Agenda of Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee Meeting

UNCONFIRMED Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee Meeting Minutes

1 November 2021

MINUTES

Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee Meeting

Monday, 1 November 2021

Order of Business

1 Opening Karakia. 3

2 Apologies. 3

3 Public forum.. 3

4 Acceptance of late items. 3

5 Confidential business to be transferred into the open. 4

6 Change to order of business. 4

7 Confirmation of Minutes. 4

7.1 Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 20 September 2021. 4

8 Declaration of conflicts of interest 4

9 Business. 4

9.1 Local Alcohol Policy. 4

9.2 Update on the City Vision Project 6

9.3 Strategic Framework Refresh Project Update. 7

9.4 Sustainability - Update. 8

9.5 Development contributions work programme. 8

9.6 Source Water Shortage. 9

9.7 Strategic Procurement Update. 10

9.10 Tauranga City Council Draft Consolidated Annual Report 2020/21. 10

9.11 Financial and Non-Financial Monitoring Report: Period ended 30 September 2021. 11

9.12 Treasury Strategy. 12

9.13 Local Government Funding Agency AGM Matters November 2021. 13

9.14 Rating Policy Review.. 14

9.8 2021 Q3 Reports: 'Health & Safety' and 'Mental Health & Wellbeing' 14

9.9 Q1 2021/22 LGOIMA and Privacy Requests. 15

10 Discussion of late items. 16

11 Public excluded session. 16

11.1 Litigation Report 17

11.2 Corporate Risk Register - Quarterly Update. 17

11.3 Internal Audit - Quarterly Update. 17

11.4 3 Waters Collaboration Project - funding. 18

11.5 Financial Update from Bay Venues Limited. 18

12 Closing Karakia. 18

MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council

Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee Meeting

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

ON Monday, 1 November 2021 AT 10.30am

PRESENT: Commission Chair Anne Tolley, Dr Wayne Beilby, Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston, Commissioner Stephen Selwood, Commissioner Bill Wasley, Ms Matire Duncan, Mr Te Pio Kawe, Ms Rohario Murray, Mr Bruce Robertson

IN ATTENDANCE: Marty Grenfell (Chief Executive), Paul Davidson (General Manager: Corporate Services), Barbara Dempsey (General Manager: Regulatory & Compliance), Susan Jamieson (General Manager: People & Engagement), Nic Johansson (General Manager: Infrastructure), Christine Jones (General Manager: Strategy & Growth), Gareth Wallis (General Manager: Community Services), Jeremy Boase (Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning), Andy Mead (Manager: City & Infrastructure Planning), Peter Bahrs (Team Leader: Water Services), David Moore (Manager: Capital Projects Assurance), Angelique Fraser (Health & Safety Change Manager), Kathryn Sharplin (Manager: Finance), Tracey Hughes (Financial Insights & Reporting Manager), Mohan De Mel (Treasurer), Malcolm Gibb (Project Manager – Rating Review), Jim Taylor (Transactional Services Manager), Ben Corbett (Team Leader: Growth Funding), Ceilidh Dunphy (Community Relations Manager), Ariell King (Team Leader: Policy), Nigel McGlone (Manager: Environmental Regulation), Coral Hair (Manager: Democracy Services), Robyn Garrett (Team Leader: Committee Support)

1 Opening Karakia

Commissioner Rolleston opened the meeting with a Karakia, and acknowledged the passing of Lynne Ririnui, Penetaka Dickson, Louis Te Kani and Marshall Bidois.

2 Apologies

Apology

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/1

Moved: Mr Bruce Robertson

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the apologies for lateness received from Ms Matire Duncan and for early departure from Dr Wayne Beilby and Mr Te Pio Kawe be accepted.

Carried

3 Public forum

Nil

4 Acceptance of late items

Nil

5 Confidential business to be transferred into the open

Nil

6 Change to order of business

Nil

7 Confirmation of Minutes

7.1 Minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 20 September 2021

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/2

Moved: Dr Wayne Beilby

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the minutes of the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 20 September 2021 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

8 Declaration of conflicts of interest

Nil

9 Business

9.1 Local Alcohol Policy

Staff Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance

Ariell King, Team Leader: Policy

Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning

Nigel McGlone, Manager: Environmental Regulation

Key points

· The first Local Alcohol Policy (LAP) was a joint venture with Western Bay of Plenty District Council (WBOPDC); this updated policy was for TCC alone. The policy must be reviewed every six years.

· Policy provided guidance to staff in the application of their duties, and also to the District Licensing Committee (DLC).

· Have had initial engagement with the police, iwi and previous submitters.

In response to questions

· WBOPDC had taken a different approach with its policy. The two councils were facing different issues with alcohol in their different areas; elected members had decided separate policies were more appropriate. TCC and WBOPDC were undertaking reviews at the same time and had been working closely together.

· Engagement with the DLC was not appropriate at this stage due to possible conflicts of interest due to their role further down the process. The Hospitality Association had not been consulted at this stage.

· Whether a District Plan process was a more effective way to manage location of licensed premises was outside the scope of this review. It was easier and quicker to change a LAP than a district or city plan.

· The ability of commissioners to consider matters raised via submission and make adjustments to the final LAP was reasonably constrained; if the final LAP was too different to the draft, there would need to be another consultative process.

· Appeals went to the Alcohol Regulatory and Licensing Authority.

· Delivery of social outcomes and addressing issues of alcohol abuse through this policy were limited; the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 set out what could be addressed by the policy and was prescriptive in what could be included in the policy.

· Establishment of off licenses could be controlled through this process but was not looked at as part of this review. There was a grandparenting rule – changed provisions around proximity and licensing would apply to new applications but not existing businesses. Council could be more proactive in widely advertising new applications.

· New off license applications could proactively be sent to iwi. The need to make sure communities were aware of applications in their neighbourhood, including wide notification of applications, was noted.

· Change to opening hours of Tauranga CBD with a reduction in hours from 3am to 2am tied in with the one-way door policy, to ensure that people did not come to the CBD after Mount bars closed. The difference between the CBD and the Mount opening hours was as a result of the consultation undertaken for the previous LAP.

· Consistency across all off-licenses e.g. supermarkets and other off-licences having the same operating hours, was a common theme received in feedback.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/3

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Ms Rohario Murray

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a) Receives the information required under section 78(2) of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (attachment one)

(b) Agrees to retain the content of the current Local Alcohol Policy with the following changes:

(i) Introduce a new section in the draft Local Alcohol Policy for club licences to provide clarity for the community and applicants (option b (1))

(ii) Propose a reduction in the opening hours in the Tauranga City Centre with a proposed closing time of 2:00am instead of 3:00am (option b (2))

(iii) Amend the one-way door restriction to commence at 1am instead of 2am to align with the proposed change in hours above.

(d) Adopts the draft Tauranga Local Alcohol Policy (attachment two) and the Statement of Proposal (attachment three) for consultation from 17 November 2021 to 20 December 2021.

(e) Authorises the Chief Executive to make any necessary minor drafting or presentation amendments to the draft Local Alcohol Policy, the Statement of Proposal and the related consultation material prior to the commencement of consultation.

(f) Requests that the following groups be included in consultation on the draft Local Alcohol Policy: iwi, Māori wardens, the Hospitality Association, Hauora, the Chamber of Commerce and the Mainstreet organisations.

(g) Requests that off-licence applications be widely notified.

Carried

9.2 Update on the City Vision Project

Staff Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy and Growth

Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning

Key points

· City Vision work was approved to proceed in June.

· Largely online driven engagement process. Three weeks only; aimed at people not agencies.

· An agency had been engaged to do the creative design and the analysis of the engagement feedback received, which would be peer reviewed by Council staff.

In response to questions

· Could be responsive and pivot engagement if it became evident that particular groups were not represented.

· Relevant agencies would be included on a theme by theme basis as the vision and strategy were turned into action.

· Due to the restricted time frame, particular groups had been targeted, especially iwi partnership groups.

· Would also pick up views expressed through the Long-Term Plan (LTP) process as well, to ensure broad gathering of information.

· Social media was the main delivery agent.

Discussion points raised

· The tight timeframe was a direction from the Commissioners. The city vision project built on work in 2019/20 and wide consultation during the LTP; noted that three weeks would be challenging to get comprehensive reach into the community of this engagement.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/4

Moved: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded: Dr Wayne Beilby

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee receives the ‘Update on the City Vision Project’ report.

Carried

9.3 Strategic Framework Refresh Project Update

Staff Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy and Growth

Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning

Key points

· Work had progressed since the project was approved in June. The framework would provide strategic direction for commissioners and councillors to guide decision making and the 2024-34 LTP.

· A number of strategies had not been recently reviewed and there were also a number of gaps. A comprehensive strategic framework should be in place by mid-2022.

· The framework would not rework established joint strategies.

In response to questions

· There was a strategic gap around sustainability, environmental and economic. Economic performance was a major part of the city’s sustainability and there was a need to lift average household income. Broader definition of sustainability included the four wellbeings.

· The key issue of housing affordability should be included in high level strategies/aspirations.

· Strategic framework was externally facing. City Vision was non-Council centric; the strategy outlined what TCC could do to deliver the vision; the executive business plan underneath the strategy effectively becomes the CE’s contract with the city and the community.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/5

Moved: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a) Receives the Strategic Framework Refresh Project Update report; and

(b) Notes that the Strategic Framework Refresh Project aims to be delivered by July 2022.

Carried

9.4 Sustainability - Update

Staff Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy and Growth

Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning

In response to questions

· External engagement list should include the Chamber of Commerce, the Port, other big industries e.g. Zespri, Instep (youth forum of Priority1).

· Outcome of consultation needed to demonstrate buy-in, support and ownership of key groups and stakeholders. Acknowledged it was not possible to please everyone and there would be outliers that would always want more or less done.

· It would be a governance call about where to pitch the process in terms of how aspirational and how quickly progress should be made.

· Noted the Te Rangapū feedback around a tailored approach for Tauranga Moana in terms of the model and suggested a designer could work with Te Rangapū to clearly articulate their vision.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/6

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Mr Te Pio Kawe

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a) Receives this report;

(b) Notes the approach and next steps for development of the council’s Sustainability Framework as outlined in this report.

Carried

9.5 Development contributions work programme

Staff Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy and Growth

Andy Mead, Manager: City & Infrastructure Planning

Ben Corbett, Team Leader: Growth Funding

Key points

· Identified during the LTP that there was a significant work programme needed.

· Outlined the priorities listed and several significant pieces of work required. There was a challenging amount of work for current resourcing.

In response to questions

· Community relations team were involved in communication planning around development contributions. The development community were generally well-informed about development contribution issues but not builders and the wider community. Messaging on development contributions should be a top priority; a large gap in understanding around development contributions and paying for the cost of development was evident during the LTP process.

· The team were doing their best with prioritising projects and using contractors where possible, but it was a complex area that took time. Delivery and funding of the infrastructure programme was one of Council’s most significant challenges; need to make sure council had the right capability.

· Implementation of the development contribution charges for the community infrastructure development programme was on track.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/7

Moved: Mr Bruce Robertson

Seconded: Dr Wayne Beilby

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a) Receives this report; and

(b) Endorses the work programme for implementation in the upcoming draft Development Contributions Policy 2022/23 and beyond.

(c) Notes the work programme will be reported against and reviewed on an on-going basis, with significant changes reported through the Executive and this Committee as appropriate.

Carried

9.6 Source Water Shortage

Staff Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Peter Bahrs, Team Leader: Water Services

Key points

· Outlined water sources used for TCC take; all three streams were showing decreased flow. This was a definitive trend with no bounce back, following three dry winters in a row.

· Schedule of interventions designed to squeeze the optimum amount of water out of the system; also planned communications to the community around water conservation strategies.

· Noted that TCC water sources were in the Western Bay of Plenty; Bay of Plenty Regional Council was also a partner. Water supply needed to be considered from a regional systemic level e.g. all takes considered, also the state of aquifers.

· Tauranga was looking at more severe water restrictions earlier and for longer.

In response to questions

· The Joyce Rd plant was at a higher elevation than the Oropi plant so it was easier to supply water from Joyce than Oropi; a short-term measure was diversion from Oropi to Joyce which would take pressure off the Tautau Stream. There was limited reticulation ability to move water around.

· People needed to value water differently and change their behaviour; utilise what water was available in the best manner. Encourage personal responsibility.

· Leakage rate was monitored – 16%-18% - not unusual for cities this size. There was always a degree of baseline leakage, no water system was totally watertight.

· BOPRC had done a significant amount of work on aquifer usage and underground water resources, and had a good understanding of consented draws but not unconsented draws and that impact on aquifers. More work was needed on the sustainability and resilience of aquifer use.

· Suggested to work with Places and Spaces/Parks teams in terms of appropriate planting, use of rain gardens and stormwater management.

· Diversion of one source stream water into another would raise questions under Te Ao Māori in terms of mixing of mauri of the different streams. If this was intended, consultation with appropriate iwi/hapū would be critical.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/8

Moved: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a) Receives the Source Water Shortage report; and

(b) Supports the mitigation measures being implemented.

Carried

9.7 Strategic Procurement Update

Staff Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

David Moore, Manager: Capital Projects Assurance (via Teams)

Key points

· The focus was now on moving from review to implementation, with a move away from a purely transactional way of delivering projects in isolation.

· Looking at in terms of building programmes not just projects.

· Looking at developing relationships with key suppliers and de-risking procurement arrangements.

In response to questions

· Council was engaged with the Infrastructure Commission and with all organisations capable of delivery projects of this scale and nature. Possibility of better sequencing as a nation via a national infrastructure pipeline.

· Biggest spend was in Three Waters; confident that this type of innovative procurement process would be able to proceed and be picked up by Entity B. Advice was being provided by experienced industry consultants with nation-wide vision.

· Noted that the procurement process followed depended on organisational risk appetite. Considered TCC was heading towards best practice.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/9

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Mr Bruce Robertson

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee receives the Strategic Procurement Update report.

Carried

At 12.45pm the meeting adjourned.

At 1.30pm the meeting reconvened.

9.10 Tauranga City Council Draft Consolidated Annual Report 2020/21

Staff Paul Davidson, General Manager: Corporate Services

Kathryn Sharplin, Manager: Finance

Tracey Hughes, Finance Insights & Reporting Manager

Josh Logan, Team Leader: Corporate Planning

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

Key points

· The audit process was still ongoing; adoption date had been pushed back to December.

· There had not been much change in in numbers since previously reported to Council. $182 m of the capital programme had been delivered; debt was just under $60m. The debt-revenue ratios for TCC and for Consolidated were noted.

· Outlined the differences in the tabled item, TCC (Group) Statement of Comprehensive Revenue and Expense.

· Noted there would be a post balance sheet disclosure around three waters reform included in the final Annual Report.

In response to questions

· The Report did not make clear that part of the contract of sale of the Harington St transport hub was still to provide public carparking.

· Many of the not achieved non-financial performance measures were due to the impacts of COVID.

· Clarified the subsequent dissolution of the City Plan Hearing Committee needed to be included.

· A footnote would be added that the review of Chair Tolley and Cmr Selwood’s reimbursement was now going to be in November.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/10

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Mr Bruce Robertson

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee receives the Report - Tauranga City Council Draft Consolidated Annual Report 2020/21.

Carried

9.11 Financial and Non-Financial Monitoring Report: Period ended 30 September 2021

Staff Paul Davidson, General Manager: Corporate Services

Kathryn Sharplin, Manager: Finance

Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning

Key points

· Financials were on track overall. Noted the difficulty of recruiting and impact on expenditure; had brought down debt forecasts to reflect the slower start to delivery of the capital programme due to COVID.

In response to questions

· Progress was picking up in terms of capital delivery with some significant contracts awarded recently, at the $170m mark for contracts awarded.

· Considered that the impact on the worldwide supply market due to COVID would continue to play a part in capital delivery. The consequences of lock downs in Auckland and the Waikato were being felt through impacts on suppliers.

· Interpretation of the wave survey was clarified; the survey was spread over four different waves of surveys to mitigate the effect of immediate events; noted the slight upswing with the “satisifieds”.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/11

Moved: Dr Wayne Beilby

Seconded: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee receives the Financial and Non-Financial Monitoring Report: Period ended 30 September 2021.

Carried

9.12 Treasury Strategy

Staff Paul Davidson, General Manager: Corporate Services

Mohan De Mel, Treasurer

Key points

· Treasury strategy was based on the actions approved in the LTP.

· Outlined borrowing, hedging, and fixed and floating interest rates achieved.

· Noted the chart describing predicted interest rates over time.

In response to questions

· Reforecasting for 2024 onwards in light of Three Waters reform may be required. Hedging would need to be managed to get the best outcome; also keeping borrowings shorter term. Uncertain how debt would actually transfer to the new entity.

· Sensible to reassess in six months in terms of interest rate rises and inflation rates. Short term rates would definitely increase; longer term rates should stabilise around 2.5%/3%.

Discussion points raised

· The Commission acknowledged Mr de Mel’s contribution to TCC and his tremendous public service, in advance of his upcoming departure from Council.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/12

Moved: Ms Rohario Murray

Seconded: Dr Wayne Beilby

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a) Receives the Treasury Strategy report.

(b) Approves the issuance of long and short-term debt on a wholesale basis to manage cash-flows.

(c) Approves the management of fixed interest rate hedging in the target range of 50% to 60% at 2 years forward, and 30% to 40% at 5 years forward.

(d) Approves maintenance of a minimum of $15m of cash and short-term investments to manage cash-flows.

(e) Approves hedging of all significant foreign exchange exposures.

Carried

9.13 Local Government Funding Agency AGM Matters November 2021

Staff Paul Davidson, General Manager: Corporate Services

Mohan De Mel, Treasurer

Key points

· Was an annual process with a number of resolutions required.

· Noted the directors retiring, and the nominations for replacements.

· TCC recommendation was to support Christchurch City Council and New Plymouth District Council to be in the Shareholders Council.

· Noted the recommended changes to the Foundation Policies.

· Noted amendments proposed to the Shareholders Agreement to streamline operations.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/13

Moved: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

Seconded: Commissioner Bill Wasley

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

a) Receives the Local Government Funding Agency AGM Matters November 2021 report.

b) Approves the following resolutions to allow voting for the Local Government Funding Agency annual general meeting:

i) Approve the re-election of Craig Stobo as an Independent Director (Proxy Form Resolution 1(a));

ii) Approve the election of Alan Adcock as a Non-Independent Director (Proxy Form Resolution 1(b));

iii) Approve the re-election of Christchurch City Council as a Nominating Local Authority (Proxy Form Resolution 2(a));

iv) Approve the election of New Plymouth District Council as a Nominating Local Authority (Proxy Form Resolution 2(b));

v) Approve the changes to the Foundation Policies (Proxy Form Resolution 3);

vi) Approve the changes to the Shareholders Agreement (Proxy Form Resolution 4);

vii) Approve the following increases in directors fee payable (Proxy Form Resolution 5 (a) to (d)):

1) With effect from 1 July 2021, the director acting as chair of the board of directors of $6,000 per annual, from $102,000 to $108,000 per annum;

2) With effect from 1 July 2021, each of the other directors acting as members of the audit and risk committee, an increase of $4,000 per annum, from $59,000 to $63,000 per annum;

3) With effect from 1 July 2021, the director acting as chair of the audit and risk committee, an increase of $4,000 per annum, from $63,000 to $67,000 per annum and

4) With effect from 1 July 2021, each of the other directors an increase of $3,000 per annum, from $57,000 to $60,000 per annum.

c) Authorises by way of proxy, a nominated member of staff to attend the AGM as shareholder representative of Tauranga City Council or appoint Chair of Local Government Funding Agency to vote on behalf of Tauranga City Council.

Carried

9.14 Rating Policy Review

Staff Paul Davidson, General Manager: Corporate Services

Malcolm Gibb, Project Manager – Rating Review

Jim Taylor, Transactional Services Manager

Key points

· The various recommendations from the LTP to review parts of the rating structure had been picked up by this review project.

· This part of the review focused on the business and commercial sectors.

· Noted the changes in kerbside targeted rates for next year.

· Noted the work being carried out around rates remission policies; rates remission was also being looked at a nationwide central level.

In response to questions

· Wastewater charges were not a high priority and the most equitable mechanism was not available under the Rating Act.

· Parking of buses was an issue; particularly out of service buses parking on residential streets behind temporary interchanges and the subsequent effect on roading network. Those residents were not benefitting from that activity on their streets; residential roads were not built for heavy vehicles. A transport rate looked at users of the networks, who benefits and the impacts of the activity.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/14

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a) Receives the report rating policy review.

(b) Approves a focus on priority topics for review of rates and rating structure for the 2022‑23 year, being:

(i) commercial and industrial differential rates, focussing on the funding of the transportation and related stormwater activities.

(ii) new targeted rates for different levels of service for kerbside waste and recycling services.

(iii) council’s remission and postponement policies.

(c) Agrees that the 2022-23 year review of rates will not include short term online accommodation, higher levels of service for road sealing and options for charging for wastewater services.

(d) Notes that consideration of options for variable water by meter charges to address demand issues, may be considered further during the year.

Carried

9.8 2021 Q3 Reports: 'Health & Safety' and 'Mental Health & Wellbeing'

Staff Susan Jamieson, General Manager: People and Engagement

Angelique Fraser, Health & Safety Change Manager

Key points

· Noted the trials undertaken in conjunction with Worksafe around innovative H&S measures.

In response to questions

· There had been significant change over the year in terms of staff turnover and retention; a more detailed breakdown identifying the most affected sectors of the organisation would be provided.

· The reduction in H&S events/injuries partly reflected the impact of COVID lockdown levels 3 and 4. Low incident numbers were not always a good thing as could indicate lack of reporting rather than lack of incidents. The Health and Safety team were more interested in content rather than numbers.

· Noted that TCC staff use of counselling services was at a higher rate than the national average. There was a theme of people feeling more disconnected during the second COVID lockdown. The counselling service was also offered to staff whanau.

· Lessons learnt from the last lockdown; mental wellbeing centred around expectations on people leaders and realistic work expectations.

· An estimated 35 staff and an unknown number of contractors were impacted by the health and education vaccination mandates.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/15

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Ms Rohario Murray

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee receive the following reports:

(a) 2021 Q3 Health & Safety Report.

(b) 2021 Q3 MHW Report.

Carried

At 2.30pm, Ms Rohario Murray and Dr Wayne Beilby left the meeting to attend a tangi. Mr Te Pio Kawe remained in the meeting remotely.

9.9 Q1 2021/22 LGOIMA and Privacy Requests

Staff Susan Jamieson, General Manager: People and Engagement

Kath Norris, Team Leader: Democracy Services

In response to questions

· Considered it was better practice to be proactive with information release rather than reactive; this also reduced the need for LGOIMAs.

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/16

Moved: Commissioner Bill Wasley

Seconded: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a) Receives the report Q1 2021/22 LGOIMA and Privacy Requests.

Carried

Item - 9.10 Tauranga City Council Draft Consolidated Annual Report 2020/21 - has been moved to another part of the document.

Item - 9.11 Financial and Non-Financial Monitoring Report: Period ended 30 September 2021 - has been moved to another part of the document.

Item - 9.12 Treasury Strategy - has been moved to another part of the document.

Item - 9.13 Local Government Funding Agency AGM Matters November 2021 - has been moved to another part of the document.

Item - 9.14 Rating Policy Review - has been moved to another part of the document.

10 Discussion of late items

Nil

11 Public excluded session

RESOLUTION TO EXCLUDE THE PUBLIC

Committee Resolution SFR6/21/17

Moved: Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston

Seconded: Commissioner Stephen Selwood

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
11.1 - Litigation Report	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)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage, negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations)	s48(1)(a) - 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
11.2 - Corporate Risk Register - Quarterly Update	s7(2)(b)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would disclose a trade secret s7(2)(b)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information 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)	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
11.3 - Internal Audit - Quarterly Update	s6(b) - The making available of the information would be likely to endanger the safety of any person 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)(d) - The withholding of the information is necessary to avoid prejudice to measures protecting the health or safety of members of the public s7(2)(g) - The withholding of the information is necessary to maintain legal professional privilege 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
11.4 - 3 Waters Collaboration Project - funding	s7(2)(b)(ii) - The withholding of the information is necessary to protect information where the making available of the information would be likely unreasonably to prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied or who is the subject of the information 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)	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
11.5 - Financial Update from Bay Venues Limited	s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary to enable Council to carry out, without prejudice or disadvantage, commercial activities	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

12 Closing Karakia

Commissioner Rolleston closed the meeting with a Karakia.

The meeting closed at 3.10pm.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed as a true and correct record at the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee meeting held on 13 December 2021.

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

CHAIRPERSON

Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee Meeting Agenda

13 December 2021

10 Business

10.1 Issues and Options Report on the Use of Council Land

File Number: A12986869

Author: Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy and Corporate Planning

Rebecca Gallagher, Policy Analyst

Vicky Grant-Ussher, Policy Analyst

Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy & Growth

Purpose of the Report

1. To consider the issues arising from the review of council policies associated with the use of council land and enable decisions on the proposed policy options to address the issues raised.

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee provide the following direction for the purpose of the development of a draft policy:

Issue 1: Decisions on the Policy Purpose and Principles

(a) Approve the proposed purposes and principles (para 21) for incorporation into the combined draft policy.

Issue 2: Prioritisation of Uses and Users on Council Land

(b) Agree to prioritise and update the current booking criteria for outdoor spaces.

Issue 3: Management of Active Reserves (Sports fields)

(d) Agree to set new prioritisation to specify that the priority of active reserves is community sport and staff will work with stakeholders to determine policy clauses that further prioritise between tournaments, regular games, training, high performance sport, national bodies and regional sporting organisations, users from outside Tauranga, and other uses where they do not displace community sports.

Issue 4: Assuring the Quality and Suitability of Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserve Land

(e) Agree to set criteria for all temporary commercial activities on reserves.

(f) Agree to amend the threshold criteria to require operators to meet health and safety requirements, be small scale activities, have a Qualmark certification, and obtain a minimum score in the tender weightings.

(g) Agree to allow two-year maximum tender length for quality operators with a review after year one.

(h) Require cultural tour operators to show evidence of engagement with appropriate iwi / hapū representatives.

Issue 5: Decisions on the Payment or Non-payment of Fees to Use Council Land

(i) Agree to provide a policy clause to clarify weddings are not charged fees.

(j) Agree no fee is required for fitness classes or bootcamps but they must book the site and time.

(k) Agree to require tour operators who charge a fee for service on council land, to obtain a licence and pay a fee to council (amount to be determined by a review of fees and charges in the next Annual Plan).

Issue 6: Allocation of Tendered Licences

(l) Agree to the following changes to the allocation of tendered licences:

(i) reducing the number on the Mall, Mount Maunganui from 4 to 3

(ii) increase the number on Marine Parade, Mount Maunganui (on the beach between Mussel Rock and Oceanbeach Road) from 3 to 4

(iii) remove Memorial Park from the tender process

(iv) remove Fergusson Park from the tender process

(v) increase the number on Kulim Park from 2 to 3

(vi) add a maximum limit of 4 on Marine Parade between Adams Avenue and Pacific Avenue from 1 December to 31 March following year (currently no limit)

(vii) reducing the number on Marine Parade opposite Tay Street from 2 to 1.

Issue 7: Community Gardens

(m) Agree to keep the status quo with potential minor amendments to current policy.

Issue 8: Memorials

(n) Add policy clauses to clarify that council land is not for the purpose of private memorials but limited provision is made for the donation of memorial seats and trees in designated areas. Memorial seats are in place for 10 years or the lifetime of the seat.

Issue 9: Sponsorship Signage on Reserves

(o) Keep the current criteria but allow discretion by the asset manager for exceptional circumstances and require a final design that must be signed off by council staff.

Issue 10: Leases and Licences to Occupy

(p) Include a policy clause setting a maximum term for a secondary long-term lease.

Issue 11: Stormwater Reserves

(q) Agree to provide policy clauses which clarify the purpose of stormwater reserves, explain why they require a different level of service of grass and vegetation, specify no swimming, and specify no structures or moveable items that can be shifted by water flows in extreme rain events within flowpaths or near waterways.

Issue 12: Merging and Aligning Content into a Single Policy

(r) Agree to the following content changes:

(i) remove the procedural elements of the Outdoor Spaces Booking Policy into a separate procedure

(ii) keep the minimum criteria operators must meet as set in the Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserves policy provisions, but remove tender attributes and weighting from the policy

(iii) simplify the Markets and Stalls policy provisions to set out that a permit is required and may be applied for by supplying the required information on the appropriate application form, and that successful applicants must comply with the conditions of that permit to be allowed to operate

(iv) simplify the Community Gardens policy to set out the intended purpose of community gardens, the role of council, the requirement for a licence to occupy and the requirement for a community garden management group and move other content into a template licence to occupy agreement.

Issue 13: Policy Clarifications

(s) Agree to the following policy clarifications:

(i) clarify that if someone is operating a business off site, but as part of that business uses a reserve, e.g. online bicycle bookings where people collect bikes from a reserve, or online surf school bookings who then offer lessons from a reserve, do constitute a commercial activity on reserves and must obtain a commercial licence

(ii) clarify that council is not obliged to offer a licence to all temporary commercial activity applicants or for all sites on reserves

(iii) clarify that reserves that have tendered licences are also able to have other temporary commercial activities that don’t meet the criteria for a tendered licence

(iv) clarify where a tendered site is left empty, it may be filled with another commercial activity provided the operator’s activities are outside of the scope of the tendered licence activities

(v) clarify that playcentres are excluded from the definition of Early Childhood Education centres (ECE) and are treated the same as other community groups

(vi) clarify in the policy that the policy considerations apply when considering a new lease for existing ECE facilities or a variation to a lease and they will be applied to lease renewals and assignments where possible

(vii) clarify that ashes are not to be scattered on council land and a garden is provided at the cemetery for this purpose.

Executive Summary

2. Tauranga is a growing city and this growth, along with trends such as intensification and climate change, is putting growing pressure on council land. The current decision-making framework for the use of council land spans multiple documents and policies making it difficult for staff and the community to understand.

3. This paper identifies and considers the policy issues and options surrounding the use of land by members of the public that is owned or administered by council (excluding Mauao).

4. The policy review covers nine policies and aims to create a single core policy to govern the use of Council land. A few stand-alone issues related to land use will continue to sit outside of the main policy, for example, the mobile shops policy.

5. Council land is currently used for a wide range of purposes, this paper proposes to set a clear purpose for council land, and principles that will guide how council land is used to give the most benefit to the community. Options are provided to give clarity on how spaces, and specific high-use spaces, could be prioritised.

6. In updating this policy, a series of engagements were undertaken with Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana Partnership, the Department of Conservation, Bay Venues Limited, and a survey was conducted with licence holders, lease holders, community groups, commercial groups that use council land, as well as members of the public. The results of the engagement highlighted thirteen issues where a change, or further clarity, was required to the current policy provisions.

7. In consolidating the full eight policies, changes are also recommended to the content of some existing policies, where they contain unnecessary operational elements, or out of date references.

8. A draft policy will be brought to the Committee in the new year for approval for consultation with an expanded group of stakeholders including Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana Partnership, the Department of Conservation, and Bay Venues Limited, Mainstreets, Network Operators, Sport Bay of Plenty, Advisory Boards and the wider communities of Tauranga.

Background

9. The council’s decision-making framework for the use of council land is made up of many documents, including legislation, plans and a large number of policies that members of the community and staff must navigate to run an event, negotiate a lease, run a business, or plan/manage activities on council land. This is unwieldy, time consuming for users, can result in rules being missed, and can result in inconsistent decision-making. Outlined in Attachment 1 is the decision-making framework in more detail.

10. While not all of Council’s policies are under review, it has been important during the review to be cognisant of the interface between aspects of different policies also relevant to the use of land by the public.

11. Significant gaps and inconsistencies have been identified in the current policy framework and its application. Many of these policies are old and require amendments to address issues arising since they were written, and as they were written across a long time period with final decisions made by different councils they do not consistently align in direction and application. Many of the policies are also very process focused rather than being true policies as statements of council’s position. While the process is important, especially in ensuring fair and consistent outcomes, it is not necessary (or usual practice) to include in the policy documents.

12. It is intended that the decisions on the issues and options contained in this paper will result in a single Community, Private and Commercial Use of Council Land Policy. This policy would incorporate the other existing eight policies; the Community Gardens Policy, Encroachment onto Reserves Policy, Events Policy, Network Operator Licences Policy, Operation of Markets and Stalls Policy, Outdoor Spaces Booking Policy, Sponsorship Signage on Reserves Policy and the Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserve Land Policy. The current policies are available to view online at https://www.tauranga.govt.nz/council/council-documents/policies. A few stand-alone issues will continue to sit outside of the main policy^{^[1]}.

Strategic / Statutory Context

13. Currently Council is refreshing its strategic framework and developing a City Vision. Together this work will ensure Council has a current and cohesive strategic framework that provides a clear line of sight from Council activities and policies, to strategy documents and from there to the City’s Vision and adopted Community Outcomes. The purpose of this work is to assist Council in matching resources to outcomes and to provide a comprehensive and interconnected picture of Council’s strategic landscape. This will allow both the organisation and the community to see how Council’s day to day operations deliver on strategic outcomes for the city. Policies, such as those which guide use of Council’s land, are an intrinsic part of this chain, ensuring that higher level strategic goals are operationalised in a consistent and transparent manner, and providing staff with delegated authority where appropriate.

InSIGHTS FROM ENGAGEMENT

14. A number of engagement processes have been undertaken which have informed the issues for consideration. This includes a series of engagements which were undertaken with Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana Partnership, the Department of Conservation, Bay Venues Limited. In addition, an engagement survey was conducted with licence holders, lease holders, community groups and commercial groups that use council land, and with members of the public. These engagement processes told us that the environment and green space are important to people and will become more so in the future as people live in smaller private spaces without their own trees and gardens, while there is also the desire to activate and enliven public spaces with events, activities, and commercial vendors.

15. The increased use of council land means that there is growing pressure on the passive users of reserves and the environment. The stakeholder and community feedback on the purpose of council land, the Vital Signs Update Survey and the WSP-prepared Community Engagement summary has told us that people highly value the public use of reserves, and the connection to greenspace, wildlife, and nature.

16. The engagement survey was conducted at the end of 2020 and was provided to licence holders, lease holders, community groups and commercial groups that use council land, and members of the public to hear their views on the purpose of council land. We received over 500 responses with the top six themes being:

· public use and enjoyment

· public recreational activity

· community events

· give people a place to connect with nature

· space for wildlife / benefits to nature

· greenspace to enable higher density residential development, and give people room to move, meet and play.

17. The survey also asked respondents to rank out of 10 a series of reasons why council should hold and maintain land for the community. The results highlighted that commercial activities and private use were considerably less desirable to the community than recreational benefits. The detailed results of the engagement survey are outlined in Attachment 2.

18. The competing priorities for public land need to be balanced and prioritised for different spaces as the city grows. To manage competing interests, there is a need for a clear and prioritised decision-making framework to balance the broad outcomes desired for the city.

Options Analysis

Policy Issues Requiring Direction

Issue 1: Decisions on the Policy Purpose and Principles

19. With so many policies, it is unclear what the purpose of council land is, and having multiple objectives and principles adds to the uncertainty and inconsistency. Aligning the purposes and principles into a single policy will assist in removing inconsistencies. In proposing the principles we have considered and consulted with the community and stakeholders as to the purpose of council land.

20. As part of Council’s decision-making, consideration must be given to the Local Government Act 2002 and the Reserves Act 1977 when determining the purpose of council land. An outline of the relevant sections of these Acts are outlined in Attachment 1.

21. Six key purposes and 13 principles are proposed. These have been developed from the existing policies and issues raised through the review. There are many objectives that could be developed in various levels of detail, but these are considered the most appropriate overarching objectives to apply across council land and activities.

Proposed Policy Purposes:

I. To adopt a consistent approach to the use of council owned and administered land by the community, community organisations, private individuals and entities, and commercial individuals and organisations, including the approach to charging or not charging for this use, and to issuing leases, licences, and permissions.

II. To maintain the integrity of council land by ensuring it is used for its intended purpose, and to protect and enhance the ecological values of council land.

III. Where appropriate, to accommodate commercial activities that encourage wider public use of reserves, especially where these increase the number of people accessing and using the reserve and where they add to the enjoyment and experience of the reserve user e.g. through events, markets and stalls.

IV. To provide consistency in the decision-making process for booking outdoor spaces, while recognising the need for flexibility to cater to a variety of situations, and to provide clarity on council’s priorities for the use of outdoor spaces to assist in ensuring the efficient and effective management and operation of these spaces.

V. To ensure a consistent approach to allowing sponsorship signage on reserves.

VI. To ensure that public open space is used primarily for community use and not for exclusive use by private or commercial users.

Proposed Policy Principles

a) Council-owned and administered land should be maintained and managed for its intended purpose.

b) Council encourages a range and diversity of activities to occur on council’s outdoor spaces network.

c) Reserve land should be used primarily for community use in line with the purpose of the reserve.

d) Council applies a network approach to use of outdoor spaces to ensure that activities are accommodated on the most suitable space for the type of use, and to minimise the impact on infrastructure, the environment, and other users.

e) Council recognises the historical and cultural connection that mana whenua has to the land and will work with mana whenua to give effect to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi, and the relationship protocols it has with iwi and hapū.

f) There is benefit to the community in council owning land and getting a financial return from it.

g) Where council land is used for commercial gain it is appropriate that a fair economic charge is applied.

h) Commercial activities on council land should be complimentary and relevant to the purpose of the land.

i) Issuing leases, licences and permissions for use of land should be fair and consistent.

j) Ensuring public safety is paramount.

k) Council’s aim is to minimise signage on reserves whilst recognising the need for some signage, and the financial benefits for users which can be gained through sponsorship signage.

l) Areas of high ecological, cultural and historical value are afforded additional protection from use by community, private and commercial organisations and individuals.

m) Council endeavours to provide for users wishing to book council land where the request is appropriate and consistent with the intended purpose of the land, however, there will be situations where a user may not be able to be accommodated within all their requirements or where an event or activity is not suitable for the preferred location or time.

Table 1: Options on Policy Purposes and Principles

Option	Advantages	Disadvantages	$ Impact
*Option 1:* Status quo. Keep all current purposes and principles from the nine different policies.	No change for the community.	Current purposes and principles are not aligned and are extensive. Difficult to form basis of new combined policy without clear overarching objectives and principles.	None.
Option 2: Adopt the proposed purposes and principles for incorporation into the combined draft policy (recommended).	Provides consistency and clear direction for the policy and its application by staff and the community. Ensures greater consistency in the use of council land. Still ability to review and consult with stakeholders once draft policy is completed.	Any changes will need to be communicated clearly to the community.	None.
*Option 3:* Other amendments or additions to the purposes and principles.	Unknown.	Unknown.	Unknown.

Issue 2: Prioritisation of Uses and Users on Council Land

22. As Tauranga grows, council land is becoming busier, and the situation is beginning to arise more commonly where more than one user wishes to book an event or activity using the same public space at the same time. There is an identified need for a policy response as to how council should manage and prioritise the growing number of competing demands. Should it prioritise community use for local wellbeing, or economic return to council, or enable certain types of commercial activities to provide specific benefits in public spaces, or national/international promotion, protection of the environment and wildlife, or various other factors?

23. The Outdoor Spaces Booking Policy is seven years old and needs to be updated to reflect current use. The policy is insufficient to address changes in use and fails to adequately provide for decisions on what activity or use takes precedence when making booking decisions. It does not consider how to decline requests based on cumulative pressures on spaces.

24. Any events on outdoor spaces are subject to the Event Approval Process which is co-ordinated by the TCC Event Facilitation Team. This includes vetting requirements prior to an event being approved or declined. For example, waste minimisation plans, health and safety plans, and any conditions required to be adhered to relevant to the proposed location. The Event Approval Process works to manage the impacts of events. For example, the team works with the Department of Conservation when holding events at the Mount Main Beach to manage the impact of events on environmental values.

25. One of the key pressure points for activities and events is the Mount Main Beach. This is a highly sought-after space for sporting and recreational events as well as drawing large crowds of beach goers and tourists over the summer months. The intensity of use over summer coincides with the nesting period of the New Zealand dotterel and other native shore birds. In particular, the Northern New Zealand dotterels’ nesting season is from August-March. This endangered species is listed as “At Risk – Recovering” by the Department of Conservation with fewer than 2500 left, making it rarer than some species of kiwi and protected under the Wildlife Act 1953.

26. Consideration needs to be given to how council can fulfil its obligations under the Wildlife Act to protect New Zealand dotterels and their nesting habitat and facilitate the best use of this iconic location. For such busy and high-profile sites, there is a need to set a clearer decision-making framework regarding activities and events (type, scale, frequency, and any conditions) due to the popularity of high-profile spaces such as the Mount Main Beach.

27. This issue and time period also aligns with concerns being raised over the ability of local residents to enjoy the main beach without encountering crowds of people there for an event or activity.

28. Blake Park is another high use area where there are significant competing priorities by many users. The policy states that one of the purposes of Blake Park is “Sport”. However, there is competition for field space between different sporting activities, from community sport through to high performance sport. In addition, active reserves are utilised as event spaces.

29. Work is already underway with users of Blake Park to identify priorities and address issues arising on this reserve. It is recommended that Blake Park be excluded from the policy until such time as that process is completed. Other active reserves such as Gordon Spratt reserve have user group forums and processes underway through Long-Term Plan outcomes, but it is considered these can be utilised to engage on the desired policy prioritisation by the user groups to feed into the draft policy rather than excluding these spaces.

30. It is acknowledged that there are over 300 reserves and various types of council land that serve different purposes and different user groups. It is extremely difficult to create a set of criteria that could apply across all areas of council land. There are specific pressure points at destination spaces such as the Mount Main Beach, Pilot Bay, Blake Park, and Papamoa Domain. The Outdoor Spaces Booking Policy identifies some high use areas and additional ones have arisen since this policy was written in 2014. The recommended approach is that we develop policy criteria for these key destination spaces to ease conflicts and congestion and shift some activities to other spaces across the city. This will allow prioritisation of key desired events and activities and set limits on others which can easily be shifted to alternative locations.

31. A new Events Strategic Plan is currently being developed and will supersede the current Events Policy. It is anticipated that the current Events Policy will be revoked when the Events Strategic Plan is adopted by Council. The Events Strategic Plan has identified a growing demand for more events across the city, from major events through to local community events.

32. The Tauranga Reserves Management Plan recognises the benefits of events to the city, and the need to continue to manage the use of reserves in a way that support events, while mitigating adverse effects on other users and the reserve itself. The Tauranga Reserve Management Plan also specifically identifies premier events spaces (e.g. Mount Main Beach) as reserves that are very popular for event use, and the need to ensure that events that use these spaces are appropriate to that location (e.g. access to water for swimming events) and hold a high profile status or cannot take place elsewhere.

33. A review of the Tauranga Reserve Management Plan could be used to prioritise and potentially restrict the number or frequency of activities on individual reserves. However, this piece of work would be very time and resource intensive. It would take a long time to develop priorities for each individual reserve with each local community and it would not resolve the immediate issues of conflicting desires and needs. To try and address the immediate issues options 2 and 3 outlined in Table 2 are recommended.

34. Where policy criteria are proposed, these would be developed in consultation with key stakeholders for inclusion in the draft policy which will be brought back to commissioners in the new year for approval or amendment prior to going out for consultation with the wider communities of Tauranga.

Table 2: Options for Prioritisation of Uses and Users

Option	Advantages	Disadvantages	$ Impact
*Option 1:* Status quo. No set prioritisation and staff assist in negotiating between multiple bookings on a case-by-case basis.	Enables flexibility of spaces.	Does not support staff in a clear decision-making pathway. Regular users get moved for bigger events. Destination spaces under pressure. Lack of protection for dotterels on Mount Main Beach, environmental concerns, passive users and local sports teams. Policy prescribes a purpose to each outdoor space, but this is general and not prioritised. Limited ability to consider the appropriateness of an activity in a particular space. Does not provide clear and consistent direction to assist in declining a request if it is considered inappropriate.	May lose some bookings where we cannot negotiate favourable dates or locations.
*Option 2:* *Prioritise and update the current booking criteria for outdoor spaces.* The following is proposed for consultation with stakeholders: 1. Location – is it essential for the success of the activity for it be located on this space? 2. Community benefits – will the activity assist in bringing together a large part of the community within Tauranga? 3. Established success – has the activity got a proven track record of success and is there a level of community expectation that it will occur again due to that success? 4. Regular booked user impact (if relevant) - to what extent will the activity reduce the ability for a regular booked user to carry out their season or activities? Has this been an issue for this user before? 5. Economic benefits – is the activity likely to bring an economic return to the city? If so, to what extent will this occur? 6. Impact on passive users of the space and wildlife - to what extent will the activity reduce the ability for passive users, local residents, or wildlife species to carry out their activities? (Recommended).	Fair and consistent across users, and everyone is aware of the rules and the priorities for the city. Enables fair and consistent decision making where there are conflicts between different activities and potential bookings.	Will not address at high use spaces where bookings are impacting user experience, the environment and reserve wildlife. May lose a small number of bookings where we cannot negotiate favourable dates or locations.	Minimal as this process is generally used where there is a conflict between multiple bookings.
*Option 3:* Set policy criteria for selected high use reserves to relieve current pressures. This option would be an update to Schedule 2 of the current Outdoor Spaces Booking Policy, with the addition of high use spaces arising since this policy was written in 2014 (with the exclusion of Blake Park until a later date). The current reserves: · Mount Main Beach · Pilot Bay · Marine Parade · Blake Park · Wharepai Domain · Mt Drury · Coronation Park · Memorial Park · City Centre Waterfront/The Strand/Masonic Park/Aspen Reserve. Proposed additional reserves: · Tauranga Domain · Gordon Spratt Reserve · Soper Reserve · Papamoa Domain. (Recommended).	Different priorities enabled for different spaces. Flexibility available for less popular locations. Likely to aid in spreading different groups and uses across different spaces. Enables a consistent and agreed approach across Council departments which will assist in timely coordinated responses. Aim to mitigate the impact on the high use space.	May lose a small number of bookings where we cannot negotiate favourable dates or locations.	Minimal due to the high demand on these reserves.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

$ Impact

Option 1: Status quo.

No set prioritisation and staff assist in negotiating between multiple bookings on a case-by-case basis.

Enables flexibility of spaces.

Does not support staff in a clear decision-making pathway.

Regular users get moved for bigger events.

Destination spaces under pressure.

Lack of protection for dotterels on Mount Main Beach, environmental concerns, passive users and local sports teams.

Policy prescribes a purpose to each outdoor space, but this is general and not prioritised.

Limited ability to consider the appropriateness of an activity in a particular space.

Does not provide clear and consistent direction to assist in declining a request if it is considered inappropriate.

May lose some bookings where we cannot negotiate favourable dates or locations.

Option 2:

Prioritise and update the current booking criteria for outdoor spaces.

The following is proposed for consultation with stakeholders:

1. Location – is it essential for the success of the activity for it be located on this space?

2. Community benefits – will the activity assist in bringing together a large part of the community within Tauranga?

3. Established success – has the activity got a proven track record of success and is there a level of community expectation that it will occur again due to that success?

4. Regular booked user impact (if relevant) - to what extent will the activity reduce the ability for a regular booked user to carry out their season or activities? Has this been an issue for this user before?

5. Economic benefits – is the activity likely to bring an economic return to the city? If so, to what extent will this occur?

6. Impact on passive users of the space and wildlife - to what extent will the activity reduce the ability for passive users, local residents, or wildlife species to carry out their activities?

(Recommended).

Fair and consistent across users, and everyone is aware of the rules and the priorities for the city.

Enables fair and consistent decision making where there are conflicts between different activities and potential bookings.

Will not address at high use spaces where bookings are impacting user experience, the environment and reserve wildlife.

May lose a small number of bookings where we cannot negotiate favourable dates or locations.

Minimal as this process is generally used where there is a conflict between multiple bookings.

Option 3: Set policy criteria for selected high use reserves to relieve current pressures.

This option would be an update to Schedule 2 of the current Outdoor Spaces Booking Policy, with the addition of high use spaces arising since this policy was written in 2014 (with the exclusion of Blake Park until a later date).

The current reserves:

· Mount Main Beach

· Pilot Bay

· Marine Parade

· Blake Park

· Wharepai Domain

· Mt Drury

· Coronation Park

· Memorial Park

· City Centre Waterfront/The Strand/Masonic Park/Aspen Reserve.

Proposed additional reserves:

· Tauranga Domain

· Gordon Spratt Reserve

· Soper Reserve

· Papamoa Domain.

(Recommended).

Different priorities enabled for different spaces. Flexibility available for less popular locations. Likely to aid in spreading different groups and uses across different spaces.

Enables a consistent and agreed approach across Council departments which will assist in timely coordinated responses.

Aim to mitigate the impact on the high use space.

May lose a small number of bookings where we cannot negotiate favourable dates or locations.

Minimal due to the high demand on these reserves.

Issue 3: Management of Active Reserves (Sports fields)

35. There is also increasing pressure on the capacity of our active reserves to provide for all desired uses. Council’s active reserves are under increasing pressure for space and playing time as well as adequate time for maintenance of turfed areas to meet competition standards. Turf fields have limited hours of use per week, depending on environmental factors, before they deteriorate to a less than acceptable quality, and need time for the grass to regrow. Active reserves are also used for events and community activities. There is also increasing conflict between community sport, professional sport, sports teams coming to use council facilities who are from outside of Tauranga and do not have their own facilities to the same standard, as well as increasing numbers of international teams.

36. The Outdoor Spaces Booking Policy sets out criteria and priorities for sports field management and use. These criteria and priorities need updating based on changes over the last seven years since the policy was adopted and to provide for future decision making that is fair and consistent.

37. It is proposed above that high use and high-profile active reserves Wharepai Domain, Tauranga Domain and Gordon Spratt Reserve have specific criteria and prioritisation developed individually as detailed in the options in Table 2 above. Blake Park would be excluded until a later date.

38. The options in Table 3 below have been developed for active reserves generally. These options do not apply to the high-profile active reserves Wharepai Domain, Tauranga Domain, Gordon Spratt Reserve and Blake Park. It is recommended that for active reserves that have a smaller profile and are not used for professional sports, that community sport is prioritised for the growing number of local players and teams who use ratepayer-funded facilities.

Table 3: Options for Prioritisation of Use on Active Reserves (excluding Wharepai Domain, Tauranga Domain, Gordon Spratt Reserve and Blake Park)

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

$ Impact

Option 1: Status quo.

No set prioritisation assessed on a case-by-case basis.

Enables flexibility of spaces.

Does not support staff in a clear decision-making pathway.

Regular users get moved for bigger events.

Destination spaces under pressure.

Limited ability to decline a request.

Limited ability to consider the appropriateness of an activity in a particular space.

Does not reflect current use or adequately provide for current competing demands between different types/levels of sports.

None.

Option 2: New prioritisation to specify priority of active reserves is community sport. Staff will work with stakeholders to determine policy clauses that further prioritise between:

1. Tournaments

2. Regular games

3. Training

4. High performance sport, national bodies and regional sporting organisations

5. Users from outside Tauranga

6. Other uses where they do not displace community sports

(Recommended).

Provides a clear decision-making pathway to determine between different users and bookings.

Provides a clear mechanism to make decisions between current competing demands of different types and levels of sports.

Applied separately to high profile active reserves which will have different priorities.

High performance sport still needs to use other active reserves when high profile spaces are booked.

None.

Issue 4: Assuring the Quality and Suitability of Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserve Land

39. The Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserve Land policy aims to set out a consistent approach to what temporary commercial activities are permitted on reserves. It does not set criteria for commercial activities in general. Commercial operators can apply to the council to operate on reserves, the council will then consider their application in accordance with the Reserves Act and Tauranga Reserves Management Plan.

40. Currently, temporary commercial activities on reserves range from large scale operators to a limited number of tendered temporary commercial activities on specific sites, to regular markets, one-off commercial activities like blow up slides, circuses, gypsy fairs, equipment hire, and art sales. Policy alignment is required to improve the fairness and consistency of process for users.

41. At specific reserves there is a tendered licence process to enable small scale temporary commercial activities^{^[2]} to activate the spaces and restrict overuse where there is high demand by vendors^{^[3]}.

42. The intention of the Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserve Land policy is to provide the greatest amenity for the community that use that space, and access to commercial activities that complement the existing space and enhance and encourage its use.

43. While the intention of the policy remains to activate spaces, requests from commercial activities that discourage the public from using council land, restrict the use of reserves, are operating unsafely or are inappropriate for particular sites need to be able to be declined.

44. Operationally it is currently difficult to defend a decision to decline an activity as the guiding criteria are enabling and spread across multiple plans and Acts. There is also not a required minimum standard for operators to meet set in the policy, so there is little assurance that operators are providing a high-quality experience to reserve users. Options to address the quality and suitability of temporary commercial activities on reserves in the policy are provided below.

Table 4: Options to assure the quality and suitability of temporary commercial activities on reserve land

Option	Advantages	Disadvantages	$ Impact
*Option 1:* Status quo.	Enables flexibility of spaces.	Not consistent. Does not address increasing competition for spaces.	None.
Option 2: Set criteria for all commercial activities on reserves That they should be limited in number, relevant, complementary to the purpose of the reserve and facilitate enjoyment of the space, scale and suitability for the site, capacity of the site to allow the activity without adversely affecting other users, noise impacts, amenity effects, encourage the broadest community participation. They must comply with the Tauranga Reserve Management Plan, Reserves Act, City Plan and Bylaws. Proposed criteria (for consultation) to decline a proposal: (i) to protect the known values of the area (ii) to protect the health and safety of people who may visit the area (iii) to protect access to the area or ensure continued use by local users (iv) to protect the environment / wildlife (Recommended).	Ensures that activities which are inappropriate for a site and may adversely impact other users are not issued licences.	May result in some commercial activities being turned down.	May lose revenue if less activities are operating.
Option 3: Amend the threshold criteria to require operators to meet health and safety requirements, be small scale activities, have a Qualmark certification, and obtain a minimum score in the tender weightings. (Recommended).	Ensures that activities are of a high quality to enhance the experience of users and assist in ensuring public health and safety.	May exclude some current operators who do not meet the threshold.	None.
*Option 4:* Allow two-year maximum tender length for quality operators Enable the opportunity in the policy for tendered licences to be issued for longer than 1 year where the licensee has an excellent proven track record and popularity with the public. Limit of 2 years and tenderer must show continued quality or an improvement of service after the first year for licence to continue for the second year. (Recommended).	Provides security for ongoing business operations which must currently apply annually to ensure the ongoing life of their business.	May stop opportunities for new ventures on those spaces. Will require an audit process to be established to monitor and measure track record, public popularity, and continued quality or an improved level of service.	None.
Option 5: Require cultural tour operators to show evidence of engagement with appropriate iwi / hapū representatives Where a Māori cultural tour is proposed to be offered by a tour operator, or where a commercial activity is proposed on a site of cultural significance identified in the City Plan, council may require evidence of engagement with the appropriate iwi / hapū representatives to verify authenticity and cultural integrity. (Recommended).	Helps ensure the integrity of cultural tours. Assists in maintaining council’s relationship with tangata whenua. Some sites and activities will require resource consent and be assessed through that process.	Difficult to assess.	None.

Issue 5: Decisions on the Payment or Non-payment of Fees to Use Council Land

45. The Community, Private and Commercial Use of Council-Administered Land policy and the Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserve Land Policy set out the activities which require a fee to take place on council land, those which require a licence, and specify some which must book but are not required to pay a fee. For example, tour operators and fitness classes are currently exempt from fees as are casual community uses of the land.

46. User fees and charges are used to assist the administration, operation, and maintenance of council land in accordance with the Revenue and Financing Policy. Revenue from fees reduces the rates revenue required to be collected from ratepayers. The fees do not cover the full costs of administration, operation, or maintenance, but they reduce the burden on ratepayers who would otherwise shoulder the full costs.

47. The results from the engagement survey indicated that people thought that commercial and non-community uses of the land should pay a fee – some a small fee and others at a market rate.

48. This section sets out the current policy and practice and policy options for three non-community uses, wedding ceremonies, bootcamps and fitness classes, and tour operators. The options relate to whether to require these activities to book or obtain a licence, and if a fee should apply to these users.

Wedding Ceremonies

49. Approximately 200 wedding ceremonies are held on council land annually and can consume significant staff time with requests and consequently we have moved to an online booking system to try and reduce the administration. Council does not provide any of the services of a wedding venue nor do we provide exclusive use. Only ceremonies are allowed, not receptions. They are held on public space with no exclusive use granted, and members of the public can spectate and occasionally wander through ceremonies.

50. Councils across New Zealand treat wedding ceremonies differently. For example, in Auckland, weddings are booked online with a minimum fee of $20 depending on the popularity of the site. Results from the engagement survey showed that approximately a quarter of the respondents supported charging no fee (27%), around half supported a small fee being charged (46%), and a quarter supported charging a full market rate (27%).

51. Wedding ceremonies are currently not charged a fee to use council land. Under the current Community, Private and Commercial Use of Council-Administered Land policy, wedding ceremonies would be considered a one-off private non-exclusive use of council land and should not be charged a fee as they are undertaken by private individuals.

52. Table 5: Requirement for Fees for Weddings

Option

Advantages

Disadvantage

$ Impact

Option 1: provide a policy clause to clarify weddings are not charged fees

(Recommended)

No change to current situation so is clear to the community and easy to administer.

None.

Option 2: Charge a small fee to cover administration and monitoring.

Will assist in offsetting the costs of maintenance to ratepayers.

Increased administration to manage and monitor.

May raise public expectation that this provides exclusive use of the space which will not be the case.

May raise expectation that a certain level of service is provided (eg mowing of the grass).

IT changes would be required to allow for online payment.

Increasing the number of activities that are charged for using council land will assist in offsetting the costs of maintenance to ratepayers.

IT costs would be approximately $10,000 in one-off set up costs and approximately $10,000 per year to run. If manual invoicing was required, this would have additional operational costs.

Commercial Bootcamps and Fitness Classes

53. Under the current Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserve Land Policy, Commercial Bootcamps and Fitness Classes are not required to pay fees to use reserves, but they are required to book the reserve space from the council before using it. However, there is currently no mechanism for operators to book these activities so this is not done in practice.

54. The engagement survey results for questions about bootcamps and fitness classes showed that approximately a quarter of the respondents supported charging no fee (26%), around half supported charging a small fee (49%), and around a quarter supported charging a full market rate (26%).

Table 6: Requirement for Licences and Fees for Commercial Bootcamps and Fitness Classes

Option	Advantages	Disadvantages	$ Impact
*Option 1:* Update policy to reflect current practice, with no booking, licences, or fees for bootcamps and fitness classes and include policy criteria to direct these activities to appropriate reserves and minimise disturbance of other users and neighbours.	Easy to administer. Recognises the public health and community benefit of fitness classes and exercise involvement. Activates reserves for recreation activities.	Not consistent or fair across all groups and individuals using council land for commercial benefit. No knowledge of reserve use, impact on other users or reserves, except from complaints.	Ratepayers bear the costs of maintenance for council land unless users are charged for their use. Where specific users are charged a fee, this contributes to the maintenance costs and reduces the burden on ratepayers. This option means ratepayers are subsidising some commercial activities.
*Option 2:* All commercial activities where a fee for participation or service is charged, including bootcamps and fitness classes, are required to obtain a licence and pay a fee (amount to be determined by a review of fees and charges in the next Annual Plan).	Consistent and fair that all commercial activities are charged for using council land.	Increased administration to manage and monitor additional operators and activities. Might discourage operators from offering these services, which reduces opportunities for people to keep fit, and reduces the activation of parks and reserves. IT changes would be required to allow for online payment.	Increasing the number of activities that are charged for using council land for commercial purposes would assist in offsetting the costs to ratepayers. How much, would depend on the fees applied and the number of operators. It may, however, result in higher administrative requirements to manage the increase in licences, fee recovery and monitoring. IT changes would be required to allow for online payment, costs would be approximately $10,000 in one-off set up costs and approximately $10,000 per year to run. If manual invoicing was required, this would have additional operational costs.
*Option 3:* No fee required for fitness classes or bootcamps but must book the site and time. (Recommended).	Aligns with current policy. An online booking system such as that used for weddings could be utilised. Enables monitoring for future decision making.	May take a short period to implement online booking changes. Somewhat difficult to monitor compliance.	Would enable monitoring of the use of reserves and compliance with Reserve Management Plan. Would enable criteria to be applied such as restrictions on the use of heavy equipment, damage to reserves, music early in the morning / disruptions to neighbours, and restrict activities to reserves without high archaeological / ecological values.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

$ Impact

Option 1: Update policy to reflect current practice, with no booking, licences, or fees for bootcamps and fitness classes and include policy criteria to direct these activities to appropriate reserves and minimise disturbance of other users and neighbours.

Easy to administer.

Recognises the public health and community benefit of fitness classes and exercise involvement.

Activates reserves for recreation activities.

Not consistent or fair across all groups and individuals using council land for commercial benefit.

No knowledge of reserve use, impact on other users or reserves, except from complaints.

Ratepayers bear the costs of maintenance for council land unless users are charged for their use.

Where specific users are charged a fee, this contributes to the maintenance costs and reduces the burden on ratepayers. This option means ratepayers are subsidising some commercial activities.

Option 2: All commercial activities where a fee for participation or service is charged, including bootcamps and fitness classes, are required to obtain a licence and pay a fee (amount to be determined by a review of fees and charges in the next Annual Plan).

Consistent and fair that all commercial activities are charged for using council land.

Increased administration to manage and monitor additional operators and activities.

Might discourage operators from offering these services, which reduces opportunities for people to keep fit, and reduces the activation of parks and reserves.

IT changes would be required to allow for online payment.

Increasing the number of activities that are charged for using council land for commercial purposes would assist in offsetting the costs to ratepayers. How much, would depend on the fees applied and the number of operators. It may, however, result in higher administrative requirements to manage the increase in licences, fee recovery and monitoring.

IT changes would be required to allow for online payment, costs would be approximately $10,000 in one-off set up costs and approximately $10,000 per year to run. If manual invoicing was required, this would have additional operational costs.

Option 3:

No fee required for fitness classes or bootcamps but must book the site and time.

(Recommended).

Aligns with current policy. An online booking system such as that used for weddings could be utilised.

Enables monitoring for future decision making.

May take a short period to implement online booking changes.

Somewhat difficult to monitor compliance.

Would enable monitoring of the use of reserves and compliance with Reserve Management Plan. Would enable criteria to be applied such as restrictions on the use of heavy equipment, damage to reserves, music early in the morning / disruptions to neighbours, and restrict activities to reserves without high archaeological / ecological values.

Tour Operators

55. Under the current Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserve Land Policy, tour operators are not required to pay fees to use reserves, but they are required to book the reserve space from the council before using it. However, in practice booking is not required.

56. The engagement survey results to questions about tour operators showed that most respondents supported charging a full market fee (63%), around a quarter supported charging a small fee (23%), and a minority supported charging no fee (13%).

Table 7: Policy Options on the Requirement for Licences and Fees for Tour Operators

Option	Advantages	Disadvantages	$ Impact
*Option 1:* Update policy to reflect practice, and continue with no licences, booking or fees for tour operators.	No administration required.	Not consistent or fair across all groups and individuals using council land for commercial benefit. Some tour operators have incurred costs to ratepayers for public toilets where their tours operate.	Ratepayers pays land maintenance costs. Where specific users are charged a fee, this contributes to the costs and reduces the burden on ratepayers. This option means ratepayers are subsidising commercial activities.
Option 2: Tour operators who charge a fee for service on council land, are required to obtain a licence and pay a fee to council (amount to be determined by a review of fees and charges in the next Annual Plan). (Recommended).	Consistent and fair that all commercial activities are charged for using council land. Recognises the activation of reserves that tour operators can enable. Allows for oversight of high-use times for commercial activities on council land.	Increased administration to manage and monitor additional operators and activities.	Increasing number of activities charged for using council land for commercial purposes would assist in offsetting the costs to ratepayers. How much, would depend on the fees applied and the number of operators. It may result in higher administrative costs to manage the increase in licences, fee recovery and monitoring. There are currently a very small number of known operators (under 5). Costs will be investigated and reported if this option chosen.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

$ Impact

Option 1: Update policy to reflect practice, and continue with no licences, booking or fees for tour operators.

No administration required.

Not consistent or fair across all groups and individuals using council land for commercial benefit.

Some tour operators have incurred costs to ratepayers for public toilets where their tours operate.

Ratepayers pays land maintenance costs. Where specific users are charged a fee, this contributes to the costs and reduces the burden on ratepayers. This option means ratepayers are subsidising commercial activities.

Option 2: Tour operators who charge a fee for service on council land, are required to obtain a licence and pay a fee to council (amount to be determined by a review of fees and charges in the next Annual Plan).

(Recommended).

Consistent and fair that all commercial activities are charged for using council land.

Recognises the activation of reserves that tour operators can enable.

Allows for oversight of high-use times for commercial activities on council land.

Increased administration to manage and monitor additional operators and activities.

Increasing number of activities charged for using council land for commercial purposes would assist in offsetting the costs to ratepayers. How much, would depend on the fees applied and the number of operators. It may result in higher administrative costs to manage the increase in licences, fee recovery and monitoring. There are currently a very small number of known operators (under 5). Costs will be investigated and reported if this option chosen.

Issue 6: Allocation of Tendered Licences

57. The engagement survey results to questions about tendered licences generally indicated support to keep the same number of licences at all current locations. Minor changes are proposed to reduce the number of licences at high pressure points.

Table 8: Proposed Amendments to Tendered Licences

Site	Type of activities	Current Max. Number of Licences	Proposed Maximum Number of Licences
The Mall, Mount Maunganui	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven or small motor powered.	4	3 due to significant increase in use of this location.
Marine Parade, Mount Maunganui – on the beach between Mussel Rock and Oceanbeach Road	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven. If the activity is sea related, then the craft should not operate further NW than Moturiki Island.	3	4 – to take up the 1 lost at The Mall as there is much more room on this side of the peninsula.
Memorial Park	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven.	2	No applicants for tendered licences for years. Remove, allow on case by case basis.
Fergusson Park	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven.	2	No applicants for tendered licences for years. Remove, allow on case by case basis.
Kulim Park	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven.	2	3 – the park will likely become more popular now that it’s been re-designed.
Marine Park	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven.	1	1
McLaren Falls Park (incl. Omanawa Falls)	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven.	2	2
Papamoa Domain	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven.	2	2
Taylors Reserve	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven.	1	2
Marine Parade between Adams Ave and Pacific Avenue from 1 December to 31 March following year.	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven.	No maximum number but must operate within designated areas.	Restrict to 4 due to significant increase in use during summer.
Marine Parade opposite Tay Street.	Family or individual activities. If water based must be wind, pedal or paddle driven.	2	1 due to significant increase in use of this location.

Issue 7: Community Gardens

58. Council currently has a Community Gardens policy which recognises the value of community gardens and encourages the establishment of community gardens. It sets out the criteria for running community gardens on council-owned or administered land.

59. There are lots of benefits to the community from well-run, accessible community gardens, including assisting in food security, community building and participation, and learning skills for participants.

60. Under the current policy, council does not provide community gardens, or maintain them, and does not actively seek out participants. The establishment of community gardens has a very high level of administration which staff assist participants with. However, their success depends on the various volunteers who run them and their leadership and succession plans. Unfortunately, they can quickly become run down if participants do not maintain their interest and leadership on the ground.

61. There are currently several community gardens active in Tauranga City. Three are on council land, while a few others are administered by external organisations on schools, church grounds and in neighbourhoods. Several external agencies are currently operating very successfully in this space, including the Good Neighbour Trust and several local churches.

62. Other councils such as Christchurch are active in facilitating community gardens and encouraging community participation.

63. It is also worth noting that various requests continue to be received from residents to use their road berm as a shared or free-for-all community garden. This scenario will be addressed in a subsequent paper addressing the multiple policies that deal with public use of road reserves.

64. There is a need to set direction as to the future role of council in community gardens.

Table 9: Options for Approach to Community Gardens

Option	Advantages	Disadvantages	$ Impact
*Option 1:* Status quo with potential minor amendments to current policy. (recommended).	Provides opportunity for the community to establish community gardens and consistency in licencing of these.	Success is based on the leadership and enthusiasm of members.	None.
*Option 2:* Provide additional support, funding, and dedicated spaces as per Christchurch and other councils.	Assists community participation and enhances the benefits gained from community gardens.	Funding required and additional staff requirements to support this.	Yes.
*Option 3:* Cease to encourage or allow community gardens.	Removes administration requirements in supporting these.	Loss of benefits to the community from community gardens.	None.
*Option 4:* Consider wider issues of food security and how council land could be used to address this.	Provides multiple community wellbeing benefits.	Funding required and additional staff requirements to support this. Wider than scope of policy.	Unknown.

Issue 8: Memorials

65. Some members of the community offer to donate memorial seats for loved ones who have died. They are able to donate a seat to Council, and in recognition of the donation, Council installs a plaque in remembrance of their loved one, and the seat and plaque are installed where a seat is needed in the reserves network. Managing these donations take a lot of time and administration and most requestors want the same locations (Mount Maunganui, Pilot Bay and popular harbour locations). Seats last for about 10 years or the lifetime of the wooden seat, and then are replaced and someone else can donate another seat in that location, in memory of their loved one. The plaque on the original donated seat is returned, where possible, to the donor family.

66. Staff have tried to direct people towards donating a memorial tree that is more permanent than a seat and there are specified locations available for these.

67. Many people assume the memorial seats and plaques are for notable person who have contributed to the community, but staff have confirmed that many recent plaques have been for people who have only lived in Tauranga for their last few years and do not have a strong connection to the community. If we continue with memorial seat donations, it has been suggested that they be reserved for those who were long term residents of Tauranga or who have made a significant contribution to the community, particularly in the most popular locations.

Table 10: Options for Memorials

Option	Advantages	Disadvantages	$ Impact
*Option 1:* Status quo. Memorials dealt with operationally.	No change to current situation so is easy to administer.	Unclear and inconsistent to the public. High administration in explaining the situation to lots of customers.	None.
*Option 2:* Add policy clauses to clarify that council land is not for the purpose of private memorials but limited provision is made for the donation of memorial seats and trees in designated areas. Memorial seats are in place for 10 years or the lifetime of the seat. (Recommended).	Clarifies the situation to the community. Ensures consistency.	None.	None.
*Option 3:* Add policy clauses that memorial seats are generally reserved for those who were long term residents or who made a significant contribution to the community, particularly in the most popular locations.	Clarifies the situation to the community. Ensures consistency. May help to reduce expectations of many who apply who all want the waterfront locations.	May put some persons off applying if they feel they have to justify the contribution of their loved one. Difficult for staff to assess and sensitive topic to convey to families.	None.

Issue 9: Sponsorship Signage on Reserves

68. Sports and community groups using reserves may need to access sources of funding to achieve their purposes. From time-to-time opportunities may arise for these sports and community groups to benefit from sponsorship opportunities and sponsorship may include signage on reserves. However, excessive signage, or signage that is poorly designed or placed, can negatively affect a reserve’s amenity and ambiance and be confusing or inconvenient. It can imply unjustified commercial or exclusive ownership of a reserve or facilities, discouraging reserve users.

69. Many people consider signs to be visual pollution, particularly in the context of the Resource Management Act and its provisions and interpretation. Council reserves are green space in suburban and intensifying areas. The Tauranga Reserves Management Plan also encourages consideration of the visual landscape when designing facilities and managing reserves.

70. The Sponsorship Signage on Reserves policy^{^[4]} aims to ensure a consistent approach to allowing sponsorship signage on reserves. The key principle of the policy is to minimise sponsorship signage on council reserves whilst recognising the financial benefits for clubs which can be gained through sponsorship arrangements with businesses and other organisations. This policy was written many years ago and did not envision the current situation where clubrooms may be shared by multiple teams, sometimes from different codes, many of whom may have multiple sponsors to keep costs affordable for members.

71. The current policy allows one sponsorship sign per clubroom. The engagement survey asked general and specific questions around signage on reserves. The results are shown in Table 5 and Table 6 in Attachment 2. Just over half of respondents supported having one sign or no signs per sport field or building, (54-58%) whereas slightly less than half supported having 2 or more (42-46%).

72. Since the Sponsorship Signage on Reserves Policy was written in 2009, council has shifted largely to a co-location approach for community groups and sports clubs rather than each club having their own building. This means multiple groups may use the same building at different times. The current policy allows one sponsorship sign no bigger than 20% of a wall. Some clubrooms have six clubs but are only allowed 20% of one wall. Where they have an exclusive use lease of land, and are responsible for the ground maintenance, they can have unlimited sponsorship signage on the area covered by the lease, but it must be internally facing.

73. Bay Venues Limited also raised the issue of commercial signage, and particularly naming rights on reserves requesting that the policy set some consistent criteria or allowance for this.

74. Five options have been developed for consideration.

Table 11: Options for Signage on Reserves

Option	Advantages	Disadvantages	$ Impact
*Option 1:* Status quo.	Easy to administer.	Unfair where multiple groups share a facility.	None.
*Option 2:* Increase signage only for shared buildings or reserves where multiple groups have leases / licences to occupy.	Allows greater sponsorship opportunities.	Increased visual pollution.	None.
*Option 3:* Increase signage for all buildings and reserves.	Allows greater sponsorship opportunities.	Increased visual pollution.	None.
*Option 4:* Set an increased portion of the wall area, sponsorship content and square metreage.	Allows greater sponsorship opportunities.	Increased visual pollution.	None.
*Option 5:* Keep the current criteria but allow discretion by the asset manager for exceptional circumstances and require a final design that must be signed off by council staff. (Recommended).	Allows greater sponsorship opportunities in more limited circumstances where it is needed and appropriate. Takes into consideration the visual effect of increased signage. Keeps visual pollution in reserves to a minimum.	Some increased visual pollution.	None.

Issue 10: Leases and Licences to Occupy

75. The current Community, Private and Commercial Use of Council Administered Land Policy distinguishes between uses on strategic property and operational property. The maximum use on a strategic property is five years. The policy does not specify the maximum term for a long-term lease on operational land that is for a secondary purpose to the primary purpose of the land (called a secondary long-term lease).

76. There is inconsistency with the term of operational leases. Historically, perpetual leases were given and then changed to leases up to 30 years. With the fast rate of growth in the city and the need to respond to the changing needs of the community and enable council land to be maximised for the benefit of the wider community rather than a single leaseholder. However as many of our leases are ground leases only, community groups may still require long lease terms to allow for financing the infrastructure required for them to utilise the space. It is recommended that the specified term for a long-term lease is defined and options of length will be developed with input from community groups and leaseholders.

Table 12: Options regarding secondary long-term leases

Option

Advantages

Disadvantage

$ Impact

Option 1: Status quo. No policy specification for a secondary long-term lease.

Maintains some flexibility.

Unclear to applicants. Could result in inconsistencies between applicants.

Creates difficulties in negotiations where people desire much longer leases such as those given in recent decades.

None.

Option 2: Include a policy clause setting a maximum term for a secondary long-term lease.

(Recommended).

Provides clarity to applicants and the community.

Provides greater consistency and improves negotiations.

Would reduce flexibility.

None.

Issue 11: Stormwater Reserves

77. The current policies do not provide any specific guidance on stormwater reserves. These reserves are significantly different in purpose to other areas of council land in that they are expected to flood in large rainfall events. Their role is to direct, slow, absorb and remove stormwater from roads, housing, and infrastructure to avoid flooding and damage. However, they also fulfil other recreational purposes, provide greenspace and ecological functions.

78. In the mind of many of their community neighbours, stormwater reserves are a reserve the same as any other reserve. This results in requests from the community for unsuitable activities, infrastructure, and high levels of service such as short grass mowing that can compromise the function of the stormwater reserve.

79. It is recommended that policy clauses are added to clarify the purpose of stormwater reserves, why they require a different level of service of grass and vegetation, specify no swimming, specify no structures or moveable items that can be shifted by water flows in extreme rain events within flow paths or near waterways (in an extreme rainfall, even cars can be moved by a surprisingly low level of water flowing quickly).

Table 13: Options for Purpose of Stormwater Reserves

Option

Advantages

Disadvantage

$ Impact

Option 1: Status quo. No policy provision for stormwater reserves. Assessed on a case-by-case basis.

None.

Does not provide clarity for community members wishing to undertake specific activities on stormwater reserves.

None.

Option 2: Provide policy clauses clarifying the purpose of stormwater reserves, why they require a different level of service of grass and vegetation, specify no swimming, specify no structures or moveable items that can be shifted by water flows in extreme rain events within flow paths or near waterways.

(Recommended).

Provides clarity for community members who wish to undertake specific activities on stormwater reserves.

Ensures only appropriate events or activities occur on stormwater reserves that do not compromise the functioning of the reserve for its intended purpose.

None.

Issue 12: Merging and Aligning Content into a Single Policy

80. Through this review nine policies will be amalgamated into one policy. Unless highlighted for change in this report, existing policy provisions will be incorporated into the single policy.

81. To consolidate these nine policies, some drafting changes to these original policy provisions will be required to create a cohesive policy. The existing nine policies were developed at different times and have different levels of information and content. Some legislative regulatory or standard references are now out of date (e.g., Network Operation Licences) and will be updated as part of the consolidation process.

82. Several policies include a high level of operational detail that would more appropriately sit in a procedure document or licence agreement. Content identified as able to be provided in operational documents or licence agreements is provided in Table 14 below.

Table 14: Original policy content that could be moved into procedures

Original Policy	Content recommend for removal	Advantages	Disadvantages
Outdoor Spaces Booking Policy - supports decisions around who gets to book an outdoor space when there is competition between users for an outdoor space on the same date and time. It provides criteria to consider when there is a conflict.	Remove the procedural elements of the Outdoor Spaces Booking Policy to a procedure e.g., stated timeframes to secure a booking.	Separates policy issues from operational issues. Simplifies and shortens the policy.	None.
Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserve Land - policy aims to set out a consistent approach to what temporary commercial activities are permitted on reserves.	Keep the minimum criteria operators must meet set in policy but remove tender attributes and weighting from the policy. Operators will still be informed of the operational weighted tender attributes they will be assessed against prior to submitting a tender to avoid disputes.	Simplifies the policy. Allows for more frequent updates in response to community feedback or emergent issues, as amendments would not have to wait for a formal policy review. Enables a more commercial process.	Currently the weighted tender process causes a lot of contention from commercial operators who are not successful, removing this from the policy may be perceived as less transparent by operators.
Markets and Stalls - policy aims to set out a consistent approach to issuing licenses for stall holders and market organisers across all public places.	Simplify the policy to set out that a permit is required and may be applied for by supplying the required information on the appropriate application form, and that successful applicants must comply with the conditions of that permit to be allowed to operate.	Simplifies and shortens the policy. Separates policy issues from operational issues. Ensures all information requested is still provided to get a licence.	None.
Community Gardens - policy recognises the value and encourages the establishment of community gardens. It also sets out the criteria for running community gardens on council-owned or administered land.	Simplify the Community Gardens policy to set out the intended purpose of community gardens, the role of council and the requirement for a licence to occupy and a community garden management group, and move other content into a template licence to occupy agreement.	Simplifies and shortens the policy. Separates policy issues from operational issues like what needs to be on the application form. Ensures what all information requested is still provided in order to get a community gardens licence. Avoids repetition between the policy and the application form.	None.

Issue 13: Policy Clarifications

83. In reviewing these policies, several issues have been identified where the policy intent has not been followed due to confusion over the policy wording, unclear definitions or where a policy fails to cover a relevant issue. Table 15 provided an outline of the policy provisions identified as requiring points of clarification.

Table 15: Policy Options requiring clarification

Original policy	Clarification	Advantages	Disadvantages	Recommended
Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserves - policy aims to set out a consistent approach to what temporary commercial activities are permitted on reserves. Temporary Commercial Activities on Reserves - policy aims to set out a consistent approach to what temporary commercial activities are permitted on reserves.	Clarify in the policy that if someone is operating a business off site, but as part of that business uses a reserve, e.g. online bicycle bookings where people collect bikes from a reserve, or online surf school bookings, who then offer lessons from a reserve, do constitute a commercial activity on reserves and must obtain a commercial licence and pay a fee.	Ensures all commercial users of reserves are contributing.	Difficult to monitor and enforce.	Yes.
	Clarify that council is not obliged to offer a licence to all applicants or for all sites.	Removes ambiguity. Supports the aim of ensuring only high-quality suitable activities may operate on reserves.	May result in less commercial activities operating.	Yes.
	Clarify that reserves that have tendered licences are also able to have other temporary commercial activities that don’t meet the criteria for a tendered licence e.g., a travelling circus.	Removes ambiguity. Increases awareness of opportunities to activate reserves.	None.	Yes.
	Clarify where a tendered site is left empty, it may be filled with another commercial activity provided the operator’s activities are outside of the scope of the tendered licence activities.	Removes ambiguity. Increases awareness of opportunities to activate reserves.	None.	Yes.
The Community, Private and Commercial Use of Council-Administered Land - policy sets out specific provisions for early childhood education centres (ECEs) on council land.	Clarify that playcentres are excluded from the definition of ECEs and are treated the same as other community groups under the policy.	Ensures clarity when reading and interpreting the policy. Consistent with previous Council decisions.	None.	Yes.
	Clarify in the policy that the policy considerations apply when considering a new lease for existing ECE facilities or a variation to a lease. They will be applied to lease renewals and assignments where possible (may not always be possible due to the need to adhere to the legal requirements of renewals and assignments in the lease).	Provides clarification of the circumstances when the factors can be applied.	None.	Yes.
Memorials – the policy is currently silent on the scattering of ashes in public places.	Clarify that ashes are not to be scattered on council land and a garden is provided at the cemetery for this purpose.	Clarifies the situation to the community. Ensures consistency. Aligns with tangata whenua cultural values.	Enforcement difficult.	Yes.
The Sponsorship Signage on Reserves - policy aims to ensure a consistent approach to allowing sponsorship signage on council-owned and administered reserves.	Add a policy clause specifying no commercial signage except where necessary to enable the public to obtain the benefit and enjoyment of the reserve or for the convenience of persons using the reserve.	Provides clarity for clubs, organisations and sponsors.	Already specified in the Reserves Act (section 54(1) d) which should be consulted when making decisions on issuing leases or licences on reserves.	No.

Financial Considerations

84. Financial costs are expected to be minimal depending on how much resource is required to deliver the recommended options. There may be a requirement for resourcing web-based tool development for some options, and monitoring or enforcement for others up to 1 FTE. If the recommended options are selected, the costs will be investigated and reported to commissioners with the draft policy.

Legal Implications / Risks

85. This report has no legal implications. Any risks associated with the recommended or selected options will be investigated during detailed development of the draft policy wording.

Consultation / Engagement

86. Council has engaged with internal and external stakeholders to provide an assessment of the current policy framework from those who use it. Internal engagement was carried out across staff teams which implement the policies under review and those who work with members of the community who may be impacted by the policies.

87. An engagement survey was provided for members of the public and responses to the survey were directly sought from members of the community who have a lease or licence to occupy, use council land for commercial purposes, or represent a community group which regularly uses public spaces. Over 500 detailed responses from members of the public were received covering a wide range of policy issues. Many respondents provided lengthy details of their current and desired uses of council land and the issues around that use.

88. Direct input to the issues and options paper has been sought and received from Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana Partnership, the Department of Conservation, and from Bay Venues Limited.

Significance

89. 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.

90. 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.

91. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the issue is of medium significance.

ENGAGEMENT

92. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the issue is of medium significance, officers are of the opinion that the following consultation/engagement is required.

93. Following today’s decisions on the various options, a draft policy will be developed by staff in consultation with key stakeholders including Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana Partnership, the Department of Conservation, Bay Venues Limited, Mainstreets, Sport Bay of Plenty, Advisory Boards and Network Operators. This draft policy once approved or amended by commissioners will be consulted on widely with the communities of Tauranga in 2022.

Next Steps

94. A draft policy will be prepared based on the options decided by the committee. This will be brought back to the committee in the new year for final decision making and approval or amendments prior to consultation. Consultation will subsequently be carried out with both key stakeholders and the community on the draft policy. Hearings will be provided after submissions are received and the committee will deliberate and decide on the final policy wording.

Attachments

1. Decision Making Framework - A13089329 ⇩

2. Engagement Survey - A13087770 ⇩

Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee Meeting Agenda

13 December 2021

10.3 Wairoa River Valley Strategy review - project update

File Number: A12996214

Author: Anne Payne, Strategic Advisor

Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy & Growth

Purpose of the Report

1. This report provides a project update on the review of the Wairoa River Valley Strategy, which was last reviewed in 2013 and is a joint strategy with Western Bay of Plenty District Council.

Recommendations

That the Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee:

(a) Receives the Wairoa River Valley Strategy review project update report.

Executive Summary

2. The Wairoa River Valley Strategy is a 2005 joint strategy between Western Bay of Plenty District Council, Tauranga City Council, Tangata Whenua and the communities within the strategy area.

3. Key factors for consideration in this strategy review include the pressures of urbanisation on the Wairoa River, significant national and local regulatory changes in freshwater management, along with a lack of overarching governance and monitoring of the strategy to date.

4. Both lead councils committed to this strategy review in 2018, and scheduled scoping work to commence in 2020-2021.

5. An initial hui with Te Kauae a Roopu on 9 February 2021 advised that there needed to be a separate Wairoa River Hapū forum for this review, that the review should include the whole of the Wairoa River and its tributaries (significantly increasing the geographical area from that of the current strategy), and that reviewing and updating the strategy would not be enough - that the desired outcome is a comprehensive and sustainable approach for the entire Wairoa River. This feedback highlighted how important the Regional Council’s role was to this process, as many of these outcomes fall more within regional council’s mandate than within our district and city councils’ scope of activities.

6. An initial hui was held with the identified Wairoa River Hapū representatives on 14 April 2021, which confirmed the previous feedback and agreed that Regional Council (BOPRC) would provide a workshop for the Wairoa River Hapū representatives to explain the National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management, and Hapū/Iwi role in that, in late June / early July.

7. The scheduled workshop on 18 August was postponed due to the Covid-19 lockdown, being held instead online on 24 November 2021. Participants agreed that this important discussion should be continued at another workshop early in the New Year.

8. Council staff are working through a range of next steps but are of the view that the Wairoa River Valley Strategy should remain in place, effectively parking the strategy review process, until the NPS-FM implementation process and Tauriko West structure planning process are completed. At that time, we should revisit the strategy to determine what gaps remain that should be filled and how best to effect that.

9. We will report back to this Committee with a further update in the first quarter of 2022.

Background

The Wairoa River Valley Strategy

10. The strategy was adopted in 2005, with a desktop review being undertaken in 2013 to ensure alignment with newly released hapū management plans.

11. This is a joint strategy between Western Bay of Plenty District Council (WBOPDC), Tauranga City Council (TCC), Tangata Whenua and the communities within the strategy area, and was envisaged as a partnership between these groups. It is a voluntary commitment to agreed direction and actions, rather than a statutorily binding document.

12. The strategy encompasses the area “from McLaren Falls Bridge downstream to where the river meets the Tauranga Harbour (Oikimoke Point to the equivalent northern point in Bethlehem). It extends up to the dominant ridgeline beside the river and to encompass the communities of interest either side of the riverbank” [10] The strategy does not include any of the river’s tributaries.

13. The strategy aims to integrate the management of this significant natural environment and open space, and to provide clear future plans for protection, use and development in this area.

Background to the Wairoa River Valley Strategy review

14. The strategy was developed at a time when urbanisation of this rural area was not planned. While much of the Strategy is still deliverable in an urban context, there are some elements that are not aligned with agreed development plans for the Tauriko West growth area.

15. Additionally, while much on-the-ground progress has been made since the strategy’s adoption and 2013 review, there has been little or no overarching governance or progress monitoring.

16. WBOPDC received two submissions to its 2018-2028 Long Term Plan, from Te Kauae a Roopu and Pirirakau Incorporated Society, requesting a comprehensive review of the strategy in light of the plans to develop Tauriko West.

17. In response, WBOPDC included scoping a review of the strategy in its 2020 work programme, noting that this should be jointly progressed with TCC, Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC) and Tangata Whenua representatives. TCC was aware of and in agreement with this joint commitment and this was reported back to the Roopu in 2018.

18. Recent significant changes in the national and local approaches to freshwater management and the regulations that govern them are also considerations for this strategy review. Key among these are implications of the government’s August 2020 Essential Freshwater package, including the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM) [11].

Strategy review process and timeline

19. WBOPDC attended the 26 November 2020 Te Kauae a Roopu hui to confirm that both WBOPDC and TCC have agreed in principle to review the strategy, with scoping to commence in early 2021. The Roopu indicated its expectation for involvement at this time. Scoping work was timed to enable results of the cultural assessment and flood risk assessment work commissioned for Tauriko West to be incorporated into the review process.

20. On 8 December 2020, the Executive Report to the TCC Projects, Services and Operations Committee advised that, together with WBOPDC, we were starting work on this previously-committed strategy review.

21. On 9 February 2021, an initial discussion was held with Te Kauae a Roopu on how local hapū might like to see the scoping of the strategy review progressed, and to identify who should be involved. Feedback from Te Kauae a Roopu was that:

(a) There should be a separate forum for the strategy review – involvement must be wider than Te Kauae a Roopu, as other hapū not involved in that group have interests in the Wairoa River.

(b) The geographic scope of the review should be broadened – to include the whole of the Wairoa River and its tributaries.

(c) Review and updating the strategy was not enough – the desired outcome is a more comprehensive and sustainable management approach for the Wairoa River.

22. On 14 April 2021, as agreed at the 9 February hui, an introductory hui was held with nominated hapū representatives[12] to progress the strategy review discussion. Key points from this hui include:

(a) Endorsement of Te Kauae a Roopu’s direction on the strategy review process and aspirations.

(b) Provision of a draft map that outlined the Wairoa River catchment and council boundaries, to enable a comparison to the geographic area encompassed by the Wairoa River Valley Strategy (refer Attachment 1, draft map of the Wairoa River catchment area).

(c) Discussion of the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM) and its implementation by BOPRC, alongside implementation of the wider Essential Freshwater programme – and the potential implications for Hapū/Iwi aspirations for the Wairoa River catchment as a whole. This discussion resulted in:

(i) A suggestion that the SmartGrowth Combined Tangata Whenua Forum would be a good place for BOPRC to cover off the NPS-FM process, as one pathway for information on this significant upcoming change process out to Iwi/Hapū in the sub-region; and

(ii) The next step being for BOPRC to hold a workshop with this Wairoa River Hapū group in late June to further explain the NPS-FM process and implications, particularly how the Hapū can and want to be involved.

(d) Overall, it was agreed that there seems little value in progressing a standard review of the strategy at this time, that active BOPRC and Hapū/Iwi engagement in the NPS-FM and Essential Freshwater programme implementation are more likely to progress Hapū/Iwi aspirations for the Wairoa River catchment. It was noted that the NPS-FM implementation will result in changes to BOPRC’s Regional Plan by July 2024. This will in turn have implications for both WBOPDC and TCC district and city plans.

23. On 24 November 2021, the BOPRC hui with the Wairoa River Hapū group was held online. This replaced the in-person hui on 18 August that had been postponed due to the Covid-19 lockdown and ongoing effects. Key points from this hui include:

(a) BOPRC walked through a powerpoint presentation explaining the NPS-FM including the deadlines BOPRC is required to meet, BOPRC’s implementation plan including its engagement with Hapū/Iwi of the region, the Hapū/Iwi capacity and capability support BOPRC can provide for this engagement, and how important Hapū/Iwi involvement is to this process.

(b) BOPRC offered to meet with anyone, Hapū/Iwi or council groups, to provide this information and engage on this process. BOPRC provided contact information and encouraged hui participants to make contact to set up time for further hui.

(c) Participants generally acknowledged how important this kaupapa is to Hapū/Iwi and the criticality of timing for involvement.

(d) Participants agreed that a follow up workshop would be organised in early 2022 to progress this discussion

Where we are now

24. WBOPDC and TCC have worked together to lead this process so far. However, given the clear direction received from both Te Kauae a Roopu and the Wairoa River Hapū representatives, the obligations on BOPRC to lead the NPS-FM implementation, and the current structure planning process relating to Tauriko West development, it seems clear that there is little to be gained in running a separate and more narrowly-focused Wairoa River Valley Strategy review process at this time.

25. The view of council staff leading this project is that the Wairoa River Valley Strategy should remain in place for now, until the NPS-FM process and Tauriko West structure planning process have been completed. At that time we will, with our Hapū/Iwi partners, assess whether there are gaps that need to be filled through a strategy, or some other, process.

26. Within TCC, staff are considering whether there may be value in arranging for BOPRC to provide their NPS-FM presentation to Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana and also for staff and/or Council Committees.

27. We will provide a further update to the Committee in the first quarter of 2022.

Strategic / Statutory Context

28. Currently TCC is refreshing its strategic framework and developing a City Vision. Together this work will ensure we have a current and cohesive strategic framework that provides a clear line of sight from council activities to strategy documents, and from there to our adopted community outcomes and the City Vision.

29. While reviewing joint strategies and plans, such as the Wairoa River Valley Strategy, are out of scope for Council’s strategic framework refresh, principles and approaches of the framework refresh will be applied to the Wairoa River Valley Strategy review when it is undertaken.

Financial Considerations

30. There are no significant financial considerations arising from this strategy review project identified at this stage. TCC has provided the hui fees for Hapū participating in hui to date, while WBOPDC has led on communication and hosting of our hui with Hapū representatives.

Legal Implications / Risks

31. There are no legal implications arising from this strategy review project.

32. Risks relate primarily to the difficulty in ensuring shared awareness about a range of different initiatives and change drivers that affect the Wairoa River catchment and its Hapū/Iwi and communities of interest. Thoughtful and timely communication within councils and between the three councils on these matters can mitigate this risk to an extent, along with ensuring our Wairoa River Hapū/Iwi are included in conversations as they need and wish to be.

Consultation / Engagement

33. The Wairoa River Valley Strategy review engagement undertaken to date and planned for the future is outlined in the ‘Where we are now’ and ‘Next Steps’ sections of this report.

Significance

34. 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.

35. 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 matter.

36. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter (the Wairoa River Valley Strategy review) is of medium significance. However, the decision proposed in this report (i.e. to receive the project update) is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

37. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the matter of the Wairoa River Valley Strategy review is of medium significance, the engagement undertaken to date and planned for the future, is outlined in the ‘Where we are now’ and ‘Next Steps’ sections of this report.

Next Steps

38. Staff from the three councils will meet, ideally pre-Christmas, to confirm next steps and responsibilities for delivering them.

39. A workshop to continue the 24 November discussion (focusing primarily on Hapū/Iwi participation in the BOPRC NPS-FM/Essential Freshwater process) will be held early in the New Year.

40. The Wairoa River Valley Strategy itself should remain in place for now, effectively ‘parking’ this strategy review until the NPS-FM process and Tauriko West structure planning process have been completed. At that time we will, with our Hapū/Iwi partners, assess whether there are gaps that need to be filled through a strategy, or some other, process.

41. Within TCC, staff are considering whether there may be value in arranging for BOPRC to provide their NPS-FM presentation to Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana and also for staff and/or Council Committees.

42. We will provide a further update to the Committee in the first quarter of 2022.

Attachments

1. Draft Map of Wairoa River Catchment with Council Boundaries - April 2021 - A12466196 ⇩

[1] This includes the Lease of Airspace Above Roads policy, the Community Share Agreement policy, the Operation of Mobile Shops policy, the Prioritising Use of Indoor Facilities policy, the Public Art Policy, the Tauranga Marina Policy and policies relating to road reserves, subsoil of roads and road berms.

[2] Temporary commercial activities provide goods or services or hire equipment at a cost to users of the public space, such as kayak hire or surfing lessons. Note that this is different to mobile shops which require a separate licence under the Operation of Mobile Shops Policy.

[3] Those reserves that have tendered licences are also able to have other temporary commercial activities that don’t meet the criteria for a tendered licence e.g., a large-scale circus or water slide.

[4] Sponsorship signage is signage which is aimed at acknowledging the partnership between the user of Council owned or administered reserves and a commercial entity. Sponsorship is not signage which is dedicated to advertising a commercial entity.

[5] Reach refers to those that have seen content.

[6] Engagement includes those that have interacted with content i.e. commented, shared, liked or made a choice.

[7] Numbers refer to participants who fully completed the survey including personal details. This does not include those that completed the survey but choose not to enter their name and email address. Note that based on feedback from Stanley Street we expect those who completed most of the questions to exceed 3,000. Also note that all information gathered will be utilised.

[8] The results from workshops were analysed, providing insight into what people think are priority response areas for our city as well identifying potential blind spots (i.e. issues which people did not prioritise, but which are likely to significantly impact our city).

[9] Results from these workshops included aspirations for the city’s future and a genuine appetite within city partners to achieve alignment to help build forward momentum for Tauranga

[10] Wairoa River Valley Strategy October 2013, page 2, refer TCC website: Wairoa River Valley Strategy October 2013

[11] Essential Freshwater and National Policy Statement on Freshwater Management (NPS-FM) explanations: BOPRC - Essential Freshwater Project and BOPRC - new freshwater rules

[12] Wairoa River hapū had been advised as: Ngāti Kahu, Ngāti Pango, Ngāti Rangi, Pirirākau, Ngāti Taka, Ngāti Hangarau and Ngāi Tamarawaho. Appropriate representatives from each of these hapū were nominated by the hapū.


AGENDA Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee Meeting Monday, 13 December 2021
I hereby give notice that a Strategy, Finance and Risk Committee Meeting will be held on:
Date:	Monday, 13 December 2021
Time:	10.30am
Location:	Tauranga City Council Council Chambers 91 Willow Street Tauranga
Please note that this meeting will be livestreamed and the recording will be publicly available on Tauranga City Council's website: www.tauranga.govt.nz.
Marty Grenfell Chief Executive

Chairperson	Commission Chair Anne Tolley
Deputy chairperson	Dr Wayne Beilby – Tangata Whenua representative
Members	Commissioner Shadrach Rolleston Commissioner Stephen Selwood Commissioner Bill Wasley
	Matire Duncan, Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana Chairperson Te Pio Kawe – Tangata Whenua representative Rohario Murray – Tangata Whenua representative Bruce Robertson – External appointee with finance and risk experience
Quorum	Five (5) members must be physically present, and at least three (3) commissioners and two (2) externally appointed members must be present.
Meeting frequency	Six weekly

Engagement	Number
Social media total reach^{^[5]} (Facebook & Instagram)	191,966
Instagram poll engagement^{^[6]}	7,090
Humans of Tauranga on Instagram engagement	3,078