Agenda of Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting

UNCONFIRMED Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting minutes

15 October 2024

MINUTES

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting

Tuesday, 15 October 2024

Order of Business

1 Opening karakia. 3

2 Apologies. 4

3 Public forum.. 4

4 Acceptance of late items. 4

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 Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting held on 10 September 2024. 4

8 Declaration of conflicts of interest 4

9 Deputations, presentations, petitions. 5

9.1 Petition - Mount Maunganui Hot Pools Opening Hour 5

10 Business. 7

10.1 Mainstreets' Report and Presentations for the Period 1 January to 30 June 2024. 7

10.2 Alcohol Control Bylaw Amendment 10

10.3 The Development of an Alcohol Fees Bylaw.. 11

10.4 Changes to Street Dining Licence to Occupy Fees. 12

10.5 Engagement on Five Playground and Reserve Enhancement Projects. 12

11 Discussion of late items. 14

12 Closing karakia. 14

MINUTES OF Tauranga City Council

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting

HELD AT THE Tauranga City Council, Ground Floor

Meeting Rooms 1 & 1b, 306 Cameron Road, Tauranga

ON Tuesday, 15 October 2024 AT 9.30am

MEMBERS PRESENT:	Cr Kevin Schuler (Chairperson), Cr Hautapu Baker, Cr Rick Curach, Cr Steve Morris, Cr Rod Taylor.
ALSO PRESENT:
APOLOGIES:	Mayor Mahé Drysdale
LEAVE OF ABSENCE:	Cr Mikaere Sydney
IN ATTENDANCE:	Paul Davidson (Chief Financial Officer), Barbara Dempsey (General Manager: Community Services), Sarah Omundsen (General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance), Alastair McNeill (General Manager: Corporate Services), Gareth Wallis (General Manager: City Development & Partnerships), Kendyl Sullivan (City Partnerships Specialist), Ruth Woodward (Team Leader Policy), Jane Barnett (Policy Analyst), Shawn Geard (City Centre Infrastructure Lead), Ross Hudson (Manager: Strategic Planning & Partnerships, Spaces & Places), Jenna Waite (Manager: Spaces & Places Engagement), Sonya McCall (Open Space & Community Facilities Planner), Alison Law (Manager: Spaces and Places), Ceilidh Dunphy (Community Relations Manager), Lucy Reed (Team Leader: Strategic Community Relations), Coral Hair (Manager: Democracy & Governance Services), Anahera Dinsdale (Acting Team Leader: Governance Services), Caroline Irvin (Governance Advisor), Aimee Aranas (Governance Advisor).
EXTERNAL:	Tina Harris, Bay Venues Limited Leah Sutton and Julia Manktelow, Papamoa Unlimited, Genevieve Whitson, Downtown/Mainstreet Tauranga, Rebecca Busby, Tony Ryan, Rosalie Crawford, Greerton Village Community Association

1 Opening karakia

Cr Baker opened the meeting with a karakia.

2 Apologies

Apology

Committee Resolution CTE2/24/1

Moved: Cr Hautapu Baker

Seconded: Cr Rod Taylor

That the apology for absence received from Cr Mayor Drysdale and the leave of absence from Cr Sydney 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 Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting held on 10 September 2024

Committee Resolution CTE2/24/2

Moved: Cr Rick Curach

Seconded: Cr Rod Taylor

That the minutes of the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting held on 10 September 2024 be confirmed as a true and correct record.

Carried

8 Declaration of conflicts of interest

Cr Rod Taylor declared a conflict of interest in relation to item 10.3: ‘The Development of an Alcohol Fees Bylaw’, and took no part in the discussion or voting on the matter.

.9 Deputations, presentations, petitions

9.1 Petition - Mount Maunganui Hot Pools Opening Hour

External Julie and Jim Carle – Mount Maunganui Residents

Key Points

· Mrs Carle represented walkers, swimmers and aqua members of the Mount Hot Pools, a unique essential rehabilitation and health and wellness public facility.

· The opening time changed to 7am after the Covid pandemic, however research showed that most other public pools around the country opened at 5.30-6.00 am.

· After talking to walkers, swimmers, aqua members and other members of public, there were now 127 signatures in support of opening at 6am.

· It was felt the Mount Hot Pools were not meeting the needs of the community. Working people who used to attend at 6am were now excluded. This also included no longer being able to cope with the traffic and restricted access to those with a disability or accessibility issues.

· Opening at 7am was causing disharmony between the walkers, swimmers and aqua class members due to restricted and clashing class times. The Mount Hot Pools website stated their pools were for swimmers and bathers.

· Other facilities and businesses were able to open at 6am so there should be no staffing problems.

· Complaints had been made both verbally and in writing to the Hot Pools and Council. It felt like Council’s policy of community transparency and engagement had failed.

· Mr Carle was a typical active retiree who used the pools as one option for an injury recovery.

· Previously pool access at 6am was without congestion, however now activities such as aqua aerobics took up the majority of the pool area with only one or two lanes for others leaving very little area to exercise.

· It was thought greater use of the pools would generate more income and be of benefit to the facility in terms of money for maintenance and other costs.

· The submitters requested that the Mount Hot Pools resume opening at 6am to allow better access and use for everyone.

In response to questions

· There could be queues of between ten to twenty people in the morning waiting for the pools to open.

Staff response to questions

· Now that the petition had been tabled, staff would come back with a report on the history of the pools, the reason for the decision to keep to a 7am as the opening time, the costs to open earlier and Council’s commercial policies. Council would then make a recommendation to Bay Venues Limited.

· It was noted that prior to the Covid pandemic, there was an average of 12 people using the pool from 6am resulting in a decision being made to change the opening time to 7am as there was an average of 24 people arriving at that time.

Committee Resolution CTE2/24/3

Moved: Cr Rod Taylor

Seconded: Cr Hautapu Baker

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Petition - Mount Maunganui Hot Pools Opening Hour".

(b) Request that staff bring a report back to Council to consider extending the opening hours of the Mount Hot Pools.

Carried

9.2 Tabled Item: Petition - Halt the Installation of a Rainbow Crossing in Tauranga’s CBD’

External Mr Wayne Farrant

Key Points

· As a resident and ratepayer of Tauranga, Mr Farrant was concerned about allocation of city funds towards projects that might not directly benefit the communities’ essential needs, noting that the community was not made aware of this as there was no consultation carried out.

· The rainbow crossing was a significant expense which could be better directed towards infrastructure, healthcare or other community services.

· The cities resources should prioritise solutions for more practical issues affecting the daily lives of the community.

· The symbolism of diversity and inclusion behind the rainbow crossing gesture was respected, however it was crucial to weigh this against the broader needs of the community, in particular in terms of fiscal responsibility.

· The estimated maintenance cost and possible costs of repairing vandalism could be used to address more pressing infrastructure or community development projects.

· It was felt this was an unnecessary expense and a divisive decision. The aim of the petition being presented to the meeting today was not to undermine the values of diversity and inclusion but to highlight the importance of resource allocation in the cities budget.

· The submitter called upon the Committee to reconsider its decision to go ahead with the rainbow crossing.

In response to questions

· Putting the crossing on a road meant that it would need to be painted and as such would incur maintenance costs.

· Rainbow crossings were very divisive and there had been a lot of vandalism done to similar crossings in other cities.

· The main issues were the cost, the lack of consultation and how divisive this issue was.

Staff response to questions

· A high level cost estimate at this stage in terms of installation was $10,500, $4.500 of which was for traffic management. Estimated cost for maintenance was $10,000. A decision to maintain the crossing on an ongoing basis had not been made. The amount equated to approximately 12 cents per year per residential ratepayer.

· Council currently only carried out some low level traffic management, however going forward cost and benefit assessments would be undertaken for each project or contract to ascertain if Council could do items such as installing crossings cheaper in-house. This was part of an exercise being done at the moment to determine the final cost.

Committee Resolution CTE2/24/4

Moved: Cr Hautapu Baker

Seconded: Cr Steve Morris

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the petition ‘Halt the Installation of a Rainbow Crossing in Tauranga’s CBD’.

Carried

10 Business

10.1 Mainstreets' Report and Presentations for the Period 1 January to 30 June 2024

Staff Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships

Kendyl Sullivan, City Partnerships Specialist

External

1) Leah Sutton and Julia Manktelow - Papamoa Unlimited

2) Genevieve Whitson - Downtown/Mainstreet Tauranga

3) Rebecca Busby, Tony Ryan, Rosalie Crawford - Greerton Village Community Association

Key Points

· The General Manager: City Development & Partnerships provided a summary of the report.

Pāpāmoa Unlimited

Leah Sutton and Julia Manktelow of Papamoa Unlimited spoke to a PowerPoint presentation providing the following points:

· Pāpāmoa Unlimited was established in 2014 and a charter to create three or four community events that brought income into the Papamoa region for the community and ratepayers.

· Achievements over the last ten years included continuation of free events through the Covid epidemic to encourage health and wellbeing for the community and a change to two major events and one smaller event.

· Papamoa Unlimited was very grateful to the Commissioners who provided funding to enable strategic planning which changed the organisation from being reactive to proactive and to operate more from a position of growth. The organisation was looking at creating the ‘Gold Coast of New Zealand’ along the Papamoa area.

· There had been great collaboration between the four town centres, with Papamoa Unlimited contributing to ‘Tantalising Tauranga’.

· Culture and inclusivity were very important and Pāpāmoa Unlimited had worked very hard to build a meaningful relationship with the Nga Potiki a Tamapahore Trust.

· ‘Papamoa Light Up The Waterway’ was an event to tell the story of Matariki. This was an illuminated walkway along the Te Ara o Wairakei stormwater trail that focused on telling the stories of the whenua and was very well attended.

· Pāpāmoa Unlimited had three major events fall into one financial year which had an adverse effect on its finances. This meant a lot of fundraising had to be done.

· Although Pāpāmoa was the fastest growing suburb in the subregion, it had very little budget and as such it made sense to extend the targeted rate boundary. This would create more revenue to put back into the area.

· Community safety concerns such as various incidents in alleyways had been raised with Pāpāmoa Unlimited who had then provided the Police and Council with this information.

· Next on the calendar was the official Pāpāmoa Santa Parade which brought around 25,000 people to Pāpāmoa.

In response to questions

· Pāpāmoa Unlimited had a very big push on funding to try to stay out of financial deficit. Working together with Nga Potiki a Tamapahore Trust had opened more funding opportunities.

· Two major events were planned for this year but if funding was not found one event would be pulled from the calendar.

· Due to inflation and other rising costs, Pāpāmoa Unlimited did not have enough money to do the things it wanted and needed to do.

· The Matariki event had grown due to the growth of relationships, the motivation and passion behind it, collaboration with others and creating the right connection points with people. There was more opportunity to collaborate with other to create more iconic events.

· It had been important not to commercialise Matariki however, a major partnership was planned for the coming year.

· In terms of an expanded targeted rate area, strategic planning would be needed to ensure that events happened evenly across the entire area. A website would contribute to this.

· Before any event occurred, residents were visited to inform them of what was happening. The Matariki event generated positive feedback but also negative feedback due to some unfortunate events. Solutions for safety were more in Council’s and the Police’s realm to address.

Staff response to questions

· A key point was that Pāpāmoa Unlimited was funded by commercial rate payers. Initially in 2014, the commercial centre for Pāpāmoa was much smaller but there were now extended areas of commercial developments. This provided an opportunity for Papamoa to go through a targeted rate expansion process and to engage with commercial rate payers to determine if this was something they would like to contribute to.

· There was also the element of community events that Pāpāmoa Unlimited was providing which raised discussion around whether commercial rate payers should be the only ones contributing to those events.

Downtown/Mainstreet Tauranga

Genevieve Whitson (Manager) spoke to a PowerPoint presentation providing the following points:

· It had been a year since moving to the new business model and some of the benefits of this were starting to come through. The vision was still to make downtown Tauranga the best city centre in New Zealand.

· The organisation’s three KPI’s were an engaged membership, advocacy and effective promotions and marketing.

· Achievements over the last six months included confirmed Annual Plan and budget, ongoing transparency and communications, strategic promotions and marketing, city centre activations and advocacy.

· Projects in progress included member and stakeholder engagement, creating one database, more engagement with stakeholders and iwi and quarterly business networking sessions.

· Foot traffic data was obtained from Bell Weather for Devonport Road and demonstrated a steady increase. More businesses were wanting to open as they saw potential in the city centre.

· There was still a slow recovery from the Covid pandemic in terms of sales. The perception of a ‘disrupted city centre’ was still having somewhat of an impact on downtown Tauranga as a destination. Department stores, leisure spending and accommodation spending was up from the same six month period last year.

· It was hoped that the extra businesses coming into the city centre would have a positive impact on revenue.

· There had been a small dip in hospitality spending. The application ‘Neat Places’ had been used to promote Tauranga more, and more support was being provided to the hospitality industry in terms of events, promotion and cross collaborations with other stakeholders.

· Challenges and actions included ongoing construction, roadworks and vacant spaces. Vacant spaces would be targeted and looked at more closely and investment would be sought from landlords.

· The biggest task currently was finishing the three to five year strategy. This would go out to members for consultation and engagement. A new constitution had been developed and would be adopted at the AGM.

In response to questions

· The contract with brand and marketing specialists ‘Tuskany Agency’ ended in June 2024.

· It was felt that the Mainstreet organisations were not competing with one another. There had been full support from the other organisations who were willing to collaborate.

· The promotional production needed to be marketed and promoted across a number of platforms to provide as much exposure as possible.

Greerton Village Community Association

Rebecca Busby (Chairperson) and Tony Ryan (Treasurer) spoke to the Committee providing the following points:

· Highlights included all projects successfully completed over the last 6 months, some of which encouraged residents to take more time in the town centre, to go into businesses and discover stores they may have not visited before.

· As part of a new direction for marketing, additional advertising had been invested in for particular events with social media giveaways donated by some business owners. This created great publicity for those businesses. Other events had created curiosity and encouraged visitors from outside Greerton to drive through the town.

· It was acknowledged that Countdown was about to close and the Association would be talking to business owners and working towards supporting those in the community that needed it.

· A media contractor was hired earlier in the year with the aim of bringing consistency across digital communications to attract more followers and encourage further interactions on Facebook and Instagram accounts, both of which have been very successful. This also filled a KPI of increasing the overall footfall on the streets.

· At the recent AGM, it became evident that communication was a two way street and was essential to meeting the organisations goals. From this meeting, the organisation was working on a communications strategy update to ensure the needs of the members were met and that the minimal resources the organisation had were put to the most effective use in order to deliver on its commitments.

· Another KPI was to continue to learn and grow through governance training. The organisation was working to ensure knowledge gained was fed into work being done on the new constitution which was required under the Incorporated Societies Act 2022.

· Greerton was generally a safe place but had some issues with rough sleepers and antisocial behaviour. Recently appointed Senior Sergeant Area Response Manager Tauranga South, Shannon Clifford, attended the AGM and explained how he and his team, along with Community Patrol could best support Greerton to foster a safe environment for the community. The WhatsApp application would be looked at in terms of safety within the community and positive/notification messaging.

· Council had been provided with the organisation’s draft Annual Plan which served to take into account transitions and ever the increasing diversity within Greerton.

· Another KPI was to adapt events to suit the changing community by taking a fresh look at well-established events and assessing how these could be made more inclusive to reflect the more diverse community. It was felt this would in turn attract more outside visitors.

· Thank you to the City Partnerships Specialist, the City Safety & Engagement Advisor, the Community Patrol, Lions, Greerton Library and the Greerton Village School. These were key stakeholders who provide a lot of support which was greatly appreciated.

In response to questions

· A targeted rate expansion had not been discussed yet and was considered that this would fit in more to a medium term plan as there were more immediate core elements that needed to be addressed before there was any expansion.

· Having Senior Sergeant Clifford’s engagement in Greerton had made a huge difference in a short amount of time which was very encouraging.

· A renewed communications strategy and the establishment of a two way communication that set KPI’s for responses was hoped to encourage more business engagement with the organisation.

· The Little Big Markets were engaged to support the Cherry Blossom Festival this year. Markets were seen as potential opportunities but sensitivity was needed if low cost competition was introduced as some business would see this as negative.

Staff Response

· The previous Council had made the decision to provide a dedicated resource to support the Mainstreet organisations. The City Partnerships Specialist role was then created and had made a huge difference in terms of positive working relationships and in turn, what each organisation was being able to achieve within their community.

Committee Resolution CTE2/24/5

Moved: Cr Steve Morris

Seconded: Cr Hautapu Baker

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Mainstreets' Report and Presentations for the Period 1 January to 30 June 2024".

(b) Receive presentations from:

(i) Papamoa Unlimited

(ii) Mainstreet Tauranga

(iii) Greerton Village and Community Association

(c) Requests that staff prepare an issues and options paper on expanding the Papamoa Mainstreet area that includes options on consultation and engagement with the local community.

Carried

At 11.20am the meeting adjourned.

At 11.39 am the meeting reconvened.

10.2 Alcohol Control Bylaw Amendment

Staff Sarah Omundsen, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance

Jane Barnett, Policy Analyst

Nigel McGlone, Manager: Environmental Regulation

Key Points

· The General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance provided a summary of the report.

In response to questions

· Summer alcohol bans had been put in place every year since 2018. The feedback from the Police and surrounding community was that the temporary ban was very effective. The Police had written to Council seeking a temporary ban.

· There had not been any specific requests from the Police or the community for temporary alcohol bans for the Parton Road/Gordan Spratt Reserve area. Staff could provide information to the next Committee meeting with an option to do this.

· There was no evidence to suggest that the bans in and around the Mount Maunganui/Pilot Bay were confusing to people and the Police had not indicated it was difficult to enforce.

Requests from Councillors

· That staff look into the rationale for the previous temporary alcohol ban for the Parton Road/Gordan Spratt Reserve area.

Committee Resolution CTE2/24/6

Moved: Cr Rod Taylor

Seconded: Cr Hautapu Baker

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Alcohol Control Bylaw Amendment".

(b) Approves the draft amended Alcohol Control Bylaw (Attachment One) and the Statement of Proposal (Attachment Two) for community consultation.

(c) Resolves that in accordance with section 155 of the Local Government Act 2002, the proposed amendments to the Alcohol Control Bylaw are the most appropriate and proportionate way of addressing the perceived problem and do not give rise to any implications under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.

(d) Authorises the General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance to make any necessary minor drafting or presentation amendments to the draft amended Alcohol Control Bylaw, the Statement of Proposal and related consultation material prior to the commencement of consultation.

Carried

10.3 The Development of an Alcohol Fees Bylaw

Staff Sarah Omundsen, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance

Jane Barnett, Policy Analyst

Nigel McGlone, Manager: Environmental Regulation

Cr Taylor noted his conflict of interest in this item and removed himself from the meeting.

Key Points

· The General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance provided a summary of the report.

In response to questions

· The intention was to have a user fees and charges workshop where all the cost recoverable services that Council provided would be looked at in terms of the current user fees and ratepayer fees split. If Council decided it needed to change this, it could be done through the next Annual Plan process when consulting on user fees specifically for alcohol.

· The fee regulations were set through Central Government and intended for the most part to be fully cost recovered. There were specific fees that were removed and set that were not able to be changed through a bylaw.

Committee Resolution CTE2/24/7

Moved: Cr Rick Curach

Seconded: Cr Hautapu Baker

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "The Development of an Alcohol Fees Bylaw".

(b) Approves the development of an Alcohol Fees Bylaw.

(c) Agrees to use 100% cost recovery as an indication of potential new fees for the purposes of community consultation on the draft bylaw.

Carried

10.4 Changes to Street Dining Licence to Occupy Fees

Staff Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships

Shawn Geard, City Centre Infrastructure Lead

Key Points

· The General Manager: City Development & Partnerships provided a summary of the report

In response to questions

· The cost to introduce a Licence to Occupy (LTO) was different to the cost to maintain once in place which was largely incorporated into business as usual for Council. This was not a complex process, but a rolling over of agreements.

· The growth revenue would be similar to the net revenue once in place. A $500 administration fee was being waived for a new or reassigned LTO this financial year.

· This could be assessed as part of the Annual Plan process with LTO’s forming part of the discussions to be held on user fees and charges.

· The administration fee included preparation of a legal agreement and a survey of the space in question to ensure it was accurately represented on a map.

· At this point there was 100% discount from now until 1 January 2025. From 2 January 2025 to 30 June 2025 there was an 80% discount, however, upon the Committees direction this could be changed to 100% discount which would allow some financial relief and time for staff to prepare the Annual Plan rollout for 1 July 2025.

· Part of the rollout would also be considering options for items such as marker stickers on the footpaths to delineate allocated spaces when setting up outside tables. This provided clarity for business owners to control these spaces and in the event enforcement was required.

· Both the bylaw and policy set out clear pedestrian-way widths which were then accommodated in the LTO agreement.

· The nationally recognised standard for minimum footpath width was 1.8 meters. The main street at Mount Maunganui was an example of this being a tight fit. Council’s policy was 1.5 metres within this area. This was recognised as the absolute minimum width to allow for accessibility in terms of wheelchair or mobility scooter safety.

Discussion points raised

· Council staff were thanked for bringing the information to the meeting.

· Fees at Mount Maunganui would not be charged until the newly elected Council had a chance to consider what the fees would look like.

· The acknowledgement that Mount Maunganui may have been left out of the loop in terms of consultation and engagement was appreciated.

· There was a desire for a fair and equal approach across all the suburbs.

· Elected Members would take into account the benefit to the wider public in adding vibrancy to the main street experiences.

· There was no wish that fees be set at such a cost that businesses did not see it as being viable.

Committee Resolution CTE2/24/8

Moved: Cr Rod Taylor

Seconded: Cr Steve Morris

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Changes to Street Dining Licence to Occupy Fees".

(b) Notes that the Committee supports staff exercising their delegated authority to continue providing 100% reduction of the Licence to Occupy Fees from 1 January to 30 June 2025 and acknowledges these fees will be reviewed as part of the Annual Plan process.

Carried

10.5 Engagement on Five Playground and Reserve Enhancement Projects

Staff Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Community Services

Alison Law, Manager: Spaces & Places

Jenna Waite, Manager: Spaces & Places Engagement

Sonya McCall, Open Space & Community Facilities Planner

Key Points

· The Manager: Spaces & Places Engagement provided an introduction to the report.

In response to questions

· This was a standard Council engagement approach to the playground and reserve enhancement projects. It was important to balance community expectation with what Council could deliver and as such the engagement was planned so that perimeters were clearly set.

· Children needed to be engaged tangibly in terms of playgrounds.

· The budgets for the five areas had been set to create a place for play, community, nature and storytelling with no specific figure allocated for each one. A bigger budget had been set to meet the needs of the community rather than just replacing like for like in terms of playground equipment.

· A neighbourhood park cost allocation could be broken down to $250,000 for playground equipment and $120,000 for additional shade, appropriate accessibility and any other ancillary equipment depending on what the community were seeking.

· Staff had moved away from replacing with the same equipment due to growth and the changing nature and needs of communities. Many were now wanting more accessibility, inclusion and spaces for girls within the scope and delivery of these spaces.

· In terms of engagement, it was best to get the community to come to the space in question to experience it and provide their feedback. Online surveys from a 500m radius were proposed for the four playground spaces. BBQ ‘drop in’ days could also be considered.

· Staff would provide some base scale concept designs for two of the spaces that were yet to be developed. The other two spaces that were more like renewals had parameters around what could be done but staff would present ideas and concepts for these as well.

· There would also be engagement with mana whenua.

· A lot of playgrounds, or individual components of playgrounds were coming up for renewal for this LTP period. Playground safety audits were undertaken by staff every year.

· In terms of prioritisation, playground equipment safety and age, gaps in provision levels across the city, previous engagement with the community, site readiness for development and geographic distribution were all taken into consideration.

· Council’s operations team had a budget to keep equipment safe and operational. An assessment and decision was made based on the prioritisation criteria on whether to do more than just replace equipment. It was preferable to take a forward planning approach when considering how many and which spaces to undertake enhancement projects.

· There were ongoing conversations regarding the land between Te Okuroa Drive and Union Drive as it was acknowledged that this was a priority for the community. There had been different views on what the community wanted versus what the Bluehaven Group wanted to do. This was being revisited and staff were looking to see what could be done in terms of moving forward.

· One of the differences accounted for in terms of prioritisation was that some locations were also tourist destinations, however the comments around inequity were taken on board. Staff would welcome the opportunity to explore direction around future prioritisation as gaps had been identified in the analysis that had been undertaken. It was important to progress with the chosen enhancement projects outlined in the report as a lot of planning and preparation had already taken place.

· Most of the playground equipment that was removed from a site was at the end of its life, but consideration was given to whether it could be reused or recycled.

· The few reusable parts of the waterfront playground would be installed at Yatton Park.

· Primary schools were not included in Council’s level of service, however areas with no school playground were considered for prioritisation over those that had them

Discussion points raised

· The team were acknowledged for their work on the enhancement projects as it was about investing in the community, a critical part of which were playgrounds.

· It was felt that there was somewhat of an inequity and inequality issue not only around playgrounds but also regarding amenities and infrastructure. Some communities were overlooked and were not experiencing the same prioritisation as others and it was queried whether reconsideration of the locations could be taken into account.

Actions

· That staff provide Councillors with like for like playground equipment replacement costs.

· That a workshop be held before the end of the year to discuss the enhancement project prioritisation direction.

Committee Resolution CTE2/24/9

Moved: Cr Rick Curach

Seconded: Cr Rod Taylor

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Engagement on Five Playground and Reserve Enhancement Projects".

(b) Understands the engagement approach, summarised in this report, for the design and delivery of proposed playground and reserve enhancement projects which are scheduled to have engagement commencing in the 2024 calendar year. The specific sites are:

(i) Hopukiore – Mount Drury Playground.

(ii) Neighbourhood reserves – Liston Park, Beaumaris Boulevard Reserve, Emerald Shores Reserve and Kiriwehi Reserve.

(iii) It is noted that the final approval for the projects will be made on 29^th October 2024.

Carried

11 Discussion of late items

Nil

12 Closing karakia

Cr Hautapu Baker closed the meeting with a karakia.

The meeting closed at 12.58.

The minutes of this meeting were confirmed as a true and correct record at the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting held on 18 November 2024.

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

Cr Kevin Schuler

CHAIRPERSON

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.2 Annual Plan 2025/26 - Communications and Engagement Approach

File Number: A16770107

Author: Josh Logan, Team Leader: Corporate Planning

Ceilidh Dunphy, Community Relations Manager

Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance

Purpose of the Report

1. The purpose of this report is for the committee to agree to an outline of a proposed communications and engagement approach for the Annual Plan 2025/26 to ensure effective community participation in the decision-making process.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Annual Plan 2025/26 - Communications and Engagement Approach".

(b) Adopts “Option 3: Enhanced” approach to communications and engagement for the Annual Plan 2025/26 and confirms the description and budget from the options:

(i) Description: …

(ii) Budget: …

(c) Notes that Elected Members will need to make themselves available for communications and engagement events during the period 28 March to 28 April 2025.

(d) Notes that that a further report with the full communications and engagement plan for the Annual Plan 2025/26 will be reported to the Community, Transparency and Engagement Committee on 3 March 2025 along with the draft annual plan consultation document.

Executive Summary

2. This report presents a proposed approach to communications and engagement for the 2025/26 Annual Plan, detailing various levels of community engagement, from minimum level to an enhanced level to encourage active participation. The options analysis includes associated costs and statutory considerations, with a recommendation for the preferred option based on its potential benefits.

Background

3. The annual plan is a critical document that sets out the Council's proposed activities, budgets, and funding arrangements for the upcoming financial year. Engagement with the community can ensure that an annual plan reflects the needs and aspirations of the local community. Previous engagement processes have shown that community members value opportunities to provide input, especially on matters directly impacting local services and rates.

4. In past years, the Council has undertaken various engagement initiatives to gather community input on both annual and long-term plans. These efforts have included public meetings and surveys. While these methods have provided valuable insights, there have been challenges in reaching a broad and diverse audience. A key challenge is encouraging the community to participate in the formal submission process.

5. Lessons Learned:

· Going to where the people are: We have found higher levels of engagement in statutory planning processes are achieved in an informal setting where people are able to talk through their views on proposals. For example, in the last long-term plan engagement period staff and Commissioners attended markets and shopping malls. The information gathered from these types of events are largely from members of the community we don’t normally hear from. However, we have also found that this does not necessarily translate to the person then going on to make a formal submission. Conversely, it should also be noted that Council-run drop-in sessions at Council premises have had very low levels of attendance and engagement.

· Inclusivity: Actively reaching out to underrepresented groups, including youth and minority communities, to ensure their voices are heard.

· Transparency: Providing clear and timely information about how community feedback is used in decision-making processes to build trust and credibility.

· Feedback Mechanisms: Establishing processes for collecting and responding to community feedback to demonstrate that their input is valued and considered.

6. The Annual Plan 2025/26 comes at a time of significant change and challenges for the community. Issues such as cost of living, traffic congestion, central government policy direction changes, housing affordability, climate change, and infrastructure development are at the forefront of public concern. The Council recognises that addressing these complex issues requires a collaborative approach, where community input is not only sought but actively integrated into planning and decision-making processes.

7. The 2024-34 Long-term Plan adopted in April 2024 proposed a significant increase in capital investment over the ten years to meet improved outcomes across several strategic priorities, including:

· Creating the spaces and places for our communities to connect, play and learn

· Enabling more homes in our existing neighbourhoods and designing communities of the future in new growth areas

· Revitalising our city centre so it once again becomes the beating heart of our city

· Improving our transport network to make it easier and safer to get around

· Reducing our impact on our natural environment and strengthening our ability to cope with our changing climate.

8. A report to Council on 12 November also proposed the following set of principles to underpin the upcoming Annual Plan 2025/26 to be built on:

· Looking after what we have got

· Paying a fair share

· Ongoing financial sustainability

· Affordability

· Growth pays for growth

· Value for money

9. To achieve these strategic priorities and adhere to the principles, Council aims to implement a communications and engagement approach that:

· Ensures that all community members have access to accurate and comprehensive information about the Annual Plan 2025/26.

· Actively seeks community feedback on proposed issues for consultation and incorporates this feedback into the final annual plan.

· Engages community members in meaningful dialogue.

· Partners with local organisations and stakeholders to leverage their expertise and resources.

· Provides opportunities for community members to take an active role in decision-making processes.

10. By building on past experiences and addressing current challenges, the Council aims to create an inclusive and effective communications and engagement plan for the 2025/26 Annual Plan. This approach will ensure that the annual plan not only meets statutory requirements but also reflects the diverse needs and aspirations of the new Council and its community.

Deliberative democracy

11. There are many different forms of deliberative democracy that can be used to engage with the community.

12. From community drop-in sessions to community assemblies to referendum, some of which council has used before and many we are keen to use in the future for suitable projects. The breadth of topics in the annual plan, scale of participation and timeline make some of these options more suitable for an annual plan than others.

13. Community drop-in sessions at markets, shopping centres and events can work well as we reach parts of the community who might not ordinarily engage with council. Using our rates database and engagement database to create a kind of online panel who are encouraged to fill out our online survey, which has not been used before for an annual plan, could also drive-up engagement numbers significantly.

Statutory Context

14. The Local Government Act 2002 requires councils to involve communities in decision-making processes. Section 82 of the Act outlines the principles of consultation, which include providing clear information, ensuring that the community is aware of the decision-making process, and giving people a reasonable opportunity to present their views. Additionally, Section 93A specifies the need for public consultation when a proposed annual plan differs significantly from the long-term plan.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

15. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):

	Contributes
We are an inclusive city	ü
We value, protect and enhance the environment	ü
We are a well-planned city	ü
We can move around our city easily	ü
We are a city that supports business and education	ü

16. There are no significant direct community outcome implications from adoption of this report. However, an annual plan seeks to enable council to make progress against all its community outcomes.

Options Analysis

17. Staff propose the following three options for differing levels of communications and engagement, each level incorporating and building upon the previous option. Staff recommend an enhanced option and seek direction from the Committee on the types of activities they would expect to see in the definition and also where the Committee’s level of comfort is for the cost of the proposed engagement approach. The three options for levels of communications and engagement are:

Option 1: Minimum

· There is no statutory obligation to consult on an annual plan unless there is significant or material change from the long-term plan. However, it is recommended that we do consult on the upcoming annual plan regardless.

· Description: Providing information to the public about the draft annual plan through channels such as the Council website, social media, and e-newsletters. Limited paid media schedule (mix of digital and newspaper). Actively seeking feedback from the community on specific elements of the annual plan through submission and hearing processes.

· Estimated Cost: Up to $20,000

· Pros: Low-cost, ensures the community is informed, legally compliant.

· Cons: Limited input from harder to reach members of the community, may result in feedback that is not representative of the wider community, risks overlooking community needs.

· Objective: Raise awareness only through Council’s channels about the annual plan process and collects submission feedback on key issues to inform decision-making.

Option 2: Regular

· Description: All Options listed in 1 with the following potential additions:

o paid media schedule (mix of digital, newspaper, billboard and radio advertising)

o council-based Q&A community sessions

o use of rates database and engagement database to reach maximum numbers of ratepayers and residents.

· Estimated Cost: $21,000 - $80,000

· Pros: Direct community input, focused, cost-effective.

· Cons: Potential for low participation, may miss broader perspectives.

· Objective: Raise awareness throughout the community about the annual plan process and collects feedback on key issues to inform decision-making.

Option 3: Enhanced (Recommended)

· This contains elements more aligned to what we would do for a long-term plan engagement coupled with some things that we haven’t done before.

· Description: All options listed in 1 and 2 with the following potential additions:

o increased paid media schedule (mix of digital, newspaper, billboard and radio advertising)

o utilise Newsbeat, our newly launched webpage hosting TCC news, to share councillor video content promoting engagement opportunities and consultation questions

o pre-engagement with identified stakeholders

o community drop in sessions in each ward where councillors and staff go to community events and areas of high foot traffic to promote consultation and answer questions on the draft annual plan

o council based Q&A session is replaced by Town hall large scale event at the University of Waikato, led by the mayor and recorded

o a demographically representative market research survey managed by a research company.

· Estimated Cost: $81,000 - $200,000

· Pros: Focused, broader insights, strengthens council-community relationships, balances reach and depth, potential for higher level of public participation, builds community ownership of decisions, fosters innovation.

· Cons: Higher cost, time-intensive, may miss broader perspectives.

· Objective: Foster collaboration and incorporate community input directly into planning.

Risk Analysis of options

Risk	Likelihood	Impact	Mitigation Strategy
Non-compliance with LGA 2002 consultation requirements	Low	High	Option 1 is created to at least meet this standard minimum.
Insufficient wider community engagement	High	Moderate	Use a variety of communication channels and engagement methods in each option.
Budget constraints limiting engagement	Medium	High	Recommended option seeks to strike a balance for cost-effectiveness and doing something more than last time.
Negative public perception if engagement is too limited	Medium	Moderate	Proactively communicate engagement opportunities and outcomes.

Financial Considerations

18. The costs associated with each engagement option vary. The Committee is invited to consider the budgetary implications and give an indication of the level of funds they want used for communications and engagement of the draft annual plan accordingly to ensure its intended engagement outcomes are achieved.

Legal Implications / Risks

19. Failure to adequately engage the community could result in non-compliance with the Local Government Act 2002, specifically Sections 82 and 93A, which outline consultation requirements. Inadequate engagement may also lead to legal challenges or reputational damage. Therefore, it is essential to adopt an approach that meets statutory obligations while ensuring effective public participation.

Consultation / Engagement

20. Consultation on the annual plan will be in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 and the details of engagement will be further developed and presented at meetings in March 2025.

Significance

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter of an annual plan is of high significance. This is because it affects all residents, ratepayers and businesses in, and visitors to, the city, and because it involves council’s resource allocation decisions and rating decisions for the next year and potentially beyond.

24. However, the decisions to be made in response to this report are considered of medium significance as they are just determining a proposed approach to communications and engagement for the annual plan. The draft annual plan itself will be consulted on next year in March.

ENGAGEMENT

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

Next Steps

26. The indicative draft annual plan will be reported to Council on 9 December 2024.

27. The draft annual plan will be reported to Council on 10 February 2025.

28. A further report with the full communications and engagement plan for the draft annual plan along with the draft consultation document will be reported to Community, Transparency and Engagement Committee on 3 March 2025.

Attachments

Nil

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.3 Annual Residents Survey 2024/25 - Wave One Results and 2023/24 Benchmarking Report

File Number: A16475182

Author: Josh Logan, Team Leader: Corporate Planning

Authoriser: Christine Jones, General Manager: Strategy, Growth & Governance

Purpose of the Report

1. The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of the results from the Annual Residents Survey for the first quarter of 2024/25 (Wave One).

2. This report also includes an overview of the results from the Annual Residents Survey Benchmarking Report for 2023/24.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Annual Residents Survey 2024/25 - Wave One Results and 2023/24 Benchmarking Report".

Executive Summary

3. Each year, council seeks feedback from its residents regarding their perception on various aspects of council provided services and initiatives. This survey is carried out over four waves during the year and is collated into an annual report. The results of the most recent survey are reported to this Committee.

4. This report, along with the material in attachment one, provides a high-level summary of the Wave one results of the Annual Residents Survey.

5. The report also provides, and overview of the benchmarking report done by Key Research against the 17 other councils it conducts the Annual Residents Survey for. It compares this council’s results against the group’s highest, lowest, and average scores to assess where this council sits in that group of 189 councils.

Background

6. The Annual Residents Survey forms part of a wider set of information we have around engagement with the Tauranga community and their wants, needs and perceptions of council and of Tauranga as a place to live.

7. Survey results help council staff assess the performance of council against a set of pre-determined actions and performance levels, including those outlined in the Long-term Plan.

8. Using a post-to-online method, 159 surveys have been undertaken with Tauranga City residents during this first wave. An invitation letter, containing an embedded link to an online survey, was sent to a random selection of residents, sourced from the Electoral Roll, with a subsequent reminder follow up.

9. Wave One fieldwork was conducted from 26 August 2024 to 27 September 2024.

10. A summary of the high-level survey results of the 2024/25 full year compared to 2023/24, and their trend is shown in the table below:

Measure	2023/24 Result	2024/25 YTD Result	Trend vs previous year
Overall performance	34%	43%	5
Overall reputation	26%	24%	6
Overall value for money	34%	33%	6
Overall core services deliverables	54%	62%	5
Overall water management	56%	63%	5
Overall road and footpaths	35%	53%	5
Overall waste management	68%	80%	5
Overall outdoor spaces	71%	76%	5
Overall public facilities	70%	74%	5

11. Further information on each of the overall sections and the measures within, along with a summary of the verbatim comments, are included in the report as Attachment 1.

12. The 2023/24 full year report highlighted three areas of council performance as these measures have the highest impact on residents’ overall perception of the council combined with a relatively low performance. The results for Wave One for these three areas are discussed below and in the attached report.

13. The below graphs used are XmR (Moving Range) charts. An XmR is a type of control chart used in process improvement and statistical analysis to monitor the variation in a single data series over time. The charts below track individual data points, showing how each measurement compares to the overall average and upper and lower control limits (shaded blue area), which define the expected range of natural variation. The XmR chart helps identify trends, shifts, or unusual variations in a process, making it useful for detecting changes and ensuring that processes remain stable and predictable.

14. Trust

Graph 1 – Trust YTD

Graph 2 - Trust by wave

· Trust - 20% of respondents are satisfied or very satisfied with Tauranga City Council, down from 26% in the full 2023/24 year.

· The XmR Charts demonstrate that satisfaction levels initially declined significantly and had begun to recover, although they have dropped in the latest wave.

15. Quality of Services

Graph 3 – Quality of services YTD

Graph 4 - Quality of services by wave

· Quality of services - 47% of respondents are satisfied or very satisfied with Tauranga City Council, up from 42% in the full 2023/24 year.

· The XmR Charts demonstrate that satisfaction levels with quality of services have remained relatively steady with the biggest range in variation seen between 2019/20 and 2020/21.

16. Annual rates fair and reasonable

Graph 5 - Annual rates fair and reasonable YTD

Graph 6 - Annual rate fair and reasonable by wave

· Annual Rates - 27% of respondents are satisfied or very satisfied with Tauranga City Council, up from 25% in the full 2023/24 year.

· The XmR Charts demonstrate that satisfaction levels with annual rates being fair and reasonable has declined year on year since 18/19. The variation between the wave data shows that W1 usually sees a drop in the result which could corelate to the receiving of the first rates notice of the year.

Annual Residents Survey Benchmarking Report 2023/24.

17. This is a recent comparative analysis report, which benchmarks Tauranga City Council against 17 other councils that use the same research provider (Key Research). The other councils, including 15 district councils and three city councils are listed on page three of Attachment 2.

18. The specific objectives of Key Research compiling this research were to understand residents’ satisfaction with services and facilities provided by councils across New Zealand and to benchmark the key performance indicators against other councils.

19. In different councils, respondents were selected at random from the Electoral Roll, ratepayer database, and/or email contacts collected through previous years’ surveys. The questionnaires were designed in consultation with councils and were structured to provide a comprehensive set of measures relating to core activities, services, and infrastructure, and to provide a wider perspective of performance. This includes assessment of reputation and knowledge of council’s activities.

20. Post data collection, the samples were weighted to be exactly representative of key population demographics for each area based on the 2018 Census. At an aggregate level, the surveys have an expected 95% confidence interval (margin of error) of between +/- 3.2% and +/- 4.8%.

21. Maximum, minimum, and average scores for key performance indicators are shown and benchmarked based on 18 councils’ performances. Questions used are either identical or closely related, allowing for comparison. To allow better and more extensive benchmarking, several measures are presented as an average score of all related measures in the relevant section.

22. The report results show initially on pages four and five that all-council averages had fallen for all but three benchmark measures from 2022/23 to 2023/24. This could potentially be attributed to dissatisfaction with proposed high rate rises in councils’ Long-term Plans. It was reported around New Zealand media earlier this year that the average rise across the country was 15%. Uncertainty around three water reform may be another reason for nationwide dissatisfaction.

23. Below, Graph 7 compares council’s high-level results for 2023/2024 against the average from all councils and also the highest and lowest score of those metrics.

24. The graph shows the results of ‘overall satisfaction’ and ‘image and reputation’ are below the all-council average. It should be noted in the report (Attachment 2) that the all-council average also declined between 2022/23 and 2023/24 pointing to a lack of satisfaction and image and reputation issues for the sector.

Graph 7

25. For core service deliverables, Graph 8 below shows that Tauranga was comparable with the all-council average for all our core service deliverables. Although as noted in the attached Wave 1 report (in Attachment 1), this year we have seen some good improvements compared to last year already in these measures.

Graph 8

Statutory Context

26. The Annual Residents Survey allows effective monitoring of performance and insights to be gained to inform future planning.

Options Analysis

27. There are no options associated with this report. The report is provided as information only.

Financial Considerations

28. There are no financial implications or risks associated with this report.

Legal Implications / Risks

29. There are no legal implications or risks associated with this report.

Consultation / Engagement

30. This report is made public.

Significance

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

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

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

(b) Any persons who are likely to be particularly affected by, or interested in, the matter.

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

ENGAGEMENT

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

Next Steps

35. The next wave (Wave 2) for 2024/25 is due to be collected during November - December 2024 with the results scheduled to be reported to this committee in February 2025.

Attachments

1. Annual Residents Survey 2024_25 - Wave 1 - Performance Report - A16875419 (Separate Attachments 1)

2. ARS - Benchmarking 2023-24 - Tauranga City Council - A16740354 (Separate Attachments 1)

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.4 Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy and Other Funding Related Policies Review

File Number: A15477358

Author: Sam Fellows, Manager: City Partnerships

Jennifer Ross, Policy Analyst

Authoriser: Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships

Purpose of the Report

1. This report seeks consideration and approval of a draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy for consultation with key stakeholders in place of the outdated Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy, and to rescind the Community Share Agreements and City Partnerships policies.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy and Other Funding Related Policies Review".

(b) Gives direction on its preferred options of those proposed in paragraph 22 of this report, and in the draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy:

(i) Rename the policy to reflect a wider approach.

(ii) Confirm the definition and use of support agreements as it is in the draft policy.

(iii) Confirm the definition and use of supporter as it is in the draft policy.

(iv) Confirm clause 5.1 that support opportunities are limited to community projects, facilities and activities.

(v) Confirm clause 5.2 to exclude entering into arrangements with parties whose values, practices or products conflict with the Council’s values and policies, or are injurious to health.

(vi) Confirm clause 5.4.2 to allow use of the Council name, logo or images in relation to support arrangements without Council approval unless specifically required.

(vii) Confirm clause 5.7.2 to use an open, competitive process to enter into sponsorship arrangements where that is practical.

(viii) Confirm clause 6.2 to use delegated authority limits for expenditure as a guide to delegated authority for Council staff entering into support arrangements of various values.

(c) Approves the draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy for consultation with key stakeholders, subject to any amendments required to give effect to the decisions made under recommendation (b).

(d) Delegates to the General Manger: City Development & Partnerships the authority to amend the draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy as required following the decisions made under recommendation (b) and make minor editorial or presentation changes to the draft policy for correction or clarity.

(e) Rescinds the following outdated policies:

(i) Community Share Agreements Policy; and

(ii) City Partnerships Policy.

(f) Delegates to staff the authority to make the marked-up amendments to the Naming Policy for consistency, when the Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy is adopted.

Executive Summary

2. We have reviewed the Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy, alongside the Community Share Agreements Policy and the City Partnerships Policy.

3. The review process involved consultations with both internal users and external stakeholders. We also looked at the approaches taken by other councils to inform our approach. Through this we gathered a range of perspectives and insights to inform our policy options.

4. We propose to rename the Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy, updating its contents to align with the current and anticipated future environment for funding community facilities and activities. This has resulted in the creation of the draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy (Attachment One).

5. Options for inclusion in the draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy are provided for your consideration in this report.

6. The Community Share Agreements Policy and the City Partnerships Policy, while once valuable, are now outdated and no longer align with current practices. Therefore, it is appropriate to rescind these policies.

7. Through this review process we have also noted that minor amendments are required to paragraph 5.7.3 of the Naming Policy for consistency between the policies and request a delegation to staff to make the changes marked up in the attached draft of the Naming Policy (Attachment Two).

Background

8. Between 2003 and 2021 council ran a city partnership programme, known initially as the City Partnership Programme and later as Project Tauranga. This programme saw participating organisations partner with the council to contribute their time, money and expertise to undertake or contribute to projects that benefitted the community of this rapidly growing city.

9. To support this programme, policies were implemented including the City Partnerships Policy, the Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy, and the Community Share Agreements Policy.

10. As Tauranga continues to grow, council staff are seeking to deliver the community facilities and activities that are needed in ways that are affordable to ratepayers. Engaging with community-minded organisations and individuals for collaboration and support has been identified as a way to do this.

11. When council staff turned to the existing policies for guidance, they found that these policies are out of date and don’t reflect current best practice, and a policy review was initiated.

12. Our review involved a series of emails and meetings with internal and external stakeholders. This included representatives from City Development & Partnerships, Spaces and Places, Venues and Events, Takawaenga Māori Unit, Transport, Community Development, and our Council-Controlled Organisations (CCOs). Additionally, we reached out to existing sponsors, funding organisations, local philanthropic individuals, and potential corporate sponsors and partners for input.

13. These discussions highlighted the importance of building relationships that could generate support and sponsorship, while also respecting the cultural significance of tangata whenua gifted names. We explored the potential for naming rooms or spaces within buildings as a means to raise funds and acknowledge contributors, recognising that this approach may not be suitable for all situations.

14. Investigating other New Zealand councils provided limited examples of sponsorship policies where the council is seeking to have council-run projects sponsored by others. Timaru and Nelson have policies that are similar to ours but are more recent and deal with both sponsorship and naming rights for their community facilities. The bigger cities (Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch) have policies focused on where those councils will provide sponsorship for others to deliver community projects, or enter into partnership arrangements with community organisations for the delivery of those projects.

15. This review process has provided valuable insights and guided us to propose a refinement of our policies to better serve our community and stakeholders. By fostering strong partnerships with organisations and individuals that share our community values, we aim to create a sustainable policy for future sponsorships and support.

16. Specifically, the review identified that:

(a) The City Partnership Programme Policy 2009 supported the partnership programmes which have ceased, so staff recommend that the Committee rescind this policy. This review is an opportunity to merge aspects from this policy that remain relevant into the new Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy.

(b) The Community Share Agreement Policy 2005 was developed to guide agreements between council and another entity for a shared use of a facility or land to enable or increase public access. This 19 year old policy is no longer in use. The remaining Community Share Agreements are stand-alone documents and do not rely on the policy to continue. Staff recommend that the Committee rescind this redundant policy.

(c) The Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy has retained the most relevance but after almost twenty years it no longer reflects the current environment and best practice. Our review has focused on proposing to update the intention and concepts of this policy to provide council staff with a current and transparent approach to seeking funding and support for community facilities and activities in Tauranga.

17. The product of this review process is the attached draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy (Attachment One).

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

18. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):

	Contributes
We are an inclusive city	ü
We value, protect and enhance the environment	☐
We are a well-planned city	ü
We can move around our city easily	☐
We are a city that supports business and education	☐

19. The City Vision adopted by Council and developed in conjunction with the community, outlines our collective vision for the city. ‘Tauranga, together we can’ captures the vision for a collaborative approach to realising a city that ‘lifts each other up’, and ‘fuels possibility’.

20. The vision and strategic framework inform the council’s plans and policies, which guide the implementation of these higher-level strategies in council’s day-to-day activities. It is important that council’s approach to seeking additional funding and support for our community facilities and activities is aligned with the council’s strategic direction. More specifically, the Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy should encourage the development of relationships with organisations and individuals to achieve a city with successful, inclusive, and thriving communities. This will involve ensuring that the council works to deliver community facilities and activities that are well planned, supported, and funded by members of the community as well as ratepayers.

Options Analysis

21. While council may consider a new relationships programme when the time and appetite for those relationships with the council is right, for now, we propose council adjust the sponsorship policy to allow a more inclusive approach to finding support for community facilities and activities in our city.

22. Based on the review described in the background section above, issues have been identified and policy details are proposed in Table One. In each case, the recommended option has been inserted in the draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy.

Table One: Issues and options in the draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy

Reference in draft policy	Issue	Options
Title	Rename the policy The existing title “Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy” is uninspiring and potentially limits how staff and the community approach using the policy. This can be addressed by updating the title of the policy to “Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy” as this is clearer about what the policy is for, that it applies to a wider range of arrangements than traditional sponsorship, and that it is available to organisations that are not corporate or might not consider themselves to be grouped with corporates.	(a) status quo. Continue with a corporate sponsorship focus. Or (b) rename the policy to reflect a wider approach. (RECOMMENDED)
3.	Definition of support agreements The term "support agreements" has been proposed instead of "sponsorship agreements" to give staff guidelines for entering various types of arrangements. The Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy focused only on sponsorships, a commercial arrangement. Now, without a partnership programme, this Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy can be used for more types of funding arrangements to ensure they align with the council's goals and values even if they are not commercial arrangements.	(a) confirm the definition and use of support agreements as it is. (RECOMMENDED) Or (b) amend the definition to exclude grants, donations or non-commercial arrangements.
3.	Definition of supporter Similar to the issue above, the term “supporter” has been proposed instead of “sponsor”.	(a) confirm the definition and use of supporter as it is. (RECOMMENDED) Or (b) amend the definition to focus on sponsors.

5.1

What can be supported

This clause restricts the support arrangements to only being for community facilities and activities. This is consistent with the Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy and removes the possibility of sponsorship for an ongoing function of Council (the KPMG finance team?) or an operational council facility (the PAL dog food Animal Shelter?).

(a) confirm support opportunities are limited to community facilities and activities. (RECOMMENDED)

(b) permit any function of the council to be sponsored subject to compliance with the policy.

5.2

Who council will not enter into support agreements with

These terms are consistent with the Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy and exclude supporters whose values, practices or products conflict with the council’s values and policies, or are injurious to health. No specific industries are excluded. Clause 5.2.1 includes a direction for staff to undertake due diligence to understand prospective supporters.

(a) confirm this clause. (RECOMMENDED)

(b) exclude specific industries and organisations from entering into support arrangements.

5.4.2

Default position on use of council name, logo, images and link to council website

This term is consistent with the Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy and does not require the supporter to submit all uses of the council name, logo or images to the council for approval prior to use. This default position does not prevent a support agreement from including terms that specify when council approval may be required.

(a) confirm this clause. (RECOMMENDED)

(b) introduce a requirement for approval prior to the use of some or all of the council name, logo or images.

(c) introduce criteria for when a support agreement might require approval prior to the use of some or all of the council name, logo or images.

5.7.2

Open, competitive process is for sponsorship arrangements

This term is consistent with the Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy as it applies to sponsorship arrangements. The council is to use an open, competitive process to enter into sponsorship arrangements where that is practical. It has not been extended to all support agreements due to the sensitive nature of some funding processes which may be out of council’s control.

(a) confirm this clause. (RECOMMENDED)

(b) introduce additional guidance on expectations for the process of seeking sponsorship.

6.2

Delegated authority to Chief Executive

This term is consistent with the Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy. Due to the sensitive nature of support arrangements and their potential political implications if things go wrong, some governance bodies keep the final approval rights for all sponsorship deals. Where support arrangements clearly fit within the policy, the Chief Executive and/or their delegates may have final approval for agreements up to the value of their delegated authority limits for expenditure. Where an agreement includes naming rights for council facilities the approval requirements of the Naming Policy will apply regardless of value.

(a) confirm this clause. (RECOMMENDED)

(b) require Council approval for all sponsorship arrangements, regardless of value or duration.

(c) set up risk-based criteria to determine the level of authority required for approval, rather than relying on the dollar value.

23. The committee may retain the existing policies as they are, rescind them, or, in the case of the Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy and the Naming Policy, elect to adopt some or all of the proposed draft policy.

24. Table Two: Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy Review Options

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option One: Status quo – do not approve the proposed policy and do not rescind the Sponsorship from Corporates and Others Policy.

· Requires no changes or further consultation.

· The policy would remain outdated and limit the approach of staff to seeking traditional sponsorship.

· Does not address issues raised by staff or stakeholders in respect of taking a wider approach to seeking funding and in-kind support for community facilities and activities.

Option Two:

Rename the policy and adopt the proposed updated version of the policy for stakeholder consultation.

RECOMMENDED

· Addresses feedback from stakeholders such as “The existing policy should be reworded to acknowledge that there are mutual benefits to sponsorship arrangements or other funding agreements, beyond reducing costs to the council.”

· Provides more opportunity for community involvement in the provision of community facilities and activities.

· Addresses issues raised by staff in respect of clearly providing opportunities to take a more relationship-based approach to soliciting funding and in-kind support to enable our provision of community facilities and activities.

· May increase the likelihood of success for staff seeking funding and in-kind support and increase our provision of facilities and activities to our community without increasing the burden on ratepayers.

· Amending the policy may be negatively received by some parts of the community who view this as the council competing for funding from local philanthropists and businesses.

Option Three:

Rescind this policy.

· Council should not enter into support arrangements that may compromise the ability of not-for-profit organisations within Tauranga to secure their own sponsorship. Council should not compete with its own ratepayers for support and sponsorship.

· Sponsorship of community activities or facilities reduces the council’s costs and as such provides benefits to all ratepayers. Council should actively pursue support arrangements for the benefit of all ratepayers.

25. Table Three: City Partnerships Policy Review Options

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option One: Status quo – do not rescind the policy.

· Requires no changes.

· The policy would remain outdated and unused.

Option Two:

Rescind this policy.

RECOMMENDED

· Removes an unnecessary policy from our books and makes finding relevant policies easier.

· None identified.

26. Table Four: Community Share Agreements Policy Review Options

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option One: Status quo – do not rescind the policy.

· Requires no changes.

· The policy would remain outdated and unused.

Option Two:

Rescind this policy.

RECOMMENDED

· Removes an unnecessary policy from our books and makes finding relevant policies easier.

· None identified.

27. Table Five: Naming Policy Amendment Options

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Option One: Status quo – do not approve the proposed amendment to clause 5.7.3 of the policy.

· Requires no changes.

· Does not address issues raised by staff in respect of consistency with the updated Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy.

Option Two:

Delegate that staff are to amend clause 5.7.3 of the policy as marked up in Attachment Two.

RECOMMENDED

· Clarifies that granting of naming rights may be considered for parts of facilities as well as whole facilities.

· Includes correct reference to the Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy, if option two of table two is selected.

· Unnecessary if option one of table two is selected.

28. Consultation and engagement with key stakeholders supports the recommended Option Two in the tables numbered two to five.

Financial Considerations

29. The proposed changes to the Policy may positively impact on the cost of council’s delivery of community facilities and activities. The positive impact will only come about if the council is successful in developing relationships with community-minded individuals and organisations that can provide financial or in-kind support for those facilities and activities.

30. If the committee wanted to publicly consult on the recommended amendments to the policy, then consultation costs, covered by the existing policy budget, will be incurred.

Legal Implications / Risks

31. This matter complies with the Council’s legal and policy requirements.

TE AO MĀORI APPROACH

32. This review and report have been informed by discussions with members of the Takawaenga Māori Unit who have advised that the council should seek the views of Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana (“Te Rangapū”) on this matter once the draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy is approved for consultation.

33. The updated policy has a more inclusive approach to support and sponsorship, with the potential to provide opportunities for collaboration with Māori organisations and businesses to help provide community facilities and activities where appropriate. This aligns with the Whanaungatanga principle, which emphasises building and nurturing relationships and networks within and for Māori communities.

34. To align with the council's vision of being an inclusive city, Tauranga Mataraunui, the proposed principles of this policy include reference to Mana Whenua, guiding staff to engage with iwi and hapū from Tauranga Moana when seeking support for community facilities and activities.

CLIMATE IMPACT

35. This is an administrative policy, the recommendations in this report do not have implications for our climate impact.

Consultation / Engagement

36. As noted in paragraph 12, initial consultation and engagement has focused on gathering feedback from staff as well as some individuals and organisations in our community who have provided support for council projects in the past.

Significance

37. 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.

38. 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 proposal; and

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

ENGAGEMENT

40. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the proposal is of low significance, officers are of the opinion that limited and targeted further engagement is required prior to the Council making a decision.

41. The proposed changes to this policy are anticipated as being of low public interest as the changes affect most directly how our staff approach leading organisations and individuals in our community to assist with funding and supporting community facilities and activities. Council can choose to engage on matters assessed as of low significance. Given the nature of the proposed policy this report recommends targeted consultation with Te Rangapū and existing stakeholders as the most effective and direct method to gather feedback.

Next Steps

42. Following approval of the draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy for stakeholder consultation, staff will undertake that stakeholder consultation to be completed in early 2025. Following consultation, submission hearings, if any, will occur in the first quarter of 2025.

43. If the Committee decide that no changes to the policies are required, then no further action is required.

Attachments

1. Draft Support and Sponsorship of Tauranga Community Facilities and Activities Policy - A16958780 ⇩

2. Draft Marked up Naming Policy - A16958778 ⇩

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.5 Consultation with Tangata Whenua on Resource Consent Applications Policy Review

File Number: A16476203

Author: Sandy Lee, Policy Analyst

Dylan Makgill, Team Leader: Environmental Planning

Authoriser: Sarah Omundsen, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance

Purpose of the Report

1. To approve the draft Engaging with Tangata Whenua on Resource Consent Applications Policy for targeted consultation.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Consultation with Tangata Whenua on Resource Consent Applications Policy Review".

(b) Approves the following noteworthy changes in the updated draft Engaging with Tangata Whenua on Resource Consent Applications Policy:

(i) Revising the policy principles to: early, good faith, open mind, ongoing, genuine, respectful, and active protection (as per section 4 of draft policy).

(ii) Clarifying what engagement in relation to this policy entails, including:

a) Defining engagement as “the intentional process of working meaningfully with tangata whenua to shape and inform the idea or proposal related to a resource consent application and to better understand the potential effects of a proposal on tangata whenua” (section 3.1 of the draft policy);

b) Highlighting that engagement “may include informing, consulting, involving, collaborating and/or empowering” (section 3.1 and schedule 1);

c) Replacing ‘consultation’ with ‘engagement’ throughout the draft policy; and

d) Including a flowchart of best practice early engagement with tangata whenua (schedule 2 or draft policy).

(iii) Removing any misrepresentation of the Council’s ability to “require” consultation and clarifying that the Council can only require and ensure adequate consideration of the cultural effects of any proposed development (clause 6.1.9 of draft policy).

(iv) Expansion of the Council’s role to include supporting tangata whenua to participate effectively in the resource consent process (clause 6.1.4 and 6.2.2.1 of draft policy).

(d) Delegates to the General Manager Regulatory Services the authority to make minor editorial or presentation changes to the draft policy for correction or clarity prior to the commencement of consultation.

Executive Summary

2. Council’s Consultation with Tangata Whenua on Resource Consent Applications Policy 2006 (included as Attachment One) was developed to try to meet the council’s responsibilities under the Resource Management Act (RMA) to recognise and provide for:

(a) The relationship of Māori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu[1], and other taonga[2] (section 6(e), RMA).

(b) The protection of historic heritage from inappropriate subdivision, use, and development (section 6(f), RMA).

And to:

(c) Take into account the principles of the Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty of Waitangi) when managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources (section 8, RMA).

3. The policy encourages applicants for a resource consent to engage early with tangata whenua in the process of developing their resource consent application.

4. The policy is overdue for a review as there have been several interruptions to review work which started 10 years ago. Those who are and will be directly affected by the policy have been engaged with over the years to understand how they think the policy is working and how it can be improved. Engagement has included various workshops and discussions with tangata whenua, property developers, and relevant council staff.

5. Feedback from the engagement highlighted a need to better clarify several key areas of the policy, including what the principles are, what the recommended engagement for resource consent applications means and/or entails, and what the council’s legislated powers are in regard to enforcing consultation. Feedback also highlighted opportunities to enhance the council’s roles and responsibilities to support the engagement that is recommended, as well as the need to address a range of operational matters[3].

6. Staff have drafted a revised policy informed by the feedback, and refreshed and updated the policy document[4], and are seeking approval of the draft for targeted consultation.

Background

Review of the policy

7. The initial review of the 2006 policy began at the end of 2013 in response to a Smart Growth Strategy action to develop a sub-regional iwi consultation policy with Bay of Plenty Regional Council (BOPRC) and Western Bay of Plenty District Council (WBOPDC) for resource consent processing. However, the work was interrupted numerous times over the years, including BOPRDC and WBOPDC withdrawing from the joint consultation policy[5]. No revised policy has therefore been presented to elected members for consideration until now.

8. The draft revised policy has been informed by the input and feedback received from tangata whenua, property developers, and relevant council teams (including environmental planning and the Takawaenga Māori Unit) over the years. Since recommencing the work in mid-2023, staff have worked with Te Rangapū Mana Whenua o Tauranga Moana Partnership and a nominated subcommittee to get their feedback on various drafts and to finalise the draft revised policy.

Statutory Context

9. Consulting on resource consent applications is primarily informed by the RMA. While there is no requirement for an applicant to consult with anyone, including tangata whenua, on their resource consent application (Section 36A), the legislation takes a very structured approach to determine public participation to ensure that any potential negative impacts of a proposal are identified by those who might be impacted, and the impacts are addressed where possible.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

10. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):

	Contributes
We are an inclusive city	ü
We value, protect and enhance the environment	ü
We are a well-planned city	☐
We can move around our city easily	☐
We are a city that supports business and education	☐

11. Encouraging early engagement with tangata whenua on resource consent applications supports Council’s strategic outcome of an inclusive city by increasing the participation of iwi/hapū in the process and working more in a partnership manner. These contribute to supporting the following strategic goals and objectives, in particular:

(a) Tauranga Mataraunui – Inclusive City Strategy 2023-33 – inclusion and diversity.

(b) Mahere Haupū me Mahi Tuku Iho, Ahurea, Toi hoki, Arts, Culture and Heritage Action & Investment Plan 2023-33 – the promotion and protection of built, natural and cultural heritage in the city.

12. Encouraging early engagement with tangata whenua on resource consent applications also supports Council’s strategic outcome to value, protect and enhance the environment as it facilitates greater contribution of knowledge and insight held by tangata whenua as kaitiaki[6] of their rohe[7]. Involving tangata whenua where appropriate and working together more often also helps to build and strengthen the relationship. These contribute to supporting the following strategic goals and aspirations, in particular:

(a) Tauranga Taurikura – Environment Strategy, 2023-33 – 1) Thriving nature and biodiversity at the heart of our communities, 2) Tauranga values resources in a circular economy through kaitiakitanga, and 3) Our built environment supports the wellbeing of our natural environment.

(b) Mahere Haupū me Mahi Taiao, Kanorau Koiora hoki, Nature and Biodiversity Action & Investment Plan, 2023-33 – to develop meaningful partnerships to better deliver nature and biodiversity actions in Tauranga.

Options Analysis

13. The draft revised policy is included in Attachment Two. Where text has been substantively changed or added, it is highlighted in red. Most of these changes are relatively minor re-phrasing or clarifications; where the issues are more substantive and require a specific decision from the committee these are highlighted in the four issues below.

Issue 1: Policy principles

14. It is unclear in the existing policy what principles underpin Council’s approach to consultation with tangata whenua on resource consent applications in the policy. The ‘Principles’ (section 2) currently contains considerable detail about the council’s responsibilities under the RMA as well as paragraphs encouraging consultation at the beginning of the process, prior to lodging an application. Early consultation is also re-emphasised in section 5.1.3 where applicants are encouraged to consult at the preliminary concept stage.

15. In section 5.6 ‘Principles of Consultation’ there are also six statements describing how the parties should act when engaging in consultation. Many of these overlap with the good consultation principles set out by the Ministry for the Environment[8] and could be incorporated into the main principles of the draft policy.

16. Te Rangapū insisted that rangatiratanga[9] be a separate principle in the policy. However, rangatiratanga is taken from the articles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi and is a rights-based concept generally considered to be a matter between the Crown and tangata whenua. There are currently no obligations under the RMA to uphold Māori rights to resources, but councils are obligated to take into account the principles of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in decision-making. Active protection is generally considered a principle under Te Tiriti and could be included in the draft policy.

Table 1: Options for clarifying policy principles

	Options	Advantages	Disadvantages
1a.	Simplify relevant paragraphs in the Principles section of the existing policy, incorporate updated versions of the statements from the ‘Principles of Consultation’ section, and include a statement for rangatiratanga as a principle.	· Clarifies which values underpin Council’s approach to good/best practice engagement with tangata whenua in the policy.	· The rangatiratanga principle may create expectations from tangata whenua that council cannot legally meet under the RMA and therefore risk legal challenge.
1b.	Simplify relevant paragraphs in the Principles section of the existing policy and incorporate updated versions of the statements from the ‘Principles of Consultation’ section, and include a statement for ‘active protection’ as a principle in the draft policy (see section 4.1 of the revised policy). Recommended – see recommended resolution (b)(i).	· Clarifies which values underpin Council’s approach to good/best practice engagement with tangata whenua in the policy. · Communicates and acknowledges the desire of tangata whenua when it comes to engagement that is captured in rangatiratanga.	· Does not reflect specific request from Te Rangapū.
1c.	Status quo. Leave principles as they are and do not include any reference to rangatiratanga or similar.	None.	· Potential confusion around what principles actually underpin Council’s approach to consultation with tangata whenua. · Does not address or acknowledge the concerns raised by tangata whenua.

Issue 2: Clarifying the recommended engagement with tangata whenua

17. Te Rangapū have stressed the importance of applicants engaging early with the appropriate iwi/hapū groups on resource consent applications and being able to work more collaboratively. However, applicants do not always engage with tangata whenua even when it is considered appropriate under the policy. Consents staff also highlighted that some applicants consider engagement to have taken place when they send information to iwi/hapū for feedback even though they may not have received any response.

18. The Council acknowledges that it is only appropriate for Māori to determine their relationship, and the relationship of their culture and traditions, with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu and other taonga and kaitiakitanga[10], and this acknowledgement is reflected in the policy. As such, the involvement of tangata whenua in the resource consent application process is important to mitigate any potential negative cultural impacts of a proposal.

19. Engaging with tangata whenua in line with this policy therefore entails not simply one-off consultation to get feedback on an application. Engagement can take various forms[11] and may be undertaken at various stages for different purposes through the resource consent application process. The policy could be improved to clearly communicate and emphasise the wide-range of engagement possible.

Table 2: Options for clarifying the recommended engagement with tangata whenua.

Options

Advantages

Disadvantages

2a.

Replace ‘consultation’ with ‘engagement’ throughout the policy, including the title; include a definition of engagement (see 3.1 of the revised policy) and a clause clarifying engagement requires two-way communication (see 6.1.3) and table of the different types of engagement (see schedule 1).

Recommended – see recommended resolution (b)(ii)(a-c).

· Does not limit engagement to just ‘consultation’ which has a more limited scope for tangata whenua participation.

· Better reflects the recommended engagement in the policy that takes place at various stages in the resource consent application process.

· May create some confusion for applicants.

2b.

Include a flowchart of best practice early engagement with tangata whenua (see schedule 2 in the revised policy).

Recommended – see recommended resolution (b)(ii)(d).

· Helps clarify for applicants the steps of the process where engagement with tangata whenua is recommended.

· None.

Issue 3: Clarifying council’s legislated powers regarding consultation.

20. Tangata whenua stressed that they would like the policy to do more than just “encourage” applicants to engage with tangata whenua. However, the RMA does not allow council to require or enforce any type of engagement.

21. The existing policy currently refers to council’s obligations to “ensure” and “require consultation” with tangata whenua under the RMA which mis portrays council’s legislated powers. Council can only ensure the cultural effects of any proposed development are adequately assessed to mitigate negative impacts and this is where engagement is necessary to understand what those cultural effects are.

Issue 3: Options for clarifying council’s legislated powers regarding consultation.

	Options	Advantages	Disadvantages
3a.	Remove any misrepresentation in the policy of council’s ability to “require consultation”, and clarify instead that the council will ensure cultural effects of proposed developments will be adequately assessed (see clause 6.1.9 in the draft policy) Recommended – see recommended resolution (b)(iii).	· Helps manage expectations. · Avoids any legal issues.	· Tangata Whenua may perceive it to be reducing their ability to be involved in the process.
3b.	Keep the references to “ensure” and “require” consultation but include a statement that clearly acknowledges that the council and applicants have no duty to consult under the RMA and that council cannot legally enforce consultation.	· None.	· May create confusion as to what the council can and cannot do regarding consultation.
3c.	Status quo. Keep references to “ensuring” and “requiring” consultation in the draft policy.	· None.	· May create expectations that council is not legally able to meet. · Risks potential legal challenges.

Issue 4: The council supporting iwi/hapū in their role during the resource consent application process.

22. The existing policy sets out the roles and responsibilities of the three main parties in the resource consent process (applicant, tangata whenua and council) to achieve the objectives of the policy. Currently, iwi/hapu in Tauranga do not receive formal training on the resource consent process and therefore new RMA representatives may not always be aware of the process they need to take when asked to provide feedback on a proposed development requiring resource consent. There is an opportunity for the council to be more active in supporting tangata whenua in fulfilling their role and ensuring adequate consideration of cultural effects.

Table 4: Options for the council supporting iwi/hapū in their role during the resource consent application process.

Options

Advantages

Disadvantages

4a.

Expand the council’s role to include supporting tangata whenua to participate effectively in the resource consent process, for example, the provision of training (see 6.1.4 and the roles under 6.2.2.1 of the draft policy)

Recommended – see recommended resolution (b)(iv).

· Ensures iwi/hapū have adequate knowledge of what they need to do to respond to requests.

· The council takes a more active role which can help expedite the resource consent process.

· Helps build the relationship between the council and tangata whenua as per the policy.

· Consistent with Bay of Plenty Regional Council’s practices.

· A time cost for resource consenting staff.

4b.

Status quo. Do not include additional provisions that extend the council’s roles.

· Staff time and cost not incurred on training etc.

· Does not help to build the relationship with Tangata Whenua, which is inconsistent with the policy.

· May be more difficult to meet the objectives of the policy.

Financial Considerations

23. All costs associated with the processing of resource consent applications are set through Council’s Fees and Charges (Planning Fees) and are covered by the applicant. Any costs incurred from engagement with tangata whenua are also covered by the applicant as per the policy. The additional costs associated with resource consenting staff training new resource management representatives in each iwi/hapū will not be recovered from specific applicants.

Legal Implications / Risks

24. The council does not have the ability under the RMA to require consultation with tangata whenua on resource consent applications. The council can only ensure that there is adequate consideration of the cultural impacts of a proposed development, and this necessitates engagement and consultation with the appropriate mandated tangata whenua.

25. However, under the City Plan, the council can only require an applicant to consider and include measures to mitigate any negative cultural impact of their proposed development if the activity status allows the council to include these considerations as a condition on a resource consent decision. The policy has been amended so that these restrictions on council’s power under the RMA and City Plan are clearly and accurately communicated.

TE AO MĀORI APPROACH

26. The recommendations in this report support a number of principles in the Council’s Te Ao Māori approach. These include:

(a) Kaitiakitanga – stewardship of the natural environment. Encouraging and supporting greater and more consistent inclusion of tangata whenua in the resource consent application process helps minimise negative impacts on te Taiao / the natural environment and ensures the protection of ancestral land, water, sites, waahi tapu (sacred sites) and valued flora and fauna.

(b) Manaakitanga – ahurutanga/haumarutanga – a strong duty of care and safety for our people. Encouraging applicants to engage with tangata whenua on their resource consent applications demonstrates good faith and care by helping to ensure any proposed development projects are sensitive to and respectful of the sites that are of significance to Māori.

CLIMATE IMPACT

27. The recommendations in this report which encourage greater and more consistent involvement of tangata whenua in the resource consent applications process help to support Tauranga’s ability to enhance nature and biodiversity by:

(a) Informing better decision-making on resource consent applications with the interests of tangata whenua in protecting the natural environment.

(b) Building and strengthening the relationship with tangata whenua and developing a meaningful partnership that enables Council and tangata whenua to work together on other nature and biodiversity actions in Tauranga.

Consultation / Engagement

28. A range of stakeholders that are directly impacted by the policy have been engaged with through the extended review of this policy between 2014 and 2021. This included engaging with tangata whenua, property developers, and relevant council staff to understand what they think is working in the policy and how it could be improved. The feedback received during these discussions helped to highlight the key issues and inform the proposed policy changes.

29. Since recommencing the review in 2023, we have had further meetings with Te Rangapū to finalise the draft revised policy. The meetings included three with a nominated sub-committee on 9 October 2023, 25 January and 21 February 2024 as well as a presentation to the full Rangapū at their hui on 26 October 2023. Many of the concerns from previous discussions were reiterated but no significant new issues were raised.

30. On 24 October 2024 the draft revised policy was presented to Te Rangapū with an overview of the key changes and the next steps for the review. Te Rangapū approved the draft policy in principle, subject to further engagement with them.

Significance

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

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

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

33. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the issue is of medium significance, however the decision proposed in this report is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

34. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the decision is of low significance, officers are of the opinion that targeted consultation with affected groups is suggested[12].

35. It is proposed that targeted consultation is undertaken with affected groups, including professional consultants (planners and developers), Te Rangapū and the resource management representatives for each of the iwi/hapū in Tauranga Moana to get feedback on the draft revised policy.

36. It is proposed that the consultation takes place online and/or in-person for each group and is between November 2024 and February 2025. Members of each group will be provided a summary of the key changes to the policy and invited to provide written feedback on the draft policy through a questionnaire prompting specific responses as well as more general comments.

37. It is proposed that the consultation be promoted to the consultant groups through the council’s existing channels including the Planning Pānui and relevant mailing lists.

38. It is proposed that consultation with the Te Rangapū subcommittee takes place in late November 2024, followed by the resource management representatives for each iwi/hapū over December and January, and then with Te Rangapū in February 2025.

Next Steps

39. Any minor changes to the draft policy will be made, if required, before the policy goes out for targeted consultation. Targeted consultation will be in accordance with the proposed engagement details above, with hearings planned for early in 2025 and deliberations and adoption following that.

Attachments

1. Consultation with Tangata Whenua on Resource Consents Policy 2006 - A15686135 ⇩

2. Draft Engagement with Tangata Whenua on Resource Consent Applications Policy - Sept 2024 - A15645698 ⇩

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.6 Proposed Draft Amended Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy

File Number: A16664391

Author: Jane Barnett, Policy Analyst

Steve Pearce, Manager: Building Services

Authoriser: Sarah Omundsen, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance

Purpose of the Report

1. For the committee to consider the proposed draft amended Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy and Statement of Proposal for community consultation.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Proposed Draft Amended Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy".

(b) Approves the proposed draft amended Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings policy (Attachment One) and Statement of Proposal (Attachment Two) for community consultation.

(c) Authorises the General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance to make any necessary minor drafting or presentation changes to the draft Dangerous, Affected Building and Insanitary Buildings policy, the Statement of Proposal and related consultation material prior to the commencement of consultation.

Executive Summary

2. The Building Act 2004[13] (Act) requires Council to adopt a dangerous and insanitary buildings policy and then to review it every five years. Our current policy was last reviewed and adopted in February 2020 so is due for review.

3. Updated guidance[14] from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) along with MBIE's recommendations from the recent performance monitoring assessment of the policy, have been incorporated into a revised draft policy.

4. Any changes to the policy must be consulted on in accordance with the special consultative procedure set out in the Local Government Act 2002.

5. We are seeking the Committee’s approval of the proposed draft amended Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings policy (Attachment One) and Statement of Proposal (Attachment Two) for community consultation in February/March 2025.

Background

6. The Act requires Council to adopt a policy that sets out:

· the approach and priorities it will take in performing its functions for managing dangerous, affected and insanitary buildings and

· how the policy will apply to heritage buildings.

7. The review has been waiting on the completion of MBIE’s performance monitoring assessment of the current policy so that these findings could be incorporated into a revised policy.

8. These findings, along with updated guidance from MBIE and staff feedback, have now been incorporated to develop the draft policy. The changes are minor and are presented in the table below. These changes are also highlighted as tracked changes in the draft policy (Attachment One).

Proposed Change	Reason
Include affected in the policy title.	Recommended by MBIE and better reflects all the types of buildings that must be considered in the policy.
Include reference to the required review schedule and that the special consultation procedure must be used in the summary information box under the title of the policy.	Recommended by MBIE.
Include the word passive in section 5.1.	Recommended by MBIE.
Amend section 4 to specify the relevant principles of the Building Act 2004 and to reference council’s community outcomes.	To provide further clarity and to link the policy to our community outcomes.
Add into section 6: Council will exercise its statutory power under section 124 of the Act where action is required to avoid immediate danger or in circumstances where an acceptable solution cannot be reached by the building owner.	Recommended by MBIE.
Include a new section 10 Recording information about dangerous, affected and insanitary buildings.	Recommended by MBIE and to reflect what information is recorded and publicly available.
Note that the powers under the Civil Defence Emergency Management Act 2002 may be used by the Council instead of or in addition to the powers under the Act.	To ensure clarity and be transparent about what powers can be used in different situations.

Statutory Context

9. Council is required to have a policy and review it at five-year internals. However, section 132(5) of the Act states that a policy does not cease to have effect because it is due for review or being reviewed.

10. The policy can only be amended or replaced in accordance with the special consultative procedure in section 83 of the Local Government Act 2002.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

11. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):

	Contributes
We are an inclusive city	ü
We value, protect and enhance the environment	☐
We are a well-planned city	ü
We can move around our city easily	☐
We are a city that supports business and education	☐

12. The proposed draft amended Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy meets the council’s requirement to have a policy under the Act. The approach set out in the policy helps Tauranga be an inclusive city by protecting the health and safety of our community and reducing the potential risk posed by dangerous, affected or insanitary buildings.

Options Analysis

13. The table below sets out the advantages and disadvantages of approving the proposed draft amended Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy and Statement of Proposal for consultation.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Approve the draft amended Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy and Statement of Proposal for community consultation.

Recommended

· The draft policy will ensure the council’s approach to identifying and managing potentially dangerous, affected and insanitary buildings is transparent and consistent with MBIE’s recommendations.

· Community feedback on the draft policy can be considered.

· Meets the council’s statutory requirement to review the policy.

· Resources used for the required consultation process.

Retain the current policy and do not approve the draft amended Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings Policy and Statement of Proposal for community consultation.

· No resources will need to be used for consultation.

· No amendments from the outcome of the review – including MBIE recommendations - will be included.

Financial Considerations

14. The costs of consulting on the policy will be funded from the existing policy and bylaws budget.

TE AO MĀORI APPROACH

15. The approach set out in the proposed draft policy aligns with the principles of Manaakitanga – a strong duty of care and safety for our people and Kaitiakanga – stewardship of the natural environment.

CLIMATE IMPACT

16. There are no direct or specific climate change impacts resulting from the proposed changes to the policy.

Significance

17. 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.

18. 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.

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

ENGAGEMENT

20. Although the issue is of low significance, consultation is required under section 132(2) of the Act if Council wish to amend or replace the policy. This section of the Act requires Council to use the special consultative procedure set out in the Local Government Act 2002.

21. We also propose to undertake targeted consultation with the Medical Officer of Health, Fire and Emergency New Zealand, Tauranga Business Chamber, main street organisations, Heritage New Zealand Pouhere Taonga, Master Builders Association and the Real Estate Association.

Next Steps

22. If the committee approve the draft policy and Statement of Proposal, then community consultation will occur in February-March 2025.

23. If there are any submitters who wish to speak to their submission, the Committee will hold hearings in April next year. The Committee will then deliberate on the issues raised and formally adopt the final policy.

Attachments

1. Draft Dangerous, Afffected and Insanitary Buildings Policy - A16896575 ⇩

2. Draft Statement of Proposal - A16961365 ⇩

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.7 Potential Expansion of Papamoa Mainstreet Targeted Rate Area

File Number: A16889460

Author: Kendyl Sullivan, City Partnerships Specialist

Jeremy Boase, Manager: Strategy & Corporate Planning

Authoriser: Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships

Purpose of the Report

1. To present process options for the potential expansion of the Papamoa Mainstreet targeted rate area, and to consider other funding options that may be available.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Potential Expansion of Papamoa Mainstreet Targeted Rate Area".

(b) Supports Papamoa Unlimited commencing a process consistent with the attached expansion process document, and ensure they report back to this Committee periodically on progress.

Executive Summary

2. Papamoa Unlimited, the Papamoa mainstreet organisation, have expressed interest in expanding the area of benefit, and therefore the targeted rate area that it serves.

3. In anticipation of a request like this from one or more of the mainstreet organisations operating in Tauranga, council staff had previously prepared a draft process to address expansion requests. Engagement with the mainstreet organisations has occurred on the draft process.

4. Key elements of the draft process are that:

· The mainstreet organisation engages with its community to build support.

· The mainstreet organisation develops a value proposition for existing and new members.

· A detailed map of the proposed expansion area(s) is prepared.

· The mainstreet organisation obtains a resolution of existing members that supports the proposed expansion.

· The mainstreet organisation secures a formal ‘yes’ vote by potential new members.

· The mainstreet organisation obtains a confirmatory resolution from existing members regarding the expansion plan.

· Council includes the expanded area in its draft annual plan for consultation and then approves the new targeted rate.

5. It is critical that for any expansion of a mainstreet organisation’s area, and therefore the targeted rate, that there is strong support for that expansion both amongst existing ratepayers who are paying the targeted rate, and amongst ratepayers in the expanded area who will pay the targeted rate if the expansion proceeds. To this end, the ‘value proposition’ noted above needs to be compelling to both sets of those ratepayers.

6. This report considers the application of the proposed draft process, as well as two other options for increasing the funding base for Papamoa Unlimited. These options are detailed in the report and are highly summarised below.

Option	Who leads?	Characteristics	Engagement required	Comments
1A – Draft process as developed Recommended	Papamoa Unlimited, supported by council	Papamoa Unlimited retains same focus, but bigger area to service. Targeted rate paid by commercial ratepayers only.	Lots, both with existing members and potential new members in the expansion area.	Process takes time.
1B – Add residential ratepayers to the funding base	Council (likely)	Papamoa Unlimited likely to change focus from economic development to community-focus. Targeted rate paid by commercial and residential ratepayers.	Lots, but with residential ratepayers as well.	Process takes time. Will require a review of revenue and financing policy. Uncertain reception from residential ratepayers. Approach not supported by Papamoa Unlimited.
1C – Simplified process	Council	Papamoa Unlimited retains same focus, but bigger area to service. Targeted rate paid by commercial ratepayers only.	Minimum – could be annual plan consultation process only.	Could be quick. Maybe challengeable by reluctant new payers of the targeted rate. Value proposition may not be as well developed.

7. The report also briefly considers other potential opportunities for Papamoa Unlimited (and other mainstreet organisations) to access funding for the development or delivery of community event activities.

background – report requested

8. At the Community, Transparency and Engagement Committee on 15 October 2024, Papamoa Unlimited expressed their desire to expand their mainstreet targeted rate boundary to encompass the wider Papamoa area to which they are already, or could in the future, provide value.

9. Subsequently the Committee resolved that it:

‘Requests staff prepare an issues and options paper on expanding the Papamoa Mainstreet area that includes options on consultation and engagement with the local community’.

10. While the resolution specifically references an expansion of the Papamoa Mainstreet area, the discussion that preceded also referenced other ways that Papamoa Unlimited could increase its funding base, particularly for community-focussed events it delivers or could deliver in the future. This report addresses both issues.

background – mainstreet organisations

11. Mainstreets are areas within Tauranga where local businesses and property owners have agreed to work together, with support from council. Council supports mainstreet organisations by collecting a targeted rate from commercial and industrial properties within a defined geographical area. The funds from the targeted rate are then provided by way of a mainstreet funding grant.

12. Mainstreet organisations are operated independently as incorporated societies and their programmes and services are provided according to their members’ stated priorities. All business operators within their respective targeted rates areas are regarded by mainstreet organisations as being a mainstreet member.

13. The mainstreet organisations are required to be compliant with their own rules and ‘constitution’, and their funding agreement with Council. The funding agreement sets out the delivery of services, and the following objectives to be achieved as part of their organisational plans:

(a) To promote, encourage and advance the interests of the businesses in the area.

(b) Promote and encourage the appearance, ambience and services of the area to make it more attractive, interesting and inviting to shoppers, visitors and persons carrying on business in the area.

(c) Develop economic activities that benefit, support, and provide value to their members and the mainstreet business community.

(d) Carry out the objects set out in the mainstreet organisation’s constitution and rules.

(e) Meet its obligations to the mainstreet members and third parties.

14. These objectives are generally consistent with mainstreet organisations’ constitutions.

15. There is a difference between community organisations and mainstreet organisations. As demonstrated above in the objectives, mainstreet organisations are focused on the interests of businesses and members in the mainstreet area.

background – mainstreet expansion process

16. Over the past two years, several of the mainstreet organisations have indicated a desire to expand the targeted rate area of their mainstreet.

17. Expansions should be undertaken by mainstreet organisations only where there is support from local businesses and a strong business/strategic case for expansion. An expansion needs to benefit or support all the ratepayers that are contributing.

18. Any expansion process requires several steps which can be worked toward over time. In the first instance, building support and engagement with those eligible voters located within the proposed expansion area. Secondly, identifying how the existing mainstreet organisation would need to evolve to meet the needs of the businesses located within the proposed wider area.

Process developed

19. Council staff have reviewed the process to expand a targeted rate area, based on the policies of other councils across New Zealand that support best practice. The draft expansion process was provided to the mainstreet organisations for their information and feedback, and to share with their members.

20. Initial feedback included concerns around polling and equity of rating where the existing boundary is adjacent to other commercial premises that are receiving incidental benefit of proximity, but not paying the targeted rate. This feedback has been addressed and we anticipate the process to be a living document.

21. A meeting was arranged for 2 August 2024 with all mainstreet organisations to go through the expansion process for increasing the targeted rate area of a mainstreet. This meeting was subsequently rescheduled and held on 1 November 2024.

22. The main feedback at that meeting was that mainstreet organisations were most interested in having certainty about a process that would be acceptable to council. They did not want to embark on a time-consuming and potentially costly process, and then find that that process was not acceptable to council.

23. The current version of the draft process is included as Attachment 1 to this report.

24. To summarise, the proposed process is as follows:

(a) The mainstreet organisation informs council of intent (with proposed timeframe).

(b) Council and the mainstreet organisation ensure that all requirements in the existing Mainstreet Agreement are met.

(d) Council will assist the mainstreet organisation to identify the proposed mainstreet boundary area and will prepare a copy of the proposed expansion map.

(e) The mainstreet organisation develops a two-year business plan outlining the proposed activities and budget that will be funded by the targeted rate (effectively establishing the ‘value proposition’).

(f) The mainstreet organisation and Council will agree on the level of targeted rate and the basis for its collection, required to support the mainstreet targeted rate grant amount.

(g) The existing mainstreet members must agree (by resolution at AGM/SGM) on the total budget required, including the amount of mainstreet targeted rate grant for the programme. The resolution is to include requesting that council include the mainstreet targeted rate in council’s next Annual Plan or Long-term Plan consultation process.

(h) The mainstreet organisation will develop a voting register of businesses and property owners in the proposed expanded area.

(i) A full consultation process and voting ballot is undertaken (and funded) by the mainstreet organisation through an independent election agent.

(j) Ballot results confirmed. To be considered a valid ‘yes’ vote, the proposed process suggests that turnout should be at least 25% of those eligible to vote, and the result should be at least 50% +one vote in favour.

(k) To progress the mainstreet expansion, the existing members of the mainstreet must confirm and approve by Special Resolution (refer to mainstreet constitution) the completed expansion project (presented in a written report), including accepting the mainstreet ballot result.

(l) The mainstreet organisation reports to council on process, and applies for the mainstreet area map and targeted rate to be charged. On receipt of the mainstreet organisation’s expansion report and minutes approving the expansion, council staff will draft a report to this Committee seeking approval (via a resolution recommending to Council) of the mainstreet expansion area map, and the proposed mainstreet targeted rate for the following financial year.

(m) Council will then consider inclusion in the next draft Annual Plan or Long-term Plan process.

background – other funding options

25. Mainstreet organisations can apply for additional funding outside their targeted rate grant. There are funding opportunities available for organisations such as mainstreet organisations for events.

26. During the Committee meeting of 15 October 2024, Papamoa Unlimited noted that additional funding may be necessary to produce their annual and very successful Matariki celebrations. Such other funding opportunities may be appropriate for this use.

27. Papamoa Unlimited has been successful with applications for event funding grants in the past, for example receiving two grants from council in the 2023/24 year. Other mainstreet organisations have applied to these funds and been unsuccessful[15], but applications continue to be welcome from mainstreet organisations.

28. There are also a number of community-focused trusts and funding organisations that may view favourably applications from mainstreet organisations for community-focussed events.

Statutory Context

29. When considering decisions relating to the funding of activities, Council needs to follow the processes set out in section 101(3) of the Local Government Act 2002. This involves reviewing the funding needs analysis (under section 101(3)(a)) and then determining the overall allocation of different funding sources (under section 101(3)(b)). The current Funding Needs Analysis (“FNA”) and the resultant Revenue & Financing Policy (“R&FP”) were both published in the 2024-2034 Long-term Plan.

30. A decision to consider extending the targeted rate area for Papamoa Unlimited is unlikely to be inconsistent with the existing FNA or R&FP. If, however, the Committee were to support Papamoa Unlimited to change the organisation’s focus from economic development to community events, and subsequently seek to change the source of funding from commercial to all ratepayers, the FNA and R&FP would need to be reviewed as part of that process.

31. A targeted rate is described in section 16 of the Local Government (Rating) Act 2002. A targeted rate may be set in relation all land in the city or in relation to a subset of that land[16], including land defined on a geographical basis or land that is used for a particular purpose (as is the case with the existing targeted rate for Papamoa Mainstreet activities). Targeted rates may be set on a uniform basis for all relevant rateable land, or differentially for different categories of rateable land[17].

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

32. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):

	Contributes
We are an inclusive city	☐
We value, protect and enhance the environment	☐
We are a well-planned city	☐
We can move around our city easily	☐
We are a city that supports business and education	ü

33. Mainstreet organisations are considered key strategic stakeholders in the council’s plans. They provide a valuable link between businesses and the council, and are involved in several projects.

34. In terms of Council’s community outcomes that are outlined in Our Direction – Tauranga 2050, well-run mainstreet programmes make a worthwhile contribution to vibrancy and to “a well-planned city with a variety of successful and thriving compact centres, resilient infrastructure, and community amenities”.

35. Well-run mainstreet programmes also have a key role in making a significant contribution “to the social, economic, cultural and environmental well-being of the region”.

Options Analysis

36. As noted above, there are two separate but linked issues that arose during the Committee’s meeting of 15 October 2024:

(a) Expansion of the Papamoa Unlimited mainstreet targeted rate; and

(b) Additional funding for Papamoa Unlimited to deliver events.

37. In preparing this options section, we have considered them separately. The Committee may decide to consider them together or separately.

Issue 1 – Expansion of the Papamoa Unlimited Mainstreet targeted rate

38. Three potential options for this issue have been identified and explored:

1A – Support exploring an expansion of the mainstreet targeted rate area using the draft process prepared; or

1B – Consider a broader targeted rate (including residential ratepayers); or

1C – Consider a simplified process whereby council creates a wider mainstreet area.

39. These options are considered further below.

40. Option 1A: Support exploring an expansion of the mainstreet targeted rate area using the draft process prepared:

Recommended: Yes

41. This option has the following characteristics:

· Follows the proposed expansion process included as Attachment 1.

· Adds additional commercial ratepayers not currently within the mainstreet Boundary Map (extent of the expansion yet to be determined).

· Led by Papamoa Unlimited, but supported by Council.

· Requires a two-year plan and budget (i.e. ‘value proposition’) to be prepared by Papamoa Unlimited and shared with both current and potential future members.

· Ensures all potentially affected commercial ratepayers have opportunities to influence decision-making on the expanded rating area (majority vote required).

· This Committee would:

o Approve the proposed draft mainstreet expansion map prior to the mainstreet ballot; and

o Consider a recommendation to Council on an expanded rating area once all process requirements have been met and the ballot has been completed.

42. This option has the following advantages, disadvantages and risks:

Advantages

Disadvantages and Risks

- Potentially increases the funding base for Papamoa Unlimited.

- Best practice process that can commence immediately.

- Ensures Papamoa Unlimited ‘owns’ the process.

- High level of engagement with affected parties, including a formal vote before proceeding.

- Requires that the ‘value proposition’ is clearly set out by Papamoa Unlimited to both current and potential future members.

- High visibility of the process to council (staff and elected members) who will ultimately be responsible for levying an expanded rate.

- Meets consultation requirements under section 82 of the Local Government Act, before the expanded rate is included in an Annual Plan or Long-term Plan process and subjected to further formal consultation.

Disadvantages:

- Is a time-consuming process for Papamoa Unlimited, which requires a level of funding and resourcing to achieve.

Risks:

- Papamoa Unlimited does not have adequate resources to undertake (council could choose to mitigate this risk by providing funding or other resources).

- Papamoa Unlimited annual plan and strategy may need to be amended to support the additional area which is potentially geographically more diverse than currently.

- Affected ratepayers may vote against an expansion plan.

- Whilst the draft expansion process has been shared with mainstreet organisations, it has not been shared with the wider business community.

43. Option 1B: Consider a broader targeted rate (including residential ratepayers).

Recommended: No

44. This option has the following characteristics:

· Adds residential ratepayers to those contributing to Papamoa Unlimited.

· Likely to require a significant change of focus for Papamoa Unlimited from a business-funded organisation to a general ratepayer-funded organisation (may no longer by a classic ‘mainstreet organisation’).

· May follow the same process as for option 1A (though that is not what it was designed for).

45. This option has the following advantages, disadvantages and risks:

Advantages

Disadvantages and Risks

- Potentially increase the funding base for Papamoa Unlimited such that residents as well as businesses fund the activities and events delivered.

- If the expansion process is followed:

o Ensures Papamoa Unlimited ‘owns’ the process.

o High level of engagement with affected parties, including a formal vote before proceeding.

o Requires that the ‘value proposition’ is clearly set out by Papamoa Unlimited to both current and potential future members.

o High visibility of the process to council (staff and elected members) who will ultimately be responsible for levying an expanded rate.

o Meets consultation requirements under section 82 of the Local Government Act, before the expanded rate is included in an Annual Plan or Long-term Plan process and subjected to further formal consultation.

Disadvantages:

- Process undefined.

- Expansion to residential ratepayers was not the original request of Papamoa Unlimited.

- Likely to be a time-consuming process for Papamoa Unlimited, which requires a level of funding and resourcing to achieve.

- Will be significantly more expensive if a poll of residential ratepayers is undertaken.

- May require a significant marketing exercise to reposition Papamoa Unlimited as a community-funded organisation rather than a business-funded organisation.

- If the purpose of the targeted rate changes from economic development to community events, then full consideration under council’s FNA and R&FP would need to be undertaken (s103, Local Government Act).

Risks:

- Mainstreet does not have adequate resources to undertake (council could choose to mitigate this risk by providing funding or other resources – realistically, for something of this scale council risks being called on to lead it).

- Mainstreet annual plan and strategy may need to be amended to support the additional area, which is potentially geographically more diverse than currently, as well as the inclusion of residential ratepayers in its rating base.

- Risk that a single ‘value proposition’ will not be appealing to both commercial and residential ratepayers.

- Affected ratepayers may vote against an expansion plan.

- Whilst the draft expansion process has been shared with mainstreet organisations, it has not been shared with the wider business community.

- Risks setting a precedent for other mainstreet organisations which may not be appropriate.

46. Option 1C: Consider a simplified process whereby council creates a wider mainstreet area.

Recommended: No

47. This option has the following characteristics:

· Establishes a bespoke and foreshortened process, which will therefore be quicker than that set out in Attachment 1 (and Option 1A).

· Will focus on commercial ratepayers only.

· Likely to be led by council rather than Papamoa Unlimited.

· Likely to involve less engagement with affected ratepayers until the draft Annual Plan or Long-term Plan consultation process.

· May simply involve Council making a draft decision and then testing it with ratepayers through the Annual Plan or Long-term Plan process.

48. This option has the following advantages, disadvantages and risks:

Advantages

Disadvantages and Risks

- Speed of decision-making.

- Potentially a simple process.

Disadvantages:

- Is not likely to be a best practice process.

- Potential new payers of the targeted rate may not feel engaged in the process.

- Council may be seen to be ‘imposing’ the new, wider targeted rate if the process is led by council not Papamoa Unlimited.

- Less visibility of the ‘value proposition’ before a draft decision is made.

- No poll of affected ratepayers.

- Top-down approach goes against the concept of localism, that local communities know what is best for them.

Risks:

- Council not seen as working collaboratively with its affected ratepayers.

- Papamoa Unlimited annual plan and strategy may need to be amended to support the additional area which is potentially geographically more diverse than currently.

- Increased risk of challenge to decision-making processes.

Issue 2 – Additional funding for Papamoa Unlimited to deliver events

49. Three potential options for this issue have been identified and explored:

2A – Council creates a contestable fund specifically for mainstreet organisations to deliver community event activities; and/or

2B – Papamoa Unlimited apply to existing contestable funds available from council and other funders; and/or

2C – Council provides direct funding to Papamoa Unlimited for community event activities.

50. These options are briefly considered further below.

	Synopsis	Advantages	Disadvantages
2A – Mainstreet contestable fund	Create a new fund. Establish objectives. Establish criteria. Annual /semi-annual funding round. Admin costs.	Even playing field among the four mainstreet organisations.	Additional expenditure for council/ratepayers to fund (both the fund and admin costs) – source to be determined. Uncertainty for each mainstreet organisation.
2B – existing contestable funds	Processes established.	No additional council expenditure required. Even playing field across all community organisations seeking similar event funding.	No dedicated funding for mainstreet organisations (would need to compete with other community organisations).
2C – direct funding	Additional grant provided for specific deliverables.	Certainty to Papamoa Unlimited. Simplicity.	Additional expenditure for council/ratepayers to fund – source to be determined.

Financial Considerations

51. The financial implications for council will depend on the approach to this issue that is taken.

52. If the recommended process is followed for an expansion of the existing targeted rate area and is pursued, the cost implications to council will depend on the extent of support that is provided to help Papamoa Unlimited through the process.

53. Once the amended targeted rate is in place, there will be no direct financial implications for the council. Targeted rates for mainstreet organisations are raised directly from business ratepayers and used by the mainstreet organisation for improvements within their respective area. The council’s financial role is to collect the mainstreet targeted rates and pass them directly to the mainstreet organisation every six-months.

54. The targeted rate is payable by the owners of the business rated properties within the geographic area of the individual mainstreet area.

55. Papamoa Unlimited currently receives a targeted rate grant of $66,000, which is proposed to increase to $72,600 in the financial year 2025/26.

56. If a different approach is made to increase funding for Papamoa Unlimited then the costs to council, and how they are ultimately funded, may be different.

Risks

57. Risks are briefly outlined under each of the options above.

58. There are no direct risks to the council that could result from the recommendation to support Papamoa Unlimited to commence a process consistent with the draft expansion process attached, as there is a large consultation requirement before Council considers actually striking the targeted rate.

59. The targeted rate is payable by the owners of the commercial and industrial properties within the geographic area of the individual mainstreet organisation. In practice, this cost is often passed on to the business owners who occupy these properties. This cost may be harder to meet at a time when businesses are financially impacted by high costs of living and overheads.

60. The operation of the mainstreet organisation is subject to the Funding Agreement. The Funding Agreement is intended to help minimise the potential for risks, by requiring each mainstreet organisation to report six-monthly to the Community, Transparency and Engagement Committee, plan for the intended use of funds, report on its activities to its members, and members to receive annual financial statements and audited financial report.

61. Council staff regularly monitor and support compliance with the Funding Agreement and provide a six-monthly report to the Community, Transparency and Engagement Committee.

TE AO MĀORI APPROACH

62. The Funding Agreement does not prescribe individual mainstreet organisations’ effectiveness, outcomes, or impacts for Māori. However individual mainstreet organisations may include, collaborate, and deliver projects, activities, and events with and for Māori.

CLIMATE IMPACT

63. This is an administrative report, the recommendations in this report do not have implications for our climate impact.

Consultation / Engagement

64. Engagement and consultation approaches are broadly outlined under each of the three options described under Issue 1. If the Committee decided to support following the documented proposed expansion process, a significant amount of engagement would be expected to occur between Papamoa Unlimited and both its existing members and its potential future members.

65. Any approach which proposed to amend the targeted rate, would also be formally consulted on through the relevant annual plan or long-term plan process prior to implementation.

66. Options under Issue 2 would not necessarily require engagement or consultation.

Significance

67. 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.

68. 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 decision.

69. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that a decision to commence a process to potentially expand the area of the Papamoa Unlimited targeted rate is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

70. Taking into consideration the above assessment, that the decision is of low significance, officers are of the opinion that no further engagement is required prior to Council making a decision on supporting Papamoa Unlimited to commence a proposed expansion process.

Next Steps

71. Staff will communicate the outcome of this meeting to Papamoa Unlimited and commence implementation of the Committee’s decision with them.

72. Staff will also ensure other mainstreet organisations are aware of the decisions made in this Committee meeting.

73. Staff and Papamoa Unlimited will report back to the Committee in the first quarter of 2025 on progress made and any resourcing issues that may be apparent.

Attachments

1. Draft Proposed Expansion of Mainstreet Boundary Process 2024 - A17010642 ⇩

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.8 Draft Alcohol Fees Bylaw

File Number: A16664380

Author: Jane Barnett, Policy Analyst

Nigel McGlone, Manager: Environmental Regulation

Authoriser: Sarah Omundsen, General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance

Purpose of the Report

1. To consider the draft Alcohol Fees Bylaw and Statement of Proposal for community consultation.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Draft Alcohol Fees Bylaw".

(b) Approves the draft Alcohol Fees Bylaw (Attachment One) and the Statement of Proposal (Attachment Two) for community consultation.

(c) Authorises the General Manager: Regulatory and Compliance to make any necessary minor drafting or presentation changes to the draft Alcohol Fees Bylaw, the Statement of Proposal and related consultation material before consultation.

Executive Summary

2. Alcohol licensing fees can be set by the prescribed fees set out in the Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulations 2013 (Fees Regulations) or through a bylaw that allows Council to set their own fees.

3. On 15 October 20024, the Community, Transparency and Engagement Committee (the Committee) approved the development of an Alcohol Fees Bylaw. The proposed bylaw would allow alcohol fees to be set through the annual plan and long-term plan process to allow greater flexibility and for the community to provide feedback on the fees each year.

4. The Committee also agreed to use 100% cost recovery as an indication of potential new fees. This aligns with the directive in the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 (Act) that as far as practicable, the total costs to councils are recovered out of the fees paid[18].

5. The proposed new alcohol licencing fees are presented in schedule one of the draft bylaw. These fees do not bind Council to a cost recovery rate as any new fees will be set through the user fees and charges process as part of the annual plan.

6. We are seeking the Committee’s approval of the draft Alcohol Fees Bylaw (Attachment One) and Statement of Proposal (Attachment Two) for community consultation in February/March 2025. The consultation will focus on whether Council should set fees (through a bylaw) or continue using the prescribed fees set out in the Fee Regulations.

Background

7. Currently Tauranga’s alcohol licensing function is funded by licensing fees and general rates. Our licensing fees, based on the prescribed regulation fees, cover around 40% of the total alcohol licensing costs with the remaining 60% coming from general rates (approximately $755 000).

8. This amount is a decrease in cost recovery compared to last financial year when around 50% of costs were recovered from fees. The decrease in cost recovery is expected to continue with rising participation in the licensing process creating increased costs.

9. Although the prescribed regulation fees are required to be reviewed every 5 years[19], the last review was carried out in 2017. The review could not draw any conclusions on overall cost recovery, so no changes were made to the prescribed fees.

10. The Act and associated secondary legislation[20] allow for Council to make a bylaw to set its own alcohol licensing fees. On 15 October 2024, the committee approved the development of an Alcohol Fees Bylaw for establishing licensing fees.

11. The specific fees will be set by Council resolution through the annual plan and long-term plan process, providing opportunity for the community to feedback on any proposed alcohol licensing fee charges each year. This process will ensure that the community can provide feedback on all of the council’s proposed fees and charges at the same time.

Statutory Context

12. Section 402(1)(b) of the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 provides that fee regulations (including fee-setting bylaws) ‘may do anything reasonably necessary to ensure that, so far as it is practicable, the total costs to the territorial authority are recovered out of the fees paid to it under this Act’.

13. Section 405 of the Act requires Council ‘to the extent that is reasonably practicable having regard to the circumstances of the particular case, consult the persons the authority has reason to believe are representative of interests likely to be substantially affected by the bylaw’.

14. The Act also outlines the specific types of fees which can be managed under a bylaw[21]. Under the Fees Regulations, fees for Manager’s Certificates must be the same across all territorial authorities. As such Council cannot include Manager’s Certificate fees in the proposed bylaw.[22] However, other types of fees such as a late lodgement fee may be applied to account for the extra staff time to apply for the required special wavier to the District Licensing Committee (DLC).

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

15. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):

	Contributes
We are an inclusive city	ü
We value, protect and enhance the environment	☐
We are a well-planned city	☐
We can move around our city easily	☐
We are a city that supports business and education	☐

16. The proposed Alcohol Fees Bylaw aligns with the council’s strategic community outcome of an inclusive city. The alcohol licensing function helps prevent harm and helps create a safe community.

Options Analysis

17. The table below sets out the advantages and disadvantages of approving the draft alcohol fees bylaw and statement of proposal for community consultation.

Option

Advantages

Disadvantages

Approve the proposed draft Alcohol Fees Bylaw and Statement of Proposal for community consultation.

Recommended

· Allows the community to provide feedback on the level of cost recovery for alcohol licensing and who should fund alcohol licensing.

· Allows the community to provide feedback on how alcohol licensing fees should be set in Tauranga.

· Meets the consultation requirement under the Act[23].

· Nil

Do not approve the Alcohol Fees Bylaw and Statement of Proposal for community consultation.

· Nil

· Does not allow for community feedback on funding alcohol licensing.

· A bylaw cannot be developed without community consultation.

Financial Considerations

18. The costs of developing the bylaw will be funded from the existing policy and bylaws budget.

Legal Implications / Risks

19. There is a risk that the development of a fees’ bylaw will be perceived negatively by licence holders. In recovering a greater portion of the alcohol licensing costs from licence holders the fees will increase. This risk will be managed through effective engagement and consultation.

TE AO MĀORI APPROACH

20. The development of an Alcohol Fees Bylaw supports the principles of Manaakitanga – a strong duty of care and safety for our people. Although there are no direct impacts on Māori from developing the bylaw, a strong alcohol licensing function will be beneficial to Māori, who experience disproportionate alcohol-related harm.

CLIMATE IMPACT

21. There are no direct or specific climate change impacts resulting from the proposed draft bylaw.

Significance

22. 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.

23. 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.

24. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the issue is of medium significance. However, the decision in this report is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

25. In accordance with the legal requirement in the Act, community consultation will be carried out. Although the Act does not require the special consultative procedure[24] to be used, we propose to use this procedure to ensure best practice and alignment with our bylaw development process.

26. The special consultative procedure requires a Statement of Proposal, the opportunity for people to present their views to Council, and a consultation period of not less than a month.

27. We will also undertake targeted consultation with all our current license holders and other stakeholders including Iwi, the Police, our Medical Officers of Health and other community groups.

Next Step

28. If the committee approve the draft bylaw for community consultation, consultation will be carried out in February/March 2025.

29. The committee will hear from submitters who wish to speak to their submission and deliberate on the issues raised before deciding whether to recommend to Council to formally adopt the bylaw in March/April 2025.

30. Any new fees will be incorporated, subject to the adoption of the bylaw, into the draft user fees and charges schedule. This schedule will be consulted on in March/April 2025 as part of the annual plan process.

31. Council will decide on the fees as part of the annual plan deliberations in May 2025 so that any new fees can take effect on 1 July 2025 (if that is the implementation date that Council ultimately chooses).

Attachments

1. Draft Alcohol Fees Bylaw - A16957303 ⇩

2. Draft Statement of Proposal - A16924247 ⇩

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.9 Library Community Hubs Cashless Payments

File Number: A16878015

Author: Joanna Thomas, Manager: Libraries

Authoriser: Barbara Dempsey, General Manager: Community Services

Purpose of the Report

1. To inform the Committee that Libraries and Community Hubs will change to cashless payments from 1 July 2025.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Library Community Hubs Cashless Payments".

(b) Notes the proposed approach for informing the community of the change.

Executive Summary

2. A decision was made in early 2024 for Tauranga City Council Library Community Hubs to go cashless from 1 July 2025. This decision was made because of the high costs that accompany the management of cash payments, plus the ever-decreasing cash-paying customers and continued safety and security concerns for staff.

3. A project team led by the Team Leader: Libraries and Community Hubs has been working on making this a smooth transition for staff and residents. GMs and team members from Corporate Services, Finance, Community Services and Regulatory & Compliance have all been involved in the planning.

4. Communications with affected customers are planned to begin early 2025, supporting a staged approach to the implementation of the change over six months – giving time for affected customers to prepare, and for council staff to support them through the shift. The communications approach is built on the premise that the shift to cashless will impact a very small number of customers, but that for some the change could be difficult, and they may feel excluded. We will show our impacted customers that we’re committed to helping them through this change, and we will take the time to do so.

Background

5. Currently, council accepts cash for payment of library fees (e.g. photocopying, top titles) at our four libraries, but only at He Puna Manawa for other council payments like rates, dog registration or parking fines. In recent years, the number of cash transactions received in the He Puna Manawa Service Centre for council payments, has been declining, mainly due to the migration of customers to online payments. Payments for rates and other council services have been taken at Greerton, Mount Maunganui and Papamoa Libraries for a number of years by Eftpos only.

6. In recent years, the number of cash transactions received in the Library Community Hubs has been declining, mainly due to the migration of customers to online payments, with customers paying for most services themselves on Tauranga City Council’s website. Most face-to-face payments are made by Eftpos (72% in 2023/24). We also introduced self-service kiosks in December 2023, more of which could be placed around the city in the future.

7. We received 1270 cash transactions in 2023/24 in relation to Council fees. This represents 0.1% of total payments across all methods (in person and online). We will be able to contact a high percentage of payees who paid by cash in respect of Rates, Water Rates and Dog Registrations to advise them of the change.

8. All payment types comparison for Council fee payments.

Payment Method	Payment received	Number of Payments	%
Online Bank transferring (Direct Credit/Direct Debit)	$676,076,492.68	868,177	92.8%
Online Credit Card	$10,898,839.32	48,016	5.1%
Online POLI	$6,933,015.09	19,305	2.1%
In-Person EFTPOS	$3,089,744.88	7190	0.8%
In-Person Credit Card	$407,659.32	1084	0.0%
In-Person Cash	$504,539.25	1270	0.1%
Total	$693,908,347.09	935,498

9. The ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) is being rolled out at Tauranga City Council, replacing OZONE, (a legacy computer system that will not be supported) with SAP. Ultimately all transactions will be managed through SAP. The opportunity to go cashless enabled the decision for SAP not to include a functionality to process cash payments. This reduces the complexity and cost of the shift to SAP, resulting in reduced risk and cost to deliver and support the new payment platform.

10. Residents will continue to be able to pay rates, water rates, fines and dog registrations at 7 participating Post Shops around Tauranga using cash. There were 5991 transactions paid at NZ Post by customers in the 23/24 Financial Year. This equated to an overall cost to TCC of $19770.30. If the current volume of cash payments paid at the He Puna Manawa service centre were paid at NZ Post sites instead, the operational cost (approx. $3771.90) would be lower than retaining and managing the cash payment option in-house.

11. Accepting cash involves, staff time, training, audit and security. A cost reduction of $20,000 per annum for cash collection services will take effect from July 2025.

12. The removal of cash as a payment option is a trend seen in libraries and local government service centres across the country, including in Auckland (all sites/libraries) and Wellington (all council sites and all libraries except two).

13. The move to cashless also supports the planning for the future Library Community Hub at Te Manawataki o Te Papa – the design of which will not require to include costly facilities for cash handling and storage.

Communications approach

14. Through our communications, we will explain the change and its benefits, and share the facts supporting this. Messaging will underline that this change makes practical and financial sense in a world where most people have moved to electronic, online and contactless payment methods. Communications will raise awareness of what it takes to provide cash as a payment method (space, time, effort, security etc.), and show what other options are available (including paying with cash at Post Shops), and how we’ll help those who may find the change difficult.

15. In our one-to-one dealings with impacted customers, we will show empathy, ensuring we don’t downplay the impact the change could have on people. We will show with words and actions that we’re committed to helping customers with the change, and to take the time to do so. We will take the time one-on-one with cash-paying customers, to talk them through the options they have, and help them get set up with other payment methods and make it easy for them.

16. We will give the community enough time to get their heads around the change. From early January: communicate on the change at every interaction, and help people choose new ways of paying in the future. This will include targeting people we know have used cash recently, to inform them before they make a payment next. From 31 March: soft deadline – this is the communicated deadline, but staff will still be able to take cash for three months after that, allowing them to make one-off exceptions. 30 June: hard deadline. From this point our systems will not be able to process cash.

17. Communications tactics will support the one-to-one interactions with customers. This will be supported by on-site signage and information handouts; along with drop-in sessions at the libraries for customers wanting support from library community programmes team to shift to online payment methods. Early notification will be sent through rates and water rates citywide mailouts, and via relevant TCC e-newsletters (e.g. library newsletter, Paw Print, Kōrero mai) and other regular communications e.g. for dog registrations. We will also directly notify (via letter) the customers who have used cash to pay for their rates, water rates or dog registration in the past 18 months (approx. 580 people).

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

18. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):

	Contributes
We are an inclusive city	ü
We value, protect and enhance the environment	☐
We are a well-planned city	☐
We can move around our city easily	☐
We are a city that supports business and education	☐

19. This administrative change is in the interest of value for money and does not contribute to a specific community outcome. However, the communication of the change will be focused on helping everyone in the community who may find the change difficult.

Financial Considerations

20. Direct savings on secure cash collections to take cash to the bank is $20,000 per annum.

21. The potential for increased fees paid to NZ Post for processing cash payments is no more than $4,000 based on current volume of cash payments. It is considered more likely that the cost of over the counter payments to NZ Post in total will decrease in future years because of the new availability to pay council fees by Eftpos at all libraries.

Legal Implications / Risks

22. TCC legal counsel will review all payment terms and conditions to make certain that we are legally compliant.

23. The risk of members of the community seeing this change as a loss, is mitigated by the Communications plan and soft deadline approach so staff are supported to help people through the change.

TE AO MĀORI APPROACH

24. Not Applicable.

CLIMATE IMPACT

25. Not Applicable.

Significance

26. 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.

27. 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.

28. In accordance with the considerations above, criteria and thresholds in the policy, it is considered that the matter is of low significance as this report is an update on the administrative decision that has been made and to inform Councillors how the community will be kept informed.

ENGAGEMENT

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

Next Steps

30. The Committee receives this Report and provides any feedback on the Communications Approach.

Attachments

Nil

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.11 Communication & Engagement - Our Changing Climate

File Number: A16532536

Author: Anna Rengstedt, Team Leader: Climate & Sustainability

Authoriser: Gareth Wallis, General Manager: City Development & Partnerships

Purpose of the Report

1. To inform the Community, Transparency and Engagement Committee (“the Committee“) about how staff aim to lead discussions, share information, and involve the community over the next three years in preparing for the effects of a changing climate.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Communication & Engagement - Our Changing Climate".

(b) Approves progressing with the three-stage approach to engage with communities on our changing climate.

BACKGROUND

Climate Action and Investment Plan

2. Tauranga residents have consistently rated the natural environment as their number one priority. Tauranga Taurikura – our Environment Strategy – responds by setting out how ”we prioritise nature...value, protect and enhance our environment”[25].

3. One of the key goals in Tauranga Taurikura is ‘Tauranga is a low emissions and climate resilient city’ with the Climate Action and Investment Plan (AIP)[26] being our roadmap. The Climate AIP sets the direction for how Council will work with the community to respond to our changing climate.

4. The Climate AIP was developed in response to the Emission Reduction Plan (ERP) and the National Adaptation Plan (NAP). The ERP outlines that “councils play an important role in engaging with their communities to help with the significant behavioural shifts required to meet our climate goals”. The NAP highlights that “local authorities have a responsibility to help and work with communities to prepare for, and adapt to, the physical effects of climate change impacts”.

5. The Climate AIP was developed in collaboration with stakeholders across the city and was adopted by Council in 2023 after community consultation. Most priority actions were funded or partially funded through the Long-term Plan 2024-34.

6. Priority actions include “developing a communications plan to clearly advise what we can do to make a difference” (action 2), “high-level community awareness programme on the impacts of climate change on the city and long-term adaptation options” (action 28), and “behaviour change and communication programmes to reduce emissions” (action 51).

Engagement

7. Engagement with communities, iwi and affected people is at the heart of local government decision-making. For this to be effective, communities must have enough information to understand the increasing risks posed by climate change over time.

8. On 5 November 2024, the Office of the Auditor General released a report[27] looking at how well councils are moving beyond high-level climate change commitments and strategies towards taking action. The report showed that effective engagement by councils with their communities is an important part of any council’s climate change response.

9. The Auditor-General also highlighted that in their view, councils need not see the current absence of a legislative and financial framework for adaptation as a reason not to begin adaptation planning.

10. Many councils are using a Dynamic Adaptive Pathways Planning (DAPP) approach to guide their adaptation planning work. DAPP is an iterative process described in Ministry for the Environment’s Coastal hazards and climate change guidance[28]. This process is intended to help communities understand what is happening with climate change, what communities value, options to address change, and how to implement a strategy and review its effectiveness.

11. In Tauranga, community engagement has told us that our communities are concerned about climate change. In the Quality of Life 2022 Survey, 76% of respondents were ‘a little worried, worried or very worried’ about the impact of climate change on Tauranga.

12. Community engagement has also told us that many of our residents are not satisfied with Council’s climate response to date. In Tauranga’s Annual Residents 2024 Survey, results show that only 30% of residents are ‘satisfied’ with how Council is taking action to help our city reduce its emissions.

Discussion

Development of Communication and Engagement Strategy

13. Based on national guidance documents and a review of how other councils in New Zealand are engaging with their communities on our changing climate, council staff have developed a draft Communication and Engagement Strategy to deliver on the priority communication and engagement actions in the Climate AIP. Design of the strategy aims to align with council’s increased focus on community engagement, trust, and transparency.

14. The Communication and Engagement Strategy will support delivery of the following outcomes:

(a) More homes resilient to extreme weather events;

(b) More energy-efficient and electrified homes;

(d) More common language for climate communication across the region; and

(e) More community-led adaptation planning.

15. To deliver this work, we propose a three-staged approach between now and June 2027.

16. In Stage 1 (starting late-2024), we will develop a toolkit of resources for project teams across Council to use, to make sure we are consistent in how we talk about natural hazards and the climate, using common terms and key messages. We will also carry out market research to understand the current perceptions, knowledge levels, and expectations of our Tauranga community regarding climate-related issues.

17. In Stage 1, we will share with the community examples from both Council and the local community, about how together we are reducing emissions and adapting to a changing climate. The main message for this stage is; ”we’re making some changes...for a better tomorrow”. Examples of stories we intend to share include:

· How our wastewater treatment plants have worked to reduce energy consumption and waste to landfill;

· Our rainwater tank programme that enables more organisations, schools and residents to install rainwater tanks and be more resilient;

· Our support for communities to grow their own food such as the Omanu community garden; and

· Our work to vegetate the city with a goal of 30% canopy cover across Tauranga.

These will be shared through a number of channels, including digital media, social media, and at community events.

18. Stage 2 (starting July 2025) will involve raising community awareness about our changing climate in Tauranga, including changes we are already seeing, what will change in the near future, and who will be impacted. Messages for Stage 2 include; “we can expect more extreme weather events, such as severe droughts, more intense rainfall and flooding”. We will continue sharing examples of what Council and the community is doing to be more resilient, and to contribute to a low-carbon future.

19. In Stage 3 (starting July 2026), we will deliver a city-wide programme to support communities to adopt resilient and future-proofed actions. The main message for Stage 3 will be along the same lines as Stage 1 but include ”together we’re...”. We will also identify communities at the highest risk from natural hazards and climate impacts where we need to talk at a local level about possible solutions.

20. Detailed communication and engagement plans will be developed for each of the three stages, including stakeholders and audiences, purpose, channels, frequency, and performance monitoring.

21. Funding to deliver the communication and engagement work over the next three years was approved through the consultation on, and adoption of, the Climate AIP, the Nature and Biodiversity AIP, and the Long-term Plan 2024-34.

Next Steps

22. Staff are available and recommend a separate briefing around climate change, its implications, and the roles and responsibilities of local government that relate to climate change.

23. Upon the Committee’s approval of the three-stage approach, Council staff will undertake market research and finalise the communication and engagement plan for Stage 1, which will be shared with the Committee over the coming months.

24. Performance monitoring, and the outcomes of the communication and engagement activities, will be provided on an annual basis, together with the plans for Stage 2 and 3 prior to being implemented.

Attachments

Nil

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.12 Backflow Prevention Device Installs - Mount Maunganui and Te Papa Central Business Districts

File Number: A16953900

Author: Jack Furnish, Water Engineer

Peter Bahrs, Manager: Water Services

Authoriser: Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Purpose of the Report

1. This report provides an update regarding Council’s backflow prevention upgrade programme and outlines proposed next steps regarding the installation and on-charging of required backflow prevention devices in the Mount Maunganui and Te Papa central business districts.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Backflow Prevention Device Installs - Mount Maunganui and Te Papa Central Business Districts".

(b) Approves the installation of required backflow prevention devices in the Mount Maunganui and Te Papa central business districts, to commence in February 2025.

(c) Approves on-charging the full costs of the backflow prevention devices and installation to customers via a single lump sum invoice.

Executive Summary

2. Council, as a water supplier, has legislative responsibilities requiring it to effectively identify and manage backflow risks. Backflow is a reversal of the normal direction of water flow in a water supply plumbing system. It occurs when the water delivery main is at a lower pressure than the internal plumbing system.

3. Backflow is an issue as it can contaminate the wider water supply. Council’s legal responsibilities regarding backflow are set out in the Water Services Act 2021, as well as the Drinking Water Quality Assurance Rules 2022.

4. As part of these requirements, Councils must carry out 5-yearly backflow prevention surveys on all backflow risks in their areas. Where indicated by the survey results, Councils are required to install or upgrade backflow prevention devices.

5. In November 2022 Council approved, following identification of properties via survey results, installing required backflow prevention devices and on-charging the full costs of the devices and installation back to customers (CO22/22/8).

6. Backflow surveys have been ongoing across the city, with required upgrades occurring as soon practical as per Compliance Rules requirements. The following has occurred to date:

(a) 951 surveys have been carried out across the region, focused on commercial and industrial zoned areas (Judea & Mount Industrial areas, Maleme St etc.).

(b) 162 upgrades have been identified.

7. The Mount Maunganui and Te Papa central business districts are the next areas of focus for this work, and 118 surveys have been completed in the Mount with 48 properties identified as requiring an upgrade. Te Papa is expected to return similar results.

8. This report seeks approval from the Committee to continue the existing approach of invoicing customers for the cost of the devices and installation, via an invoice requiring a lump sum payment. This user-pays approach decreases costs for the general ratepayer and ensures costs are met by the business most likely to create backflow contamination.

Background

9. Backflow is defined as ‘the unplanned reversal of flow of water or mixtures of water and contaminants into the water supply system’, Water Services Act 2021 (WSA). It occurs when the water delivery main is at a lower pressure than the internal plumbing system. Causes of backflow include:

· A burst or ruptured water main.

· High demand across the system.

· Cross-connection of another water pump (such as a bore pump) to the internal plumbing system, and operation of this pump at a higher pressure than the water mains.

10. Backflow is a critical consideration as it can pollute the wider water supply. The WSA is focussed on ensuring water suppliers provide safe drinking water to consumers and introduced new and stringent requirements for Councils regarding backflow management.

11. All water connections generally have some form of backflow prevention device. This is typically a non-testable dual check device for residential properties with low risk (about 50,000 devices installed), with higher levels of backflow protection required for properties with identified medium or high hazards on the site.

12. There are approximately 5,000 testable backflow prevention devices across the city. There are different types of prevention devices required for different levels of backflow risk. In situations where the risk is greater from a potential backflow event, there is a greater level of protection required, as below.

(i) Low Risk – Dual Check Valve

(ii) Medium risk – Testable Double Check valve

(iii) High risk – Reduce Pressure Zone Device or Air Gap

13. The introduction of the WSA was accompanied by new Quality Assurance Rules in 2022. These require Councils to carry out 5-yearly backflow prevention surveys on all backflow risks in their areas. Where indicated by the survey results, Councils are to install or upgrade backflow prevention devices.

14. In November 2022 Council approved, following identification of properties via survey results, installing required backflow prevention devices and on-charging the full costs of the devices and installation back to customers (CO22/22/8, agenda).

15. Project delivery approval was sought from Council in August 2023 (Council report “Backflow Prevention Device Physical Delivery Procurement”) and a contract to deliver the upgrade works was signed in March 2024.

16. Backflow surveys have been ongoing across the city, with required upgrades occurring as soon practical as per Compliance Rules requirements. The following has occurred to date:

(a) 951 surveys have been carried out across the region, focused on commercial and industrial zoned areas (Judea & Mount Industrial areas, Maleme St etc.).

(b) 162 upgrades have been identified.

(d) Less than 10% of invoices remain outstanding and are being managed under Council debt recovery process.

Mount Maunganui and Te Papa Central Business Districts

17. The Mount Maunganui central business district (CBD), focused on the businesses north of the corner of Maunganui Rd and Sutherland Ave, has been surveyed as part of Council’s risk assessed backflow survey programme.

(a) 118 surveys have been completed.

(b) 48 properties have been identified as requiring an upgrade (NOTE, 2 properties likely requiring upgrade are yet to be surveyed due to access issues)

18. The Te Papa CBD (Tauranga City centre) is yet to be surveyed, but similar results are expected, with a similar numbers of upgrades required.

19. These two areas are some of the older dense commercial zones in Tauranga, so a higher proportion of upgrades are expected (or have been found) than in other areas of the city. The expected cost of each installation is approximately $3,000. This cost is passed onto the property owner by a single lump sum invoice, due by the 20^th of the following month.

20. It is recognised that these areas are impacted by increases in commercial rates, License to Occupy rollouts, and alcohol licencing fees, and that the wider economy is creating challenges for many businesses.

21. Despite these challenges, this report recommends continuing with the current approach to backflow device installation (cost recovery, lump sum invoice), as this aligns with Council’s approach to the 108 properties already upgraded and invoiced.

22. This report, whilst recommending the status quo of single lump sum payments, also presents an alternative option for Council’s consideration – the choice of a payment plan for customers who want it.

23. Installation of upgraded backflow prevention devices in these two areas is currently scheduled for February 2025, with payment due on the 20^th of the month following installation. Recognising that this may be an unanticipated cost, Council staff are planning to send out early notification letters to all impacted premises in January.

Options Analysis

24. The following options are set out for Council to consider.

(a) Option 1 – Cost recovery to continue using status quo, with invoicing of full costs via a single lump sum invoice. (Status Quo, Recommended)

(b) Option 2 – Customers can choose the option of cost recovery via a payment plan (full costs recovered over a 6-month period) or via a single lump sum.

(c) Option 3 - Council completes the required upgrades and meets either the full cost, or part of the cost, from Council budgets. This is non-budgeted item.

Option 1 (Status Quo, Recommended)

25. Council completes the required upgrades and invoices the works in full back to customers via a lump sum sundry invoice, as per current practice.

26. Estimated Cost: No cost to Council, full costs recovered in lump sum and unpaid debt captured in debt recovery process.

27. Key Risk: Property owners (and the wider community in general) may be unaware that they are carrying a backflow risk, due to backflow being a poorly understood aspect of drinking water safety, and may oppose the installation costs.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Keeping with status quo allows for consistent treatment of all commercial/industrial property owners.

· Follows a user-pays philosophy.

· Imposes an additional cost to businesses.

· Customers may not be in a position to pay in one lump sum.

Option 2

28. Council completes the required upgrades and invoices the works in full back to customers, offering the choice of a payment plan (full costs recovered over a 6-month period) or payment via a lump sum.

29. Estimated Cost: No cost to Council, full costs recovered by a lump sum or payment plan, and unpaid debt captured in debt recovery process. However, recovery of costs may lead to unpaid debt remaining on Council budgets for extended periods.

30. Key Risks: Property owners who have already paid may be unhappy as they were not offered the choice of a payment plan, and property owners who are unaware they are carrying a backflow risk may oppose the installation costs (although this risk is decreased by offering a payment plan).

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Providing the option of splitting the cost over months potentially softens the impact of a cost on the property owner.

· Follows a user-pays philosophy.

· Imposes an additional cost to businesses.

· Does not follow the status quo. May be perceived as unfair by already affected customers elsewhere in the city.

· Will require additional administration by Council Finance team staff.

Option 3

31. Council completes the required upgrades and meets either the full cost, or part of the cost, from Council budgets.

32. Estimated Cost: $150,000 (assuming $3000 per installation, assuming 50 devices are required).

33. Key Risk: Given the short timeframe required for delivery (this financial year) there is not time to seek funding via the Annual Plan or Long-Term Plan process. These works would be funded out of existing operational or capital budgets, which may impact on other planned work. This could be particularly challenging, given Council’s constrained financial position.

Advantages

Disadvantages

· Does not add an additional cost to property owner.

· Does not follow the status quo.

· May be perceived as unfair by already affected customers elsewhere in the city and these customers may request refunds (approx. 110 installations).

· Does not follow a user pays philosophy. Using the wider ratepayer funding for subsidising a small group of individuals increases the overall cost of water fees.

· May create unplanned overspend for Council or negatively impact on the ability to deliver other initiatives.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

34. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):

	Contributes
We are an inclusive city	☐
We value, protect and enhance the environment	☐
We are a well-planned city	ü
We can move around our city easily	☐
We are a city that supports business and education	ü

35. Identifying the required backflow upgrades and installing devices is part of Council’s commitment to meeting the requirements of the Water Safety Act 2022.

Te ao Māori

36. Not applicable, Council’s approach to backflow management is a legislative requirement.

CLIMATE IMPACT

37. Not applicable, Council’s approach to backflow management is a legislative requirement.

Statutory Context

38. Council’s legal responsibilities regarding backflow are set out in the WSA, as well as the Drinking Water Quality Assurance Rules 2022. Under the Quality Assurance Rules 2022, Rule D3.3, the upgrade must be completed “…as soon as reasonably practicable”.

Legal Implications / Risks

39. Backflow risk has been recognised by the Water Regulator as a significant risk and is a prominent aspect of the Water Services Act and the Quality Assurance Rules. Water suppliers have defined requirements to protect against backflow risk. If Council do not adequately enforce the Quality Assurance Rules, Council as the water supplier will be held liable.

40. A backflow event which occurs due to Council failing to adequately manage backflow risk would have significant public health and financial implications to Council as a water supplier.

41. If a customer does not pay the sundry invoice for the installation of the required backflow prevention device, the debt may be passed on to a debt collection agency.

Consultation / Engagement

42. To date, only pre-survey engagement has been carried out with Mount Maunganui CBD customers. Those customers whose properties require upgrades have not been notified, nor have any local advocacy groups. Following this report, letters will be sent out advising those property owners who require an upgrade.

Significance

43. 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.

44. 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 decision.

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

ENGAGEMENT

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

Next Steps

47. The next steps for this project include:

(a) Advising property owners in the Mount Maunganui CBD who require upgrades.

(b) Advising property owners in the Te Papa CBD that backflow surveys will be undertaken and may require them to upgrade such devices for council to be compliant with the requirements under the Water Services Act 2021.

(c) Completing surveys for the Te Papa CBD and advising property owners in the event upgrades to their backflow prevention devices are required.

(d) Commence installations in February 2025.

Attachments

1. Appendix A - Extract from Quality Assurance Rules for Backflow Protection Rules - A14233073 ⇩

Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Agenda

18 November 2024

10.13 Remote Metering Trial - Windermere

File Number: A16953772

Author: Jack Furnish, Water Engineer

Authoriser: Nic Johansson, General Manager: Infrastructure

Purpose of the Report

1. This report provides an update to Council regarding the remote metering trial proposed for Windermere and the accompanying community engagement plan.

Recommendations

That the Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee:

(a) Receives the report "Remote Metering Trial - Windermere".

(b) Notes that the Windermere remote metering trial is on track, with meters scheduled for installation March 2025.

(c) Notes that this trial is accompanied by a community engagement plan to ensure residents are aware of the trial and understand how remote metering can benefit them.

Executive Summary

2. Most of Tauranga City Council’s (Council’s) water metering fleet are read via a manual process, where contractors visit household water meters quarterly and record usage. This is labour intensive, costly, and at times inaccurate. Additionally, private water leaks often go unnoticed until the next quarterly meter reading is taken.

3. Every year, Council loses an estimated 222,300m³ of water, the equivalent of 900 Olympic swimming pools, to leaks (public and private) and issues nearly $1 million per annum in credits due to private water leaks.

4. A smart (remote) meter trial is being proposed for Tauranga’s Windermere suburb. Remote water meters enable real-time, accurate monitoring of water use patterns, including detecting any failures or leaks that need repairing.

5. This trial will inform a wider Proof of Concept project for the technology, which will assess evidence of the anticipated benefits of the technology. These benefits will then be used to inform a future business case for potential city-wide roll out of the technology.

6. The total estimated cost of the trial is $82,200 and will be funded from existing metering budgets.

7. A community engagement plan is in place and includes:

· A letter to the affected residents.

· A public webpage on the Council website outlining the scope of the trial and providing answers to frequently asked questions.

· A community drop-in session prior to commencing physical works.

· Contact details where questions and/or issues can be directed to Council.

8. Installation of the meters is planned to occur in early March 2025.

Background

9. Most of Tauranga City Council’s (Council’s) water metering fleet are read via a manual process, where contractors visit household water meters quarterly and record usage. This is labour intensive, costly, and at times, inaccurate. Additionally, private water leaks often go unnoticed until the next quarterly meter reading is taken.

10. Water leaks are largely due to aging infrastructure, including pipework and fittings (both private and public). Every year, Council loses an estimated 222,300m³ of water, the equivalent of 900 Olympic swimming pools, to leaks.

11. When water is lost to a private leak, customers are charged for water they did not use. They can recover the cost of this by requesting a water remission, however this process takes time and effort. Council issues nearly $1 million annually in credits due to private water leaks. Water leaks also add unnecessary load to Council’s water treatment plants and pump stations, increasing power use and emissions.

12. Council is proposing a smart (remote) meter trial for Tauranga’s Windermere suburb. Remote water meters will help households to understand their own water-use habits through an online customer portal, allowing them to identify ways to reduce consumption (and costs) associated with water use. Remote meters assist Council in emphasising the value of water as a resource to our community.

13. Remote water meters enable real-time, accurate monitoring of water-use patterns, including detecting any failures/leaks that need repairing. They also enable superior asset management practices across the potable water network.

14. Remote water meters are identical to normal meters but include a communication device attachment that allows meter data to be collected remotely. These remote meters will utilise the existing smart-streetlight radio network, already owned and operated by Council.

15. Around 450 households and businesses will have remote water meters installed to monitor water use. This is planned to occur in early March 2025. The cost of this trial will be covered by existing water metering budgets (i.e. there will be no additional costs for the households within the pilot catchment).

16. This trial will inform a wider Proof of Concept project for the technology, which will assess evidence of the anticipated benefits of the technology. These benefits will then be used to inform a future business case for potential city-wide roll out of the technology.

Installation process

17. All works are isolated to the existing water meter location, usually located at the boundary of the property within the Council owned road reserve.

18. The replacement process is non-invasive and requires only a short (10 minute) water shutdown for the property where the meter is being replaced.

19. Residents will be notified of the onsite water shutdown by the placement crew prior to works commencing.

Consultation / Engagement

20. A Communication Plan has been developed to guide engagement with Windermere residents and businesses.

21. The rollout of the Communication Plan includes:

· A letter to the affected residents.

· A public webpage on the Council website outlining the scope of the trial and providing answers to frequently asked questions.

· A community drop-in session prior to commencing physical works to discuss the project and answer any questions.

· Contact details where questions and/or issues can be directed to Council.

22. Purpose

(a) To inform the Windermere community about the upcoming installation of remote water meters, including potential disruptions such as temporary water shutdowns.

(b) To inform the community of the benefits of remote water meters.

23. Timing

(a) End of January 2025: Remote water meter recipients to be advised of upcoming installations of remote water meters, with associated information campaign about remote water meters for Windermere residents, such as a video of the installation process.

(b) End of February 2025: Drop-in information session for residents to engage with project team to be held within the community.

Statutory Context

24. Council’s responsibilities regarding water supply are governed under several pieces of legislation, including the Local Government Act 2002, the Water Services Act 2021 and the Local Government (Water Services Preliminary Arrangements) Act 2024.

25. The remote metering trial has no legislative implications.

STRATEGIC ALIGNMENT

26. This contributes to the promotion or achievement of the following strategic community outcome(s):

	Contributes
We are an inclusive city	☐
We value, protect and enhance the environment	ü
We are a well-planned city	ü
We can move around our city easily	☐
We are a city that supports business and education	☐

27. The Windermere remote water meter trial contributes towards Council’s commitment to environmental sustainability by reducing water leaks and providing improved tools for water management. Additionally, transitioning to remote water meters is part of delivering on a well-planned water supply, ensuring Council’s water supply network continues to evolve as new technology becomes readily available.

Financial Considerations

28. The cost to install the remote water meters in Windermere is estimated at $82,200 and will be funded from existing metering budgets.

29. Remote metering will deliver the following value-for-money benefits to Council and water users.

(a) Live leak detection – private leaks are identified the day they begin. This will save the end user in water rates and will save Council in water remission and water production costs.

(b) Demand management – customers are provided with hourly data. This allows for greater engagement with the community to drive better water efficiency. Customers are given information which can allow them to save money by reducing water usage, and to develop a greater understanding of the value (and cost) of water.

(c) Wider network efficiencies – by receiving live data for all end users, Council water engineers can complete a water balance for Windermere. This allows Council to better understand the level of leakage/water theft occurring within the Council owned network. In turn, this leads to opportunities for greater water efficiency, and cost savings from lowered production costs. With an approximate variable cost of $0.90/m³ to Council to supply water to customers, reducing what Council needs to produce can have real effects on operational budgets.

(d) Asset Management insights – high resolution meter data allows for better management of Council’s metering fleet. Utilising analytical software Council can more effectively prioritise meter renewals, leading to more efficient use of renewals budgets.

(e) Security of water rates revenue streams – remote meters that fail will alarm the day they fail, meaning that Council can take immediate action and avoid long stretches of no usage data. This offers far greater security of revenue compared to current manually read methods that may not find failed meters for 3 months.

30. The trial has set a target of a 10% reduction in legitimate and non-revenue (leaks/theft) water consumption. This would equate to approximately $9,000 in yearly production costs savings now and continually in the future (noting this is with less than 1% of the total cities water meters converted to remote metering, and if more meters are converted to remote metering, savings would also increase), and a continual yearly savings of $105 per household (assuming 3 people/household).

Legal Implications / Risks

31. There are no notable legal risks to Council from this trial. All data collection and management will comply with the Privacy Act 2020 and there are no health implications from transferring to the remote water meters, as the only function of the meters is to measure usage.

Te ao Māori

32. There is no targeted consultation with mana whenua planned as part of this trial. Implementing remote water meters contributes to the Te ao Māori principle of Kaitiakitanga - stewardship of the natural environment by reducing water loss and improving management of Council’s water supply.

CLIMATE IMPACT

33. The implementation of remote water meters has the potential to improve the sustainability of Council’s water supply by delivering water use efficiencies via changed consumer behaviour and decreased water losses due to leaks. Decreased water demands will have a flow-on effect of reducing emissions resulting from water treatment and network distribution.

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 is of low significance.

ENGAGEMENT

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

Next Steps

38. Following acceptance of this report, the implementation of the trial will begin, including the rollout of the Communication Plan and the installation of the remote meters.

39. The results of the Windermere trial will inform a wider Proof of Concept of the technology, currently underway and planned for delivery by the end of the current financial year.

Attachments

Nil

[1] Means a place or item sacred to Māori in the traditional, spiritual, religious, historical, or mythological sense. Places defined as “waahi tapu” vary from hapū to hapū but typically include burial grounds and battle sites.

[2] Means all things prized or treasured by Māori, both tangible and intangible. Examples include water bodies,

trees, special landmarks and te reo.

[3] This included having up-to-date and accurate maps and rohe information (now available on council’s public

website https://www.tauranga.govt.nz/community/tangata-whenua/resource-management-processes), clear guidance on best practice consultation per the policy (the council website has been updated with a specific page on https://www.tauranga.govt.nz/living/planning/consulting-with-people/consulting-with-iwi-and-hapu and a flowchart outlining the recommended process is now included as an attachment to the revised policy), and upskilling resource consent processing staff (all Environmental Planning staff have recently completed

cultural training, including Te Ao Māori in Planning, and all new staff must complete cultural connections training. Staff are also encouraged to participate in external professional development opportunities).

[4] Several changes have been made to the policy, including:

- Updating the strategic references

- Updating the template to be consistent with council’s current format, including adding a scope section.

- Removing procedural information (an associated procedure has been developed for staff)

- Removing unused definitions

[5] In 2020, BOPRC advised the Smart Growth Management Team they no longer wanted a policy but preferred online guidance instead. They developed guidance material on their website which includes a step- by-step diagram of assessing cultural effects, flowchart and guidance notes: https://www.boprc.govt.nz/environment/resource-consents/applying-for-resource-consent/assessing-cultural-effects/. When TCC staff recommenced the policy work in mid-2023, WBOPDC informed staff that they are working on other ways of getting the information out to applicants rather than focusing on a policy.

[7] Means a Māori tribal boundary or territorial area.

[9] Means chieftainship, right to exercise authority, autonomy, sovereignty, self-determination.

[10] As defined by the RMA means the exercise of guardianship by the tangata whenua of an area in accordance with tikanga Māori in relation to natural and physical resources and includes the ethic of stewardship.

[11] See the International Association for Public Participation – IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation: https://iap2.org.au/resources/spectrum/

[12] Because of the narrow focus of the policy, generally affecting only tangata whenua and those applying for resource consent for the development of large pieces of land, it is not expected that the general public will have a meaningful interest in the detail of the draft policy and therefore it is not proposed that consultation with the general public be undertaken. However, if the committee requires consultation with the general public to occur then staff will ensure this also happens.

[14] Guidance for Developing Policies on Dangerous, Affected and Insanitary Buildings, Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) second edition July 2024

[15] Three applications from two mainstreet organisations have been received recently, which didn’t meet the criteria for the two funds that the applications were made to and were therefore declined.

[16] See section 16(3) and 17, and Schedule 2, Local Government (Rating) Act 2002

[17] Se section 16(4), Local Government (Rating) Act 2002

[18] Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 section 402(1)(b).

[19] Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012, s 404

[20] Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012, s 495 and Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fee-setting Bylaws) Order 2013

[21] Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012, ss 397 and 402

[22] Sale and Supply of Alcohol (Fees) Regulation 2013, Reg 11

[23] Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act 2012 s.405.

[25] In the 2020 Vital Updates Survey, 41% of people responded that they feel that green spaces / natural environment / trees were important to protect. In the 2022 My Tauranga Vibe survey, 38% of people said that they think the way to tackle climate change is through the utilisation of our natural resources.

[27] OAG, 2024, How well four councils are responding to a changing climate: https://www.oag.parliament.nz/2024/climate-actions


AGENDA Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting Monday, 18 November 2024
I hereby give notice that a Community, Transparency & Engagement Committee meeting will be held on:
Date:	Monday, 18 November 2024
Time:	9.30am
Location:	Bay of Plenty Regional Council Chambers Regional House 1 Elizabeth 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	Cr Kevin Schuler
Deputy chairperson	Cr Hautapu Baker
Members	Cr Rick Curach Cr Steve Morris Cr Rod Taylor Mayor Mahé Drysdale (ex officio)
Non-voting members	(if any)
Quorum	Half of the members present, where the number of members (including vacancies) is even; and a majority of the members present, where the number of members (including vacancies) is odd.
Meeting frequency	Five weekly