
096	Jesse Campbell – Ngati Kaahu Ki Mangatawa on Te Rangapu Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana
097	Cynthia Turuwhenua
099	Matire Duncan – Te Rangapu Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana
100	Vivienne Robinson – Te Kapu o Waitaha
101	Rob Paterson
102	Barry Scott

Significance

8. The Local Government Act 2002 requires an assessment of the significance of matters, issues, proposals and decisions in this report against Council’s Significance and Engagement Policy. Council acknowledges that in some instances a matter, issue, proposal or decision may have a high degree of importance to individuals, groups, or agencies affected by the report.

9. In making this assessment, consideration has been given to the likely impact, and likely consequences for:

(a) the current and future social, economic, environmental, or cultural well-being of the district or region

(b) any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by, or interested in, the issue, proposal, decision, or matter

10. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter of the draft policy is of medium significance, but the decision to accept and hear submissions is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

11. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the decision is of low significance, officers are of the opinion that no further engagement is required prior to Council making a decision.

Next Steps

12. Staff to collate the submissions, including any additional information presented at the hearings, and provide any proposed changes to the draft policy to Te Rangapu Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana before reporting back to Council on a proposed policy for adoption.

1. Attachment A - Draft Acqusitions and Disposals Policy Submissions - A12521585 ⇩

2. Attachment B - Draft Acquisitions and Disposals Policy for consultation - A11977313 ⇩

3. Attachment C - Comments on news articles and social media posts during consultation - A12520982 ⇩

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

PDF Creator

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

PDF Creator

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

PDF Creator

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

12 Discussion of Late Items

Ordinary Council Meeting Agenda

31 May 2021

13 Public Excluded Session

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Recommendations

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

General subject of each matter to be considered

Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter

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

13.1 - Public Excluded Minutes of the Council Meeting held on 10 May 2021

s7(2)(a) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect the privacy of natural persons, including that of deceased natural persons

s7(2)(c)(i) - the withholding of the information is necessary to protect information which is subject to an obligation of confidence or which any person has been or could be compelled to provide under the authority of any enactment, where the making available of the information would be likely to prejudice the supply of similar information, or information from the same source, and it is in the public interest that such information should continue to be supplied

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

s7(2)(h) - the withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities

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

s7(2)(j) - the withholding of the information is necessary to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or improper advantage

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

14 Closing Karakia

[1] As recorded in the “chairing endorsement” column of the MfE list/register of “Making Good Decisions” certificate holders who are non-local body elected members.

[3] Based on $171,000 aggregate for 8 trustees, including 2x multiplier for Chair (assumed). No change from 2017 annual report.

[4] Based on $22,796 aggregate for 8 trustees, including 2x multiplier for Chair (assumed)

[5] Based on $84,078 aggregate for 6 trustees, including 2x multiplier for Chair (assumed). 2 trustees were appointed 1 month before the end of the year, so the estimated figure may not be accurate. However, in 2016/17 the base trustee fee was $11,428 so this is within a reasonable range of that figure.

[6] Based on $176,000 aggregate for 7 directors, including 2x multiplier for Chair (assumed)

[7] Based on combined fee for retired and newly appointed Chair (changed during the year)


AGENDA Ordinary Council Meeting Monday, 31 May 2021
I hereby give notice that an Ordinary Meeting of Council will be held on:
Date:	Monday, 31 May 2021
Time:	9am
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	Commission Chair Anne Tolley
Members	Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston Commissioner Stephen Selwood Commissioner Bill Wasley
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	As required

· 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.